Coinbase and Ripple CEOs Join CFTC Advisory Panel Overseeing Digital Assets

TheNewsCryptoPublicado a 2026-02-13Actualizado a 2026-02-13

Resumen

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has formed a new advisory committee focused on digital assets, appointing key industry leaders including Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse. The committee, established under the Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act, will provide expertise on regulatory and market developments. It includes representatives from crypto exchanges, stablecoin issuers, derivatives desks, and blockchain firms. The group will meet at least four times in 2026 to address issues like compliance, risk management, market transparency, and regulatory coordination. Their input will help shape future CFTC rules and oversight approaches for digital asset markets.

The United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced appointments to a new committee that would provide advice on regulatory and industry developments regarding digital assets. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong confirmed his position as a member of the committee representing crypto exchange interests. The advisory committee also has Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse as a member, offering information from a prominent payments blockchain company. The committee has various members representing companies in digital assets, finance, and blockchain technology. The committee also has members from a company that issues a stablecoin and a derivatives desk manager.

CFTC Chairman Rostin Behnam stated the committee would assist in helping regulators grasp the intricacies of the digital market. The members would contribute their expertise and knowledge from the digital asset marketplace. This advisory committee would meet at least four times in 2026 to discuss the problems regulators face in their work. The CFTC formed the committee through the Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act’s powers. They would concentrate their focus on market issues such as compliance and risk management.

The committee has executives from companies such as Paxos, Cumberland, Galaxy Digital, among other companies. A representative of the stablecoin issuer has knowledge of liquidity and a framework for redemption. The diversity of the group is evident since there is knowledge on trading platforms, derivatives exchanges, and blockchain operations. The members of the CFTC’s advisory panel are compliance experts and know legal issues. The committee has experts from fintech and blockchain-based think tanks. The experts know derivatives exchanges, clearing operations, and blockchain operations.

Committee Aims and Regulatory Role

The Advisory Group will review options for enhancing digital asset markets under U.S. laws. The members will be able to review the risk issues faced by participants in the digital markets, whether retail or institutional. The members will also give opinions on compliance issues faced and law enforcement. The panel may also discuss transparency issues in digital markets in the U.S. The issue of coordination between U.S. regulatory authorities may also come up.

The committee members may assist the CFTC in oversight roles for new technologies. These could involve data infrastructures and market settlement systems. The contributions from the members to the CFTC may shape the proposals for future rules set forth by the agency.

Highlighted Crypto News:

U.S. Bankers Urge OCC to Slow Crypto Trust Bank Charters

Preguntas relacionadas

QWho are the two prominent CEOs appointed to the CFTC's new advisory committee for digital assets?

ACoinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse.

QWhat is the primary purpose of the CFTC's newly formed advisory committee?

ATo provide advice on regulatory and industry developments regarding digital assets and assist regulators in grasping the intricacies of the digital market.

QHow many times is the advisory committee scheduled to meet in 2026?

AAt least four times.

QWhich act granted the CFTC the power to form this digital assets advisory committee?

AThe Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act.

QBesides crypto exchanges, what other types of companies are represented on the committee?

AA stablecoin issuer, a derivatives desk manager, fintech companies, blockchain-based think tanks, and companies like Paxos, Cumberland, and Galaxy Digital.

Lecturas Relacionadas

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that the core limitation of blockchain technology is not the scalability trilemma, but its fundamental lack of privacy, which acts as a barrier to institutional capital. It defines blockchain as a slow, expensive, shared computer whose primary value is "permissionlessness" (no administrator) and verifiable trust. While this is ideal for native financial assets like stable币, which now process trillions, two critical flaws remain for mainstream adoption: regulatory legitimacy and a default transparency that leaks all financial activity. The author contends that transparency is not a feature but a tax, quantified through MEV extraction, making the public ledger unusable for serious institutions. However, modern cryptography, specifically zero-knowledge proofs, now offers a solution: "provable privacy." This allows users to prove compliance (e.g., solvency, KYC) without revealing underlying data. This fusion of privacy and auditability resolves the transparency-compliant privacy-compliance dichotomy, enabling a purely upgraded system where transactions are verified but not broadcasted. Closing these flaws is presented as the essential bridge to onboard the next wave of trillions in capital.

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手Hace 4 hora(s)

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手Hace 4 hora(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手Hace 8 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手Hace 8 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbitHace 9 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbitHace 9 hora(s)

Trading

Spot

Futuros