Trump Pushes Digital Assets Into U.S. Banking System

TheNewsCryptoPubblicato 2026-05-20Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-05-20

Introduzione

President Trump has issued an executive order directing federal agencies to revise financial regulations to integrate digital assets and fintech into the traditional banking and payments system. The policy aims to streamline rules, lower barriers to entry, and encourage collaboration between fintech firms, banks, and regulators. A key directive is for financial regulators to identify and amend any rules that unfairly prevent fintech companies from partnering with federally regulated banks. Specifically, the order requires the Federal Reserve Board to evaluate its system for providing payment accounts and services to non-bank financial institutions. This review includes examining whether Federal Reserve banks can issue such accounts independently, which could benefit entities like Wyoming's Special Purpose Depository Institutions (SPDIs). The move follows recent limited master account access granted to the crypto exchange Kraken and ongoing Fed efforts to establish a more formal framework for such access.

On Tuesday, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the federal government to revise its regulatory frameworks in order to incorporate “digital assets and innovative technology into traditional financial services and payment systems.”

The order said:

“It is therefore the policy of the United States to streamline regulatory processes, reduce unnecessary barriers to entry, and encourage collaboration between fintech firms, federally regulated financial institutions, and Federal financial regulators.”

Expanding Crypto-linked Access to Fed Payment Services

The document recommends that the United States integrate financial technology services into its preexisting payment and banking infrastructure.

Over the next three months, the chiefs of financial regulators are required by the order to evaluate their current laws and identify any regulations or documents that unfairly prevent fintech companies from forming relationships with banks authorized by the federal government.

As a consequence of the evaluation, Trump ordered regulators to take action within six months to promote innovation. Among these measures is a request that the Federal Reserve Board of Governors examine the current system for providing payment accounts and services to non-bank financial enterprises and uninsured depository institutions.

Additionally, this evaluation inquires as to whether or not the twelve Federal Reserve banks have the authority to issue payment accounts apart from the board. Special purpose depository institutions in Wyoming and other jurisdictions with comparable structures may be particularly well-served by this provision. An SPDI based in Wyoming, Kraken, was earlier this year allowed access to a restricted version of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas’s so-called master account. Similar access has been requested by other firms.

After unveiling a plan in December to provide access to some businesses, the Federal Reserve is now hard at work creating a more official “skinny” master account.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Bitcoin Faces Pressure as Retail BTC Activity Hits Record Low

TagsAltcoinBitcoin

Domande pertinenti

QWhat did the executive order issued by President Trump aim to do regarding digital assets?

AThe executive order aimed to direct the federal government to revise its regulatory frameworks to incorporate digital assets and innovative technology into traditional financial services and payment systems.

QWhat are the three main policy goals stated in Trump's order for encouraging fintech?

AThe policy goals are to streamline regulatory processes, reduce unnecessary barriers to entry, and encourage collaboration between fintech firms, federally regulated financial institutions, and Federal financial regulators.

QWhat specific action did the order require the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to examine?

AThe order required the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to examine the current system for providing payment accounts and services to non-bank financial enterprises and uninsured depository institutions.

QWhich recent development for a specific type of institution is mentioned as being well-served by the order's provisions?

AThe order's provisions may particularly well-serve Special Purpose Depository Institutions (SPDIs) in Wyoming and other jurisdictions with comparable structures, referencing Kraken's earlier access to a restricted Fed master account.

QWhat is the Federal Reserve currently working on regarding master accounts, according to the article?

AFollowing a plan unveiled in December, the Federal Reserve is now hard at work creating a more official 'skinny' master account to provide access to certain businesses.

Letture associate

Interpreting Investment Opportunities in the Age of Great Navigation, Invesco Great Wall Fund Releases '2026 Report on Chinese Enterprises Going Global'

Invesco Great Wall Fund has released its "2026 China Corporate Globalization Report," titled "The 'Great Navigation Era' of Chinese Enterprises." The report analyzes the new trends and investment opportunities as Chinese companies expand globally, moving from simple product exports to comprehensive overseas operations involving services, branding, and local production. Driven by factors like trade friction, the pursuit of higher profit margins abroad, and policy support, globalization is becoming essential for Chinese companies. The report outlines an evolution: from early product export ("Globalization 1.0") to the current "Globalization 2.0," characterized by overseas capacity, capital goods investment, consumer brand expansion, and service exports. Chinese firms' competitive advantages are highlighted, including a vast engineer talent pool, low-cost and robust infrastructure, and complete industrial clusters. Specific sectors with significant出海 potential are identified: * **Capital Goods** (e.g., engineering machinery, power equipment): Benefiting from global demand, especially in Belt & Road markets and the AI-driven power grid upgrade cycle. * **Consumer Brands**: Transitioning from cost to brand advantage, leveraging供应链 efficiency. * **Technology & Innovation**: Including AI applications, optical modules within global tech supply chains, and new energy vehicles focusing on local production. * **Pharmaceuticals**: Chinese biotech firms are becoming preferred partners for global pharma, with potential for breakthrough drugs in areas like oncology and weight loss. The report concludes that corporate globalization represents a sustained, core theme for China's capital markets, though companies must navigate challenges like geopolitics and localization.

marsbit8 min fa

Interpreting Investment Opportunities in the Age of Great Navigation, Invesco Great Wall Fund Releases '2026 Report on Chinese Enterprises Going Global'

marsbit8 min fa

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

On the night of February 9th, GitHub suffered a major outage caused by a simple configuration change—reducing a cache refresh interval from 12 to 2 hours—that triggered a cascade of failures. This was not an isolated event, but part of a broader pattern. In early 2026, GitHub experienced at least 8 major incidents, failing to meet its promised 99.9% availability. These outages stemmed from structural issues: explosive growth in load, tight service coupling, and insufficient protection against abnormal traffic. This unprecedented load is driven by AI Agents. In 2025, GitHub handled ~1 billion commits. By 2026, weekly commits reached 275 million, projecting to ~14 billion for the year—a 14x increase. AI tools like Claude Code now contribute 4.5% of all public repository commits, with weekly submissions surging 25x in just three months. AI-generated pull requests jumped from 4 million to 17 million per month in half a year. Unlike human developers, AI Agents work continuously, generating commits at a scale that overwhelms infrastructure designed for human rhythms. The surge also shattered GitHub's business model. Copilot's flat-rate pricing, based on assisting human developers, became unsustainable as Agentic AI sessions consumed resources worth hundreds of dollars for a few dollars in fees. In response, GitHub imposed usage limits and, by June 1st, shifted to a pay-per-use "AI Credits" system. Facing this new reality, GitHub realized a 10x scaling plan was insufficient. It announced a need to *redesign* its architecture for 30x current scale—decoupling services, adding fault isolation, and improving change management to prevent cascading failures. Other platforms like Stripe and AWS are facing similar challenges with AI Agents. Fundamentally, GitHub is transitioning from a human collaboration platform to an "exhaust pipe" for automated AI workflows. Its detailed post-mortem reports aim to maintain trust during this turbulent rebuild. The February outage was not just a technical glitch, but a signal of the software industry's entry into a new, AI-driven era.

marsbit47 min fa

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

marsbit47 min fa

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

Facing massive paper losses exceeding $90 billion each amidst a sharp market downturn, "Digital Asset Treasury" (DAT) giants Strategy and Bitmine find themselves in a precarious position, but with different underlying risks. Strategy, heavily invested in Bitcoin (BTC), faces significant financial strain. Its strategy relies heavily on debt, including convertible notes and preferred stock (STRC) requiring substantial dividend payments. With its cash reserves dwindling and BTC offering no staking yield for cash flow, Strategy's high leverage makes it vulnerable. A continued price decline could force asset sales to meet obligations, potentially creating a negative feedback loop. Its market value has already fallen sharply. In contrast, Bitmine, an Ethereum (ETH) holder, appears on firmer financial ground. It primarily funds its purchases through equity offerings (like ATM programs), avoiding debt pressure. It also generates income by staking a large portion of its ETH holdings. While not immune to market drops and shareholder dilution concerns, Bitmine maintains more flexibility, recently announcing a new preferred share offering to raise further capital. The core divergence lies in their financing: Bitmine uses equity (investor money), while Strategy uses debt (borrowed money). Consequently, Bitmine currently faces less immediate liquidity pressure than Strategy, which must navigate the dual challenge of servicing debt/dividends and a declining core asset (BTC) price.

marsbit54 min fa

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

marsbit54 min fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片