‘Customers are awake’- Eric Trump slams banks over stablecoin yield opposition

ambcryptoОпубликовано 2026-03-05Обновлено 2026-03-05

Введение

Eric Trump, son of former U.S. President Donald Trump, has criticized banks for their strong opposition to stablecoin yields, calling it "anti-retail, anti-consumer, and anti-American." He claims banks are fighting crypto platforms that offer 4–5%+ yields, but are losing as customers become aware. Tensions between banks and crypto have escalated, threatening the CLARITY Act. Recently, Kraken became the first crypto firm to gain access to the Fed’s payment rails, a move opposed by banks citing financial risks. President Trump also warned banks against undermining his crypto agenda. The rift risks stalling the crypto bill, with prediction markets showing a 71% chance of the CLARITY Act passing in 2026, down from 78%.

Eric Trump, the son of U.S. President Donald Trump, has criticized banks’ strong opposition to stablecoin yield.

In a statement on the 4th of March, Eric Trump said the banks’ fight against stablecoin yield is “anti-retail, anti-consumer, and anti-American.”

He added,

“The banks are desperately targeting crypto/stablecoins, where platforms plan to offer 4–5%+ yields or rewards. Fortunately, the big banks are losing this fight as customers wake up to the games...”

The rift between crypto and banks has worsened over the past few months and threatened to stall the crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act.

There have been ongoing negotiations to reach a stablecoin yield deal between the two industries to advance the bill. However, the recent grant of access to Fed payment rails to Kraken has irked the banks.

Banks oppose Kraken’s access to Fed payment rails

On Wednesday, Kraken became the first crypto-native firm to gain access to the Fed’s payment rails. It had applied for a license five years ago and only received approval this week.

Although crypto supporters hailed the update as a watershed moment for the sector, banks, through the American Bankers Association (ABA), strongly opposed it.

According to the banking lobby, the move was rushed and could expose the financial system to risks.

Interestingly, President Trump also recently warned the banks against undermining his crypto agenda.

He cautioned the bank lobby against pushing to amend the stablecoin law, the GENIUS Act, or holding the CLARITY Act hostage over stablecoin yield.

Will banks stall the crypto bill?

Whether banks will come back to the negotiating table to advance the CLARITY Act remains unclear.

However, the recent developments don’t augur well for the previously optimistic outlook of the potential passage of the CLARITY Act by mid-2026.

Even so, prediction site Polymarket showed a 71% chance of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026.

However, the odds had dropped sharply from 78% to 71% in the past two days, amid a deepening rift between banks and crypto alongside the Trump Administration.

That said, the recent crypto market recovery could be affected if the rift deepens and derails the CLARITY Act’s progress.


Final Summary

  • Eric Trump joined his father, U.S. President Donald Trump, in slamming banks’ strong opposition to stablecoin yield.
  • It is unclear whether banks will withdraw support for the CLARITY Act after opposing Kraken’s limited access to the Fed’s payment rails.

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat did Eric Trump criticize banks for regarding stablecoins?

AEric Trump criticized banks for their strong opposition to stablecoin yield, calling it 'anti-retail, anti-consumer, and anti-American.'

QWhich crypto firm recently gained access to the Fed's payment rails, and why did banks oppose it?

AKraken became the first crypto-native firm to gain access to the Fed's payment rails. Banks, through the American Bankers Association (ABA), opposed it, claiming the move was rushed and could expose the financial system to risks.

QWhat is the name of the crypto market structure bill that is threatened by the rift between banks and crypto?

AThe crypto market structure bill threatened by the rift is called the CLARITY Act.

QAccording to Polymarket, what are the odds of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026?

AAccording to Polymarket, there is a 71% chance of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026, though the odds dropped from 78% in the past two days.

QWhat did President Donald Trump recently warn banks about concerning his crypto agenda?

APresident Donald Trump warned banks against undermining his crypto agenda, cautioning them against pushing to amend the stablecoin law (the GENIUS Act) or holding the CLARITY Act hostage over stablecoin yield.

Похожее

From Survival to Accelerated Growth: The Journey of Zcash's Three-Year Rise as Told by the Founder of ZODL

**From Survival to Accelerated Growth: Zcash Founder Details the 3-Year Rise** Three years ago, Zcash (ZEC) was a struggling pioneer in privacy technology, with a price near $30, low shielded supply (11%), and a community mired in governance disputes. Today, ZEC trades around $600, with over 31% of its supply (~$3B) in user-controlled shielded pools. This transformation resulted from breaking key constraints. First, **governance shackles were removed**. The old model guaranteed funding to two entities (ECC and ZF) regardless of performance, creating a monopoly. In 2024, ECC rejected further direct funding, forcing a change. The NU6 upgrade ended direct funding, allocating 8% to community grants and 12% to a protocol-controlled treasury for retroactive rewards, expiring in 2028 unless renewed by overwhelming consensus. The entities also relinquished their trademark-based veto power, freeing community governance. Second, the **product focus shifted** from pure cryptography to user growth. Previously, engineering excelled at privacy tech but failed to attract users. In early 2024, the team (later ZODL) pivoted to building products users wanted, like the Zodl wallet (default privacy, hardware support, cross-asset swaps). This drove shielded supply to grow over 400% in ZEC terms, with 86.5% of recent transactions being shielded, representing real user adoption. Third, the **narrative evolved** from the limiting "privacy coin" label to "unstoppable private money." This clarified Zcash's value proposition: a Bitcoin-like monetary policy with verifiable private payments via advanced cryptography. This structural narrative—protocol (Zcash), asset (ZEC), gateway (Zodl)—enabled broader exchange listings, institutional interest, and ETF filings. Finally, **organizational constraints were broken**. In early 2026, the ECC team left its non-profit structure after disputes over control, forming Zcash Open Development Lab (ZODL). ZODL raised $25M from top VCs (Paradigm, a16z, etc.), gaining the capital and agility of a startup to scale consumer products. Current metrics show strong momentum: social discussion volume for ZEC surged 15,245% in a year, with 81% positive sentiment. The focus is now on enhancing user experience (Zodl wallet), scalability (Tachyon project targeting Visa-level throughput with 25-second blocks), and post-quantum security (quantum-recoverable wallets coming soon). Zcash is positioned to become faster, more usable, scalable, and quantum-resistant.

marsbit7 мин. назад

From Survival to Accelerated Growth: The Journey of Zcash's Three-Year Rise as Told by the Founder of ZODL

marsbit7 мин. назад

Five Counterparty Risk Architectures: A Settlement-Layer Methodology for Classifying TradFi Models in Crypto Exchanges

**Summary:** This companion piece reframes the five TradFi-on-crypto exchange architectures, previously classified by "architectural fingerprint," through the lens of counterparty risk. The core question is: whose balance sheet bears the loss first in a stress scenario, and has it historically done so? Each of the five models corresponds to a distinct risk holder with its own documented failure modes. * **Model 1 (Stablecoin-Settled CEX Perpetuals):** Risk is held by the stablecoin issuer (e.g., reserve composition, bank connectivity) and the CEX's own book. History includes Tether's banking disconnections (2017) and reserve misrepresentations (CFTC 2021 Order). * **Model 2 (CFD Brokers):** Risk resides on the broker's balance sheet (B-book model). Regulatory differences (e.g., ESMA's mandatory negative balance protection vs. Mauritius FSC's lack thereof) define loss allocation rules, as seen in the 2015 SNB event (Alpari UK insolvency). * **Model 3 (Off-Chain Custody & Transfer Agent Chain):** Risk lies with the off-chain custodian/platform. User asset recovery depends on Terms of Use and corporate structure, exemplified by the Celsius bankruptcy ruling (2023) where Earn Account assets were deemed property of the estate. * **Model 4 (DEX Perpetual Protocols):** No single balance sheet bears risk. Loss absorption relies on a protocol's insurance fund and Auto-Deleveraging (ADL) mechanism, as demonstrated in the GMX V1 (2022) and dYdX v3 YFI (2023) incidents. * **Model 5 (Regulated CCP - DCM-DCO-FCM):** The most institutionalized model concentrates risk in the Central Counterparty (CCP). However, history shows CCPs can employ non-standard tools under extreme stress, such as mass trade cancellation (LME Nickel, 2022) or enabling negative price settlements (CME WTI, 2020). The report argues that regulatory choices and counterparty risk structures are co-extensive, not in an upstream-downstream relationship. It concludes with five separate observation checklists (not predictions) for monitoring the structural vulnerabilities of each risk model.

marsbit24 мин. назад

Five Counterparty Risk Architectures: A Settlement-Layer Methodology for Classifying TradFi Models in Crypto Exchanges

marsbit24 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片