CoinDeskPolicyPublished on 2024-04-10Last updated on 2024-04-11

Abstract

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry and the panel's ranking Democrat, Maxine Waters, reportedly met with the Senate's majority leader on next steps.

The U.S. congressional effort to establish regulations for stablecoins has become an increasing longshot for passage this year, but the lawmakers who've pushed legislation the farthest reportedly had a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer about it, Punchbowl News reported.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) and the panel's senior Democrat, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), met with Schumer on Thursday to get legislation moving, potentially tying it to reauthorization of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) funding, the site reported.

On the crypto event circuit, McHenry has repeatedly contended that it's still possible to get his panel's stablecoin bill passed for President Joe Biden to sign it into law, including in remarks earlier this week. McHenry is retiring from Congress this year and has put a priority on the legislation to provide guardrails to issuers of the tokens that, among other uses, provide a steadier foundation for the trading of more volatile cryptocurrencies.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), who has also been trying to move digital assets legislation, said last month that Schumer was willing to work on a stablecoin bill.

Despite its success in passing the House committee with a bipartisan vote, the legislation faces daunting hurdles. It could be difficult to get a floor vote in a House that has been virtually paralyzed by infighting – especially within the ranks of top Republicans. And the Senate Banking Committee has shown no interest in picking the idea up and matching it. That could leave the narrower option of engaging in esoteric legislative wrangling to get it attached to a must-move item, such as the FAA spending bill.

Spokespeople for McHenry and Waters didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the meeting.

Crypto insiders in D.C. have been quietly lamenting it as a likely lost cause for this session, but the Schumer meeting and McHenry's optimism may keep hope alive.

Edited by Nick Baker.

Related Reads

Borrowed Faith: How Much of the Bitcoin ETF Flows Are Real Money

"Rented Faith: How Much of Bitcoin ETF Flows Are Real Money?" Bitcoin ETF inflows are often seen as a barometer of institutional conviction. However, week-to-week analysis reveals they are primarily driven by a hidden arbitrage trade rather than directional bullishness. This is the cash-and-carry trade: buying the ETF while simultaneously shorting Bitcoin futures on the CME to lock in the price difference (basis). This delta-neutral activity registers as ETF inflows but reflects a rate-seeking, not price-betting, strategy. Data shows weekly ETF flow volatility is closely tied to hedge fund ("leveraged funds") short positions on CME futures, with a correlation of 0.70. About half of weekly flow variation can be explained by this single factor. In contrast, Bitcoin's weekly price changes have no statistically significant power to predict flows. Crucially, while this arbitrage trade dominates weekly *fluctuations*, it is not the main component of the cumulative *stock*. Of the ~$55 billion total net inflow, the estimated net arbitrage position is only about $1 billion. The vast majority is steady, directional buying averaging ~$400 million per week. Thus, ETF flows overstate the *volatility* of belief, not its *level*. The "rented" arbitrage capital churns, while "owned" directional capital forms the bedrock. This arbitrage trade has been unwinding for two years, with hedge fund shorts peaking at ~$14 billion in late 2024 and falling to ~$4.5 billion. Recent outflows align with basis compression, signaling the trade's exit, not a loss of faith. For Ethereum ETFs, the same dynamic is weaker due to negative carry from forgone staking yield. The key takeaway: To interpret ETF flows, watch the basis vs. Treasury yields and CME hedge fund net shorts. They reveal how much of the weekly "demand" headline is driven by rented, rate-seeking capital versus real conviction.

链捕手12m ago

Borrowed Faith: How Much of the Bitcoin ETF Flows Are Real Money

链捕手12m ago

Two Giants' Credit Expansion: Loan Balances of $9.9 Billion vs. $14.6 Billion, Brazil Emerges as the Main Battlefield

Title: Two Giants "Credit" Surge: Loan Balances of 99 Billion vs. 146 Billion USD, Brazil Emerges as Main Battlefield Summary: The article compares the rapid expansion of credit businesses by two major e-commerce and fintech players, Sea (via Monee) and Mercado Libre (via Mercado Pago), in overseas markets like Southeast Asia and Latin America, contrasting with a slowing domestic Chinese credit market. Using Q1 2026 financial data, it highlights their significant growth. Sea's Monee reached a loan balance of $99 billion, up 71% year-over-year (YoY), contributing 17.5% to Sea's total revenue. Mercado Pago's loan balance hit $146 billion, up 87% YoY, contributing 45% to its parent company's revenue. Both maintained stable risk metrics (e.g., Monee's 90+ day NPL at 1.1%) despite rapid scaling. Brazil is identified as a key and accelerating growth market for both. Sea's Brazilian operations saw loan volumes exceed $10 billion, growing 250% YoY, with SPayLater GMV penetration still low (~10%) indicating high potential. Sea also secured a key Brazilian financial credit license (SCFI). Mercado Libre's Brazil segment contributed over half (54%) of total group revenue, with its credit business there generating $11.24 billion in revenue, up 89% YoY and accounting for 12.7% of global revenue. Mercado Pago's credit portfolio, especially credit cards (46% of loans, +105% YoY), is a strategic focus, described as crucial as building logistics was a decade ago. Its net interest margin after loss (NIMAL) remains high at 17.8%. The article concludes that while Brazil presents immense opportunities, the success is largely driven by these integrated "e-commerce + fintech" giants with proprietary transaction data and ecosystems, making it challenging for standalone fintech players to compete effectively.

链捕手34m ago

Two Giants' Credit Expansion: Loan Balances of $9.9 Billion vs. $14.6 Billion, Brazil Emerges as the Main Battlefield

链捕手34m ago

Research Report Analysis: Is Intel Making a Comeback with Apple? Bernstein's Calculations Show the Right Direction, but the Price Is Already Overvalued

Bernstein analyst Stacy A. Rasgon published a report on June 18 regarding Intel, assessing the potential impact of recent political support for a US-based PC chip design and manufacturing collaboration between Apple and Intel. The report views this as a significant signal for the foundry landscape shift but concludes the initial financial contribution would be minimal. Key conclusions: 1) An Apple deal is seen as a small-scale "proof of concept." Even if Intel wins 40% of Apple's premium notebook chip orders (~5 million units/year), Bernstein estimates it would generate only about $500M in annual revenue and ~$0.03 EPS, negligible against Intel's ~$55B revenue. 2) Political encouragement is not equivalent to enforceable mandates. Winning orders ultimately depends on Intel demonstrating competitive technology (like its 18A node), cost, and reliable supply. 3) The path from validation to large-scale production involves significant challenges, capital investment, and time. Due to these uncertainties, Bernstein maintains a Market-Perform (Hold) rating with a $100 price target, implying potential downside from the ~$121.10 price at the report date. The analysis highlights the tension between near-term validation value—serving as a crucial trust signal for Intel's foundry ambitions and US supply chain resilience—and the long-term opportunity to attract larger cloud and AI chip customers. The investment thesis hinges on successful 18A execution and sustained policy support, not on immediate financial gains from Apple.

marsbit58m ago

Research Report Analysis: Is Intel Making a Comeback with Apple? Bernstein's Calculations Show the Right Direction, but the Price Is Already Overvalued

marsbit58m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片