Eric Trump Goes to War With Big Banks Over ‘Anti‑American’ Crypto Lobbying

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-03-05Last updated on 2026-03-05

Abstract

Eric Trump has publicly criticized major U.S. banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America, accusing them of pursuing an "anti-American" agenda by lobbying against crypto and stablecoins. He claims these institutions are trying to block Americans from earning higher yields on savings—often 4–5% in crypto platforms—to protect their low-interest monopoly and prevent deposit flight. According to Trump, banks are supporting bills like the Clarity Act to restrict yields and rewards on stablecoins, undermining competition and consumer freedom. He argues this contradicts American ideals and reflects the banking industry's panic over losing dominance in digital finance. The conflict centers on the GENIUS Act, which allowed stablecoins but banned interest payments, and the proposed Clarity Act, which aims to further limit yields.

Eric Trump lashed out against Big Banks for targeting Crypto and stablecoins, essentially not letting Americans make as much money as they could be.

An “Anti-American” Crypto Agenda

In a post on social network X on March 4, following his father Donald Trump’s message accusing banks of “undermining” the GENIUS Act, Eric Trump subsequently called out big banks like JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Bank of America.

He claims these banks are actively blocking Americans from “getting higher yields on their savings” and preventing “any rewards or perks from being given to customers,” arguing this is happening because they are “desperately targeting crypto/stablecoins, where platforms plan to offer 4–5% yields or rewards.” He goes as far as saying this stance betrays America’s freedom ideals:

The ABA and other lobbyists are spending millions trying to ban or restrict those yields via bills like the Clarity Act, crying “fairness” and using words like “stability”—when it’s really about protecting their low-rate monopoly and preventing deposit flight. his is anti-retail, anti-consumer, and straight-up anti-American.

The Greatest Hypocrites

In a different post from the same day, Eric Trump doubled down, accusing Big Banks of “doing everything they can to block the crypto industry” and branding them institutions that have “held a monopoly and screwed their customers for years.”

As Eric Trump sees it, this comes as a sort of tantrum, the last-ditch effort of a scared institution to keep control of Americans’ savings:

They are the greatest hypocrites and are in mass panic given they know they are losing the digital finance race!

The GENIUS Act vs. The Clarity Act

Both Donald and Eric Trump’s rants respond to a broader context: two flagship Trump-era bills are being weaponized against each other by the TradFi institutions.

The GENIUS Act, last year’s “big win” for payment stablecoins, legalized fully‐backed dollar tokens while explicitly banning issuers from paying interest on customer balances, a compromise that pushed yield into exchanges, fintech apps and DeFi protocols instead of killing it outright.

Now the banking lobby wants the CLARITY Act to finish the job: they are demanding a blanket prohibition on “yields, rewards or inducements” for stablecoin holders, closing the GENIUS loophole that still lets platforms compete with near‐zero bank accounts.

This is the fight the Trumps are now front running: an active opposition against those that are trying to make sure digital dollars can never pay ordinary savers more than the legacy system does.

BTC’s price trends to the downside on the daily chart. Source: BTCUSD on Tradingview

Cover image from ChatGPT, BTCPUSD chart from Tradingview

Related Questions

QWhat did Eric Trump accuse big banks like JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America of doing?

AEric Trump accused big banks of actively blocking Americans from getting higher yields on their savings and preventing rewards or perks from being given to customers, claiming they are desperately targeting crypto and stablecoins to protect their low-rate monopoly.

QWhich two acts are central to the conflict between the Trump family and big banks regarding crypto and stablecoins?

AThe GENIUS Act and the Clarity Act are central to the conflict, with the GENIUS Act legalizing fully-backed dollar tokens but banning interest on customer balances, while the Clarity Act seeks to prohibit yields, rewards, or inducements for stablecoin holders.

QWhy does Eric Trump label the actions of big banks and their lobbyists as 'anti-American'?

AHe labels them as 'anti-American' because he believes they are undermining America's freedom ideals by protecting their monopoly, preventing deposit flight, and restricting consumers from earning higher yields through crypto and stablecoins.

QWhat does Eric Trump claim is the real motivation behind the banking lobby's support for bills like the Clarity Act?

AHe claims the real motivation is to protect their low-rate monopoly and prevent deposit flight, rather than genuine concerns about fairness or stability.

QHow does Eric Trump describe the big banks' response to the rise of digital finance?

AHe describes it as a mass panic and tantrum, accusing them of being hypocrites who are desperately trying to block the crypto industry because they are losing the digital finance race.

Related Reads

Has Hook Summer Really Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Narrative of Uniswap v4

"Hook Summer" Arrives? Sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite Uniswap v4 Narrative Amidst a slight market recovery, attention within the Ethereum ecosystem has shifted to Meme coins built on Uniswap v4's Hook protocol. Following ASTEROID, tokens like sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD have become market focal points, with market caps ranging from millions to tens of millions, bringing concentrated liquidity to a narrative-dry market. Uniswap v4 Hooks are "plugin smart contracts" that allow developers to inject custom logic at key points in a liquidity pool's lifecycle (initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps, etc.), making the AMM programmable. Recent representative projects include: * **sato**: Market cap peaked over $38M; uses a v4 curve mechanism for minting/burning, locking ETH as reserve. * **sat1**: Market cap briefly exceeded $10M, positioning as an "optimized sato," but later declined significantly. * **Lo0p**: Market cap neared $6.6M; a "lending AMM protocol" allowing users to borrow ETH against deposited LO0P tokens without immediate selling pressure. * **FLOOD**: Market cap approached $6M; channels trading reserves into Aave v3 to generate yield, which is retained in the pool. The emergence of these Hook-based tokens could drive long-term growth for the Uniswap ecosystem by attracting users and liquidity to v4 pools. Combined with Uniswap's activated fee switch (partially used to burn UNI), the long-term outlook for UNI appears positive. However, short-term UNI price appreciation is not directly guaranteed. Factors include the sustainability and lifecycle of these new tokens, their price volatility, overall market conditions, and regulatory pressures. Currently, Uniswap v4's TVL ($595M) lags behind v3 and v2, indicating Hook adoption still requires time to mature. In summary, the Hook ecosystem serves as "long-term nourishment" for UNI, but acts more as a "catalyst" than a direct "booster" in the short term. Note: These are early-stage experimental tokens and may carry unknown risks.

marsbit3m ago

Has Hook Summer Really Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Narrative of Uniswap v4

marsbit3m ago

Has Hook Summer Truly Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Uniswap v4 Narrative

With the broader market showing signs of recovery, a new wave of interest has emerged around Ethereum-based meme coins. Following ASTEROID, tokens like sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD, built upon the Uniswap v4 Hook protocol, are capturing market attention. Their market capitalizations range from millions to tens of millions of dollars, injecting much-needed focused liquidity into a market lacking narratives. This article explores whether this trend signifies an incoming "Hook Summer" and its potential impact on UNI's price. Hooks are essentially plug-in smart contracts for Uniswap v4 liquidity pools, allowing developers to inject custom logic at key points in a pool's lifecycle (like initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps). This transforms the AMM into programmable building blocks. Key highlighted projects include: * **sato**: Peaked over $38M market cap. It utilizes a v4 curve for minting/burning; buying locks ETH as reserve to mint new tokens, while selling redeems ETH from the reserve and burns tokens. * **sat1**: Market cap briefly exceeded $10M, promoted as an "optimized sato," but later declined significantly. * **Lo0p**: Reached nearly $6.6M. It's a lending AMM protocol where buying LO0P tokens locks them as collateral, allowing users to borrow ETH from the pool reserve at 40% LTV, aiming to improve capital efficiency for idle ETH in LPs. * **FLOOD**: Peaked near $6M. Its mechanism directs asset reserves from buys into Aave v3 to generate yield, with fees and interest retained in the pool to potentially influence the token's price long-term. In the long term, the development of the Hook ecosystem can attract users and liquidity to Uniswap v4, benefiting UNI's fundamentals—especially combined with the recent activation of the protocol fee switch, where a portion of fees is used to burn UNI. However, in the short term, these Hook-based tokens are unlikely to directly drive significant UNI price appreciation. Their impact is moderated by factors like token sustainability, price volatility, and broader market and regulatory conditions. Currently, Uniswap v4's TVL ($595M) still trails behind v2 and v3, indicating adoption and growth will take time. The article concludes that while the Hook ecosystem provides long-term "nourishment" for UNI, its short-term role is more of a "catalyst" than a "booster." Readers are cautioned that these are early-stage experimental tokens and may carry unknown risks.

Odaily星球日报16m ago

Has Hook Summer Truly Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Uniswap v4 Narrative

Odaily星球日报16m ago

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I Would Sell Bitcoin, But Never a Net Sale

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Said We'd Sell Bitcoin, But Never Be a Net Seller In a recent podcast, MicroStrategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor clarified the company's stance on potentially selling Bitcoin. Following MicroStrategy's earnings call statement about being prepared to sell BTC to fund dividends for its STRC (Strategic) credit product, Saylor emphasized the distinction between selling and being a "net seller." Saylor explained the core business model: MicroStrategy sells credit instruments like STRC and uses the proceeds to buy Bitcoin, which is viewed as "digital capital" expected to appreciate around 30-40% annually. A portion of these capital gains can then be used to pay the dividends on the credit products. He stressed that even if the company sells some Bitcoin for dividends, it simultaneously buys much more with new credit issuance. For example, after raising $3.2 billion from STRC sales in April, the dividend obligation was only $80-90 million, making the company a net buyer. The clarification aims to counter market narratives questioning the value of Bitcoin on MicroStrategy's balance sheet if it were never sold, and to dismiss claims of a "Ponzi scheme." Saylor reiterated his personal philosophy for investors: "Don't be a net seller of bitcoin" and ensure your Bitcoin holdings increase each year. Saylor also discussed Bitcoin's role as the foundation for "digital credit," noting that STRC has become the largest and most liquid preferred stock issue in the U.S., offering high risk-adjusted returns (Sharpe ratio). He highlighted Bitcoin's deep liquidity, stating that even large purchases by MicroStrategy do not move the market significantly, which is driven by macro factors, geopolitical tensions, and capital flows from ETFs and credit products. Finally, Saylor reflected on his early inspiration from sci-fi books, which motivated his path to MIT, and maintained his fundamental thesis on Bitcoin remains unchanged: it is superior digital capital enabling superior digital credit.

链捕手20m ago

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I Would Sell Bitcoin, But Never a Net Sale

链捕手20m ago

Beaten SK Hynix Employees in China: Year-end Bonus Less Than 5% of Korean Staff's

"SK Hynix Chinese Staff Hit Hard: Bonuses Less Than 5% of Korean Counterparts" Driven by the AI boom, South Korea's SK Hynix is experiencing record performance, with media reports predicting massive year-end bonuses for its employees, making them highly desirable in the matchmaking market. However, this prosperity starkly contrasts with the situation for the company's Chinese employees. According to reports, SK Hynix operates under a rule allocating 10% of operating profit for employee bonuses. While projections suggest Korean employees could receive bonuses reaching millions of RMB, a Chinese employee with over a decade of technical experience revealed the disparity: "If they get 3 million, Chinese staff get less than 5% of that." After adjustments based on KPI ratings, this employee's highest bonus was slightly over 100,000 RMB. Bonuses are paid annually in Korea but semi-annually in China. During the industry downturn in 2023-2024, Chinese employees received no bonus at all. The gap extends beyond bonuses. Recruitment posts for SK Hynix's Chinese factories (in Wuxi, Dalian, Chongqing) show engineer monthly salaries ranging from 10,000 to 35,000 RMB, with a 13th-month salary promised. Chinese employees also receive standard benefits like annual leave but lack stock incentives, which are reportedly unavailable to them. Furthermore, management positions in China are predominantly held by Korean personnel, though industry observers note a gradual increase in local middle managers over time. SK Hynix has confirmed the 10% bonus rule but cautioned that specific future bonus amounts remain unpredictable. The company forecasts strong demand for HBM and other high-value enterprise products for the next 2-3 years, driven by AI infrastructure investment. This focus on business-to-business markets may continue to constrain supply for consumer products, potentially prolonging price increases for components like memory.

链捕手34m ago

Beaten SK Hynix Employees in China: Year-end Bonus Less Than 5% of Korean Staff's

链捕手34m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片