
Institutionalizing the cryptocurrency frontier
Cryptocurrencies have long existed in a legal and financial gray zone — praised as disruptive innovations, dismissed as speculative bubbles and often relegated to the periphery of serious capital markets. That era is over. New US federal regulation of digital assets, especially stablecoins, signals a shift from speculation to mainstream investment. Legislation known as the Genius Act is one of three cryptocurrency bills currently advancing in Washington with President Donald Trump's support.
This is not merely a regulatory footnote. It is a structural turning point. For the first time since the publication of Satoshi Nakamoto's white paper in 2008, the debate in Washington is no longer about whether to regulate crypto, but how — and, more importantly, who gets to define the rules. With bipartisan momentum and political backing from figures such as Trump, the US is stepping decisively into a global contest over digital financial infrastructure.
The implications are material, especially for investors and financial institutions recalibrating their exposure to a space once seen as fringe. Since the collapse of FTX, the crypto industry has not only recovered market capitalization but has also ramped up lobbying efforts, poured capital into US elections and achieved a legislative milestone that provides regulatory clarity for dollar-backed stablecoins. The new framework mandates full reserve backing with short-term, Treasury-like instruments and places oversight in the hands of state or federal regulators. What was once dismissed as internet play money is now being granted legal standing and policy legitimacy.
This clarity matters. It creates a regulatory perimeter in which US-based issuers like Circle can scale and in which institutional finance can enter without reputational or compliance risk. The regulatory moment resembles the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which sought to modernize laws for an internet-driven world. Like that law, today's crypto framework is racing to catch up with technological reality — aiming to open the gates to competition while preserving systemic resilience.
Major players such as Citigroup and JPMorgan are not just taking notice, they are moving in. Citigroup CEO Jane Fraser has pointed to rising client demand for 'multi-asset, multi-bank, cross-border, always-on' payment solutions — characteristics that programmable, blockchain-based money can deliver. JPMorgan and Citibank are developing deposit tokens: bank-backed digital instruments designed to retain institutional control while mimicking the benefits of stablecoins.
These moves underscore a deeper truth: stablecoins are not just a crypto niche — they are fast becoming a parallel infrastructure for global payments. Settling instantly, operating continuously and increasingly functioning outside legacy banking rails, these instruments resemble nothing so much as the Eurodollar markets of the 1960s — offshore dollar liquidity that reshaped global finance while evading domestic regulatory control.
Stablecoins are already testing the limits of monetary sovereignty, with the potential to rival traditional payment networks in speed and reach. And like the Eurodollar, their evolution may define a generation of financial innovation — unless they are absorbed by the incumbents first.
Yet crypto-native firms are outpacing the banks. Circle has soared in valuation. Coinbase, benefiting from its stablecoin partnership, has seen record highs. The market is voting with capital. The era of programmable money is not coming — it is already underway.
For serious investors, this presents both an opportunity and a challenge. Regulation is no longer a threat to crypto. It is a prerequisite for scale. Just as the Securities Acts of the 1930s laid the foundation for modern capital markets, today's digital asset legislation seeks to institutionalize a new financial layer — without stifling its underlying dynamism. That historical moment transformed Wall Street; this one could do the same for the blockchain economy.
Still, this will not be a clean transition. A single token can be a governance tool, a medium of exchange and a speculative asset — simultaneously. Decentralized exchanges mimic brokerages but lack centralized accountability. Applying legacy legal frameworks to these hybrids is like regulating aviation with maritime law.
Critics, especially among Democrats like Elizabeth Warren and Maxine Waters, have raised red flags. They worry about insufficient consumer protections, the potential for systemic risk and — should stablecoin issuers fail — the possibility of future taxpayer bailouts. Their skepticism is not without merit. But their remedy — regulatory inaction or outright prohibition — risks pushing innovation into unregulated offshore zones and ceding global leadership to more agile jurisdictions. Critics argue the legislation introduces more risk than reward. After all, the US already has a functioning payment system — it is called the dollar and, for most purposes, it works just fine. So why reinvent the wheel?
For much of crypto's existence, its real-world use case — beyond underground transactions and speculative fervor — has remained elusive. While tokenization promises faster, more efficient payments, the volatility of most cryptocurrencies has made them a poor substitute for fiat money. They are not reliable stores of value and, thus, not viable as everyday currency.
Stablecoins attempt to square this circle by pegging themselves to the dollar, offering price stability without sacrificing speed. Most do so by backing their tokens with low-risk reserves like Treasury bills, effectively functioning as digital wrappers for existing US assets.
Europe's Markets in Crypto-Assets framework is more than consumer protection. It is strategic industrial policy. By offering a unified regulatory passport across the EU, it provides clarity, scale and first-mover advantage. While the US squabbled over jurisdiction, Europe built the infrastructure. Other jurisdictions — Singapore, the UAE and even Hong Kong — have embraced similar clarity. China has gone its own route with a state-backed digital yuan. The US, long caught in agency turf wars, is finally catching up — but only just.
This is not merely a new asset class. It is an emerging economic architecture. In countries like Argentina and Nigeria, crypto offers escape from monetary dysfunction. In Ukraine, it became a wartime financing tool. In the US, stablecoins increasingly serve as the foundation for faster, cheaper and programmable transactions.
This is not peripheral experimentation. It is foundational infrastructure.
What was once dismissed as internet play money is now being granted legal standing and policy legitimacy.
Dr. John Sfakianakis
Congress' move signals a shift in political perception: crypto is no longer an anarchic subculture but a matter of financial strategy and sovereign control. But this shift is not without its complications. Trump's vocal support of crypto — and financial ties to digital asset ventures — raises uncomfortable questions about transparency and influence. The intersection of public policy and private gain in the digital asset space will require vigilant scrutiny.
Nonetheless, the legislation, despite its imperfections, marks a belated but necessary leap forward. Without regulatory clarity, the US risks becoming a bystander to innovations it helped pioneer. With it, it has a credible chance to shape — not just respond to — the financial infrastructure of the 21st century.
As of now, the total crypto asset market exceeds $4 trillion, driven by altcoin gains and positive regulatory developments. Options markets suggest growing investor confidence in continued upward movement.
For institutional investors, this is no longer a niche curiosity or a speculative side bet. It is a rapidly institutionalizing frontier. The verdict on crypto is not yet settled. But the idea that it can be ignored has been definitively laid to rest.
The law has entered the ledger. The market has taken note.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Asharq Al-Awsat
2 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
How Moscow Might Respond if Trump Stops Russian Oil to India
US President Donald Trump's demand on India to halt Russian oil imports could threaten billions in Russian revenues, prompt Moscow to retaliate by stopping a major US-led oil pipeline and potentially lead to a new global supply crisis. India, the world's third largest oil importer, has become the biggest buyer of Russian oil since 2022, purchasing up to 2 million barrels per day of oil accounting for 2% of global supply. Other top buyers are China and Türkiye. The Indian route is so important for the Kremlin that if disrupted it could prompt it to retaliate by closing the CPC pipeline from Kazakhstan, where US oil majors Chevron and Exxon hold big stakes, analysts at JP Morgan said this week. "Russia is not without leverage," the US bank said. Trump has threatened to slap tariffs of up to 100% on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a peace deal with Ukraine by August 7-9. A 25% tariff on all US goods imports from India starts on Friday. Reuters reported on Thursday that Indian state refineries had paused purchases of Russian oil this week amid Trump's threats. REALIGNMENT India only began buying large quantities of oil from Russia, the world's second largest oil exporter, since 2022. It became a top importer after Europe, Russia's former top client, imposed a ban on Russian oil over its military actions in Ukraine. Russia's oil giant Rosneft has a major stake in one of India's biggest oil refineries. India is now 35% reliant on Russian oil imports worth $50.2 billion in the 2024-25 fiscal year, according to India's government data. "Cutting off this flow would require a massive realignment of trade flows," said Aldo Spanjer from BNP Paribas, adding that the global supply was already stretched. India buys all varieties and grades of Russian oil - including Urals from Western ports, ESPO and Sokol from the Pacific and some grades from the Arctic, according to LSEG data. Urals would be hit hardest if India stops buying as it purchases up to 70% of Russia's biggest export grade by volume. India's oil minister said the country can find alternative supply. India would need to raise imports of US and Middle Eastern crude or cut refining runs, leading to a spike in diesel prices, especially in Europe, which imports fuel from India. "Indian refiners will still struggle to replace the heavy quality of Russian crude so they may end up paring runs," said Neil Crosby from Sparta Commodities. FALLING INCOME Russia has managed to continue selling oil since 2022 despite international sanctions, although it sells it at discounts to global prices. Falling global prices mean Russia's income is already under pressure. Its oil and gas revenue fell 33.7% year-on-year in June to its lowest since January 2023, finance ministry data showed. Revenues will fall 37% in July due to weaker global oil prices and a strong rouble, Reuters calculations show. Russian firms will need to store oil on tankers if India stops buying, paying extra money for shipping charges and being forced to offer wide discounts to new buyers, traders said. A loss of 2 million bpd of exports might also gradually prompt Russia to start reducing oil production from the current levels of 9 million bpd, traders said. Russia's current production is regulated by OPEC+ quotas. HOW CAN RUSSIA RESPOND? Russia could potentially divert some 0.8 million bpd of oil to Egypt, Malaysia, Pakistan, Peru, Brunei, South Africa and Indonesia, JP Morgan said. Moscow could also disrupt the CPC pipeline to make sure the West feels the pain from higher oil prices. Western oil firms Exxon, Chevron, Shell, ENI and TotalEnergies ship up to 1 million bpd via CPC, which has total capacity of 1.7 million bpd. "If we get a visible and substantial difficulty in clearing Russian crude and Putin shuts off CPC, oil prices might get well over $80 per barrel, possibly a lot more," said Crosby. The CPC pipeline crosses Russian territory and the consortium has clashed with Moscow, which ordered it to suspend operations for several days in 2022 and 2025 citing environmental and tanker regulations. A combined stoppage of CPC and Russian flows to India would create a disruption of 3.5 million bpd or 3.5% of global supply. "The Trump administration, like its predecessors, will likely find sanctioning the world's second-largest oil exporter unfeasible without spiking oil prices," JP Morgan said.


Saudi Gazette
3 hours ago
- Saudi Gazette
Palestine Red Crescent says Israeli strike on Gaza HQ kills worker, injures three
KHAN YOUNIS, Gaza Strip — The Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) accused Israeli forces on Sunday of striking its headquarters in southern Gaza, killing one worker and wounding three others. In a statement, the humanitarian group said the early morning attack on its Khan Younis facility sparked a fire in the building, which is 'well known' to the Israeli military and 'clearly marked with the protective red emblem.' It called the strike 'deliberate' and renewed its appeal for accountability and protection of humanitarian and medical staff. The PRCS identified the slain worker as Omar Isleem and said two other staff members were injured, along with a civilian who was attempting to put out the fire. Images shared by the group showed heavy structural damage, debris-filled offices and large bloodstains. When asked about the incident, the Israel Defense Forces told the BBC it had 'no knowledge about neither artillery nor any air strikes' targeting the facility. The attack comes as Gaza's humanitarian crisis deepens. UN figures indicate that at least 1,373 Palestinians have been killed since late May while trying to access food, most near Israeli and US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation distribution sites. Israel disputes the UN's figures and accuses Hamas of fomenting chaos at the aid centres, while denying that its forces intentionally target civilians. Egyptian state media reported Sunday that two fuel trucks were waiting to enter Gaza amid ongoing shortages that have crippled hospitals and aid operations. The Hamas-run health ministry says 175 people, including 93 children, have died from malnutrition. Israel launched its Gaza campaign after the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which killed about 1,200 people and saw 251 taken hostage. Since then, more than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed, according to Gaza's health ministry. — BBC


Al Arabiya
10 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
US agency probes special counsel Jack Smith who prosecuted Trump: Report
US officials have opened an investigation into Jack Smith, the former special counsel who led two federal criminal cases against President Donald Trump, US media reported Saturday. The Office of Special Counsel told The New York Times it was investigating Smith for potentially violating the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal workers from engaging in political activity while on the job. Republican Senator Tom Cotton had reportedly asked the agency to investigate whether Smith's actions had been designed to influence the 2024 election. The agency, which monitors the conduct of federal employees, did not immediately respond to request for comment by AFP. Smith was appointed special counsel in 2022, and charged Trump with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election and mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House. Trump denied both charges and sought to frame them as politically motivated, accusing the Justice Department of being weaponized against him. Neither case ever came to trial, and the special counsel -- in line with a Justice Department policy of not prosecuting a sitting president -- dropped them both after Trump won the November 2024 presidential election. Smith then resigned before Trump could fulfil his campaign pledge to fire him. The Office of Special Counsel operates separately from special counsel offices at the Department of Justice, such as the one headed by Smith. The prosecutorial decisions made by Smith do not typically fall under its remit, according to the Times. It cannot lay criminal charges against Smith but could refer its findings to the Department of Justice, which does have that power. The most severe penalty under the Hatch Act is termination of employment, which would not apply to Smith as he has already resigned. Since taking office in January, Trump has taken a number of punitive measures against his perceived enemies. He has stripped former officials of their security clearances and protective details, targeted law firms involved in past cases against him and pulled federal funding from universities. Last month the FBI opened criminal investigations into its former director James Comey and ex-CIA chief John Brennan, two prominent Trump critics. Days later Comey's daughter Maurene -- a federal prosecutor who handled the case of notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who has been repeatedly linked to Trump -- was abruptly fired.