Why Ethereum Is Losing Institutional Favor

Why Ethereum Is Losing

COIN4U IN YOUR SOCIAL FEED

Ethereum, once the unquestioned leader of the smart contract revolution, stood for years as the natural choice for banks, hedge funds, enterprises, and large financial institutions experimenting with blockchain technology. As the first major network to make decentralized applications and programmable smart contracts possible, it attracted developers, liquidity, and attention from the world’s most powerful investors. Why Ethereum Is Losing. In its early days, Ethereum was seen as the future of decentralized finance and the backbone for institutional blockchain adoption. However, as blockchain technology has rapidly evolved and competitors have matured, the narrative has shifted. Institutions, which once viewed Ethereum as the default solution, are now exploring alternative networks that are faster, cheaper, more scalable, and in some cases more aligned with regulatory and compliance requirements.

To why Ethereum is no longer the top choice for institutions, it is essential to examine the fundamental changes taking place in the blockchain ecosystem. Institutions now have significantly more options than they did in the past, and many of these options address the limitations that have held Ethereum back. High gas fees, network congestion, environmental concerns, and regulatory uncertainties have all contributed to a changing institutional landscape. At the same time, Ethereum still maintains a strong position, but the days of uncontested dominance are over. The question is not whether Ethereum still matters—it absolutely does—but why institutions are broadening their focus and, in some cases, shifting away from Ethereum in favor of platforms that better meet their evolving needs.

Ethereum’s Early Institutional Dominance

Ethereum’s early success with institutions can be attributed to its ability to do what Bitcoin could not. While Bitcoin was revolutionary as a decentralized store of value, Ethereum introduced smart contracts, a transformative innovation that allowed code to self-execute on the blockchain. This breakthrough opened the door to decentralized applications, tokenized assets, automated financial products, and the early foundations of what would become the massive DeFi sector. Institutions that were curious about blockchain technology found Ethereum appealing because it offered functionality, programmability, and innovation potential unmatched by any other network at the time.

Throughout its early years, Ethereum benefited from the largest developer community in the blockchain industry. This meant new tools, applications, and services were constantly being built, providing a stronger infrastructure for institutional experimentation. Ethereum also captured the majority of stablecoin volume, decentralized exchanges, and liquidity pools. For institutions wanting to interact with blockchain-based markets, Ethereum was the place where the most activity happened. Because it had such a strong brand and such deep liquidity, institutions could feel confident that they were entering an ecosystem with relevance, future growth potential, and wide support from custodians and infrastructure providers.

However, the very success that made Ethereum dominant also created problems. As the network grew, congestion became common. As more decentralized applications launched and user demand skyrocketed, Ethereum’s limited throughput became a bottleneck. Although institutions tend to be long-term thinkers, they also require a degree of predictability, performance, and cost-efficiency that Ethereum often struggled to provide.

The Scalability Problem: High Gas Fees and Network Congestion

The Scalability Problem High Gas Fees and Network Congestion

One of the clearest reasons Ethereum is no longer the top choice for institutions comes from its well-documented scalability challenges. Ethereum’s base layer has limited bandwidth, and when the network becomes congested, transaction fees—known as gas fees—can spike to extremely high levels. There have been periods when processing a single transaction could cost hundreds of dollars, making it impractical for institutions that want to move significant amounts of assets efficiently or frequently.

For organizations that manage large portfolios, execute high-frequency trades, or run automated smart contract strategies, unpredictable fees are a major concern. Institutions need reliability and cost predictability, especially when executing operations at scale. Ethereum, because of its congested network and fluctuating costs, has not always been able to provide these guarantees. Despite the shift to Proof-of-Stake and ongoing improvements, the base layer still faces the same structural limitations. This means that institutions operating on Ethereum must either accept high fees or shift their activity to Layer 2 networks. Many institutions are reluctant to do so because multiple layers introduce complexity, risk, and integration challenges.

Ethereum’s throughput challenges also mean that transactions sometimes take longer than institutions prefer. Lightning-fast settlement is not just a convenience; for financial institutions, it can be essential. When alternative blockchains can confirm transactions in seconds for a fraction of the cost, it becomes easy to see why many organizations are exploring new options.

The Rise of Faster and Cheaper Layer 1 Competitors

The emergence of high-performance Layer 1 blockchains is one of the most significant reasons institutions have expanded beyond Ethereum. Platforms like Solana, Avalanche, BNB Chain, and others have marketed themselves as faster, cheaper, and more scalable alternatives. These networks often process thousands of transactions per second, offer extremely low fees, and provide near-instant settlement. For institutions focused on speed, throughput, and cost-efficiency, these platforms can be more appealing than Ethereum’s congested base layer.

What makes this shift particularly impactful is that these competing blockchains are no longer experimental. They have matured into full-fledged ecosystems with decentralized finance platforms, tokenized assets, derivatives markets, and development environments that rival Ethereum. As liquidity grows on these networks and institutional infrastructure improves, institutions feel increasingly comfortable diversifying into or even prioritizing these alternative ecosystems.

Another important factor is the speed with which some competitors have embraced enterprise use cases. Instead of trying to adapt a general-purpose blockchain to institutional needs, many networks are building features designed specifically for businesses. These may include custom consensus mechanisms, governance models tailored for organizations, and improved data privacy frameworks. Ethereum, while powerful, was not originally designed with institutional specialization in mind, and this has created opportunities for competitors to position themselves as better fits for corporate users.

Layer 2 Complexity and Institutional Hesitation

To address its scalability issues, Ethereum has turned to Layer 2 solutions, such as optimistic rollups and zero-knowledge rollups. These scaling networks offer faster and cheaper transactions by processing activity off the main Ethereum chain and then settling the data on the base layer. From a technological perspective, Layer 2 solutions are essential to Ethereum’s long-term scalability. However, from an institutional adoption perspective, they introduce new complexities that some organizations find difficult to manage.

Instead of dealing with a single network, institutions must now interact with multiple Layer 2 environments, each with its own bridging solutions, liquidity pools, security assumptions, and operational challenges. Institutions generally prefer simplicity and standardization, and the fragmentation of Ethereum’s ecosystem can create complications that discourage adoption. The need to manage bridging between networks, understand differing fee markets, and ensure secure operational processes makes Ethereum’s multi-layer ecosystem harder to navigate.

Although Layer 2 networks derive security from Ethereum itself, they still represent additional layers of technology that must be audited, monitored, and understood. Traditional institutions often prefer a single, unified environment where risks are minimized and performance is consistent. Until Ethereum’s Layer 2 ecosystem becomes more streamlined and standardized, these complexities may continue to push institutions toward alternative solutions.

Regulatory and Compliance Challenges

Regulation is another critical factor in determining why Ethereum is no longer the top institutional choice. Ethereum is a public blockchain, meaning all transactions are visible on the ledger. While transparency is an advantage for decentralization, it is not always ideal for institutions that must protect client privacy, sensitive financial data, and confidential internal processes. Public visibility can create compliance and privacy concerns that make it difficult for certain institutional use cases to operate on Ethereum’s public layer.

Additionally, institutions must comply with strict KYC, AML, and reporting requirements. If regulators view Ethereum-based assets or certain decentralized finance activities as high-risk or potentially unregulated, institutions may reduce or limit their engagement. The uncertain regulatory environment surrounding some Ethereum-based tokens and DeFi protocols has pushed institutions to look for platforms that offer clearer compliance pathways.

Private and permissioned blockchains have gained interest because they provide controlled environments with defined governance and restricted access. Some organizations prefer hybrid or permissioned networks that allow them to maintain confidentiality and meet regulatory requirements without exposing sensitive information to the public. Ethereum does offer enterprise solutions through frameworks such as Enterprise Ethereum and private chain options, but competing blockchain platforms have been more aggressive in positioning themselves directly as institutional-grade solutions.

Shifting Institutional Priorities and Multi-Chain Strategies

Shifting Institutional Priorities and Multi-Chain Strategies

Institutional priorities have changed significantly over time. In the past, institutions adopted blockchain primarily for experimentation and innovation. Ethereum, with its robust ecosystem and early leadership, was the natural choice for pilot projects. Today, however, institutions are more strategic and selective. They consider specific use cases such as cross-border payments, tokenized real-world assets, digital identity systems, and decentralized finance through a different lens. Each use case may align better with a particular blockchain’s strengths.

As a result, institutions increasingly prefer a multi-chain strategy. Instead of choosing a single platform, they distribute activity across several networks based on their performance, cost structure, and regulatory alignment. Ethereum still plays an important role in this landscape, especially for DeFi and tokenization, but it is no longer the only serious option. Institutions now evaluate blockchain platforms as part of a broader ecosystem rather than defaulting to Ethereum because of its early dominance.

Another important shift is the desire for specialized networks. Not all blockchains aim to be general-purpose platforms. Some are built specifically for high-frequency trading, institutional settlement, or enterprise-level customization. Where Ethereum lacks specialization, other networks have stepped in with purpose-built architectures designed to meet precise institutional needs. This shift toward specialization is one of the main reasons institutions are exploring other blockchains more aggressively than before.

Ethereum’s Institutional Strengths and Continued Importance

Despite increased competition and its declining status as the sole top choice, Ethereum remains one of the most important networks in the institutional blockchain world. It continues to hold the largest decentralized finance ecosystem, the widest pool of liquidity, and the most established community of developers. Institutions that want exposure to DeFi, staking, or tokenization often still rely heavily on Ethereum due to its depth and maturity.

Ethereum’s Proof-of-Stake upgrade and ongoing scalability roadmap show that the network is committed to addressing its limitations. As rollups mature, transaction costs decrease, and interoperability improves, Ethereum may regain some lost ground among institutions. Its strong brand, long-term vision, and large community ensure that it will remain a foundational element of the blockchain ecosystem regardless of shifts in institutional sentiment.

However, while Ethereum will likely remain central to the future of blockchain innovation, it must adapt to the realities of a more competitive ecosystem. Institutions now demand speed, scalability, predictable costs, and regulatory clarity. Ethereum must evolve to meet these expectations while maintaining the decentralization and security that made it valuable in the first place.

Will Ethereum Regain Its Institutional Dominance?

The future of Ethereum’s relationship with institutions depends on how effectively it can simplify its scaling solutions, reduce friction in Layer 2 onboarding, and deliver lower transaction costs. Institutions may return in greater numbers if Ethereum provides a streamlined, scalable, and unified experience across its ecosystem. The ongoing development of rollups, cross-chain standards, and improved user experiences is a positive sign, but the competition is fierce. Other blockchains have strong technical advantages, and many are tailoring their products directly to institutional audiences.

The blockchain world is now firmly multi-chain, and Ethereum must coexist with other networks rather than dominate them. Whether or not it regains its institutional leadership will depend on the success of its upgrades, the strength of its developer community, and the ability of its ecosystem to maintain relevance in an increasingly diverse and competitive environment.

Conclusion

Ethereum’s evolution from a pioneering smart contract platform to one part of a broader multi-chain ecosystem reflects the rapid growth of blockchain technology. While once the uncontested leader for institutional experiments and innovation, Ethereum now faces competitors that offer higher throughput, lower fees, and specialized solutions for enterprise needs. High gas fees, network congestion, Layer 2 complexity, regulatory concerns, and the rise of faster Layer 1 networks have all contributed to institutions rethinking their approach to blockchain adoption.

Today’s institutions are guided by strategic use cases, regulatory pressures, and operational efficiency. Ethereum remains a key player, but it is no longer the only path forward. Instead, it is part of a diversified landscape where multiple blockchains serve different purposes. Ethereum’s future success with institutions will depend on its ability to continue evolving, delivering scalable solutions, and meeting the demands of a market that now values performance, specialization, and flexibility.

Explore more articles like this

Subscribe to the Finance Redefined newsletter

A weekly toolkit that breaks down the latest DeFi developments, offers sharp analysis, and uncovers new financial opportunities to help you make smart decisions with confidence. Delivered every Friday

By subscribing, you agree to our Terms of Services and Privacy Policy

READ MORE

Trump Pardons Binance Founder Changpeng Zhao

Trump Pardons Binance

COIN4U IN YOUR SOCIAL FEED

The news that President Donald Trump has granted a presidential pardon to Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, the founder of Binance, instantly ricocheted across the digital-asset world. It’s more than a headline—it’s a pivot point that could reshape cryptocurrency regulation, market structure, and the global narrative surrounding compliance and innovation in fintech. Zhao, who pleaded guilty in late 2023 to violations tied to anti-money laundering controls and served a four-month sentence, now sees his legal slate wiped clean by executive clemency. The pardon, announced on October 23, 2025, signals a marked policy turn as the administration declares that the “war on crypto is over,” a message that has drawn intense praise from industry advocates and fierce criticism from financial-crime watchdogs and key lawmakers.

In this in-depth analysis, we unpack -what CZ’s pardon means for Binance, the broader crypto markets, investors, and the evolving relationship between Washington and Web3. We’ll explore the legal history that brought the world’s largest exchange to this moment, the immediate reactions from Capitol Hill, and the strategic implications for compliance, market access, and global competition. By the end, you’ll have a clear understanding of the stakes—and what to watch next.

The backstory: from record settlement to clemency

Before the pardon, Zhao’s case had already left an indelible mark on cryptocurrency exchange compliance. In November 2023, CZ pleaded guilty to charges related to Bank Secrecy Act violations and shortcomings in anti-money laundering (AML) and sanctions controls. As part of a sweeping deal, Binance agreed to pay a record $4.3 billion penalty, and Zhao himself received a four-month federal sentence—far below the three years prosecutors had sought. He served his term and paid a $50 million fine. The plea and the penalties were framed as a turning point for compliance across the sector, with nearly every large exchange revisiting onboarding, monitoring, and suspicious-activity reporting.

Fast-forward to October 23, 2025: the presidential pardon erases the conviction and reframes the narrative. Administration officials cast the move as part of a broader shift away from punitive enforcement and toward a growth-oriented approach to digital assets, asserting that over-criminalisation had chilled innovation and pushed American users offshore. Supporters say the reset could bring jobs, investment, and innovation back to U.S. shores; critics counter that it risks weakening deterrence and undermining the rule of law.

What exactly does a presidential pardon do here?

A presidential pardon is an act of executive clemency that forgives a federal offense. In CZ’s case, it removes the legal consequences of his conviction even though the underlying conduct and settlement history remain part of the public record. Practically speaking, that can ease travel, business licensing, and engagement with regulated partners such as banks and payment networks. For a founder-operator like Zhao, the clean legal slate reduces counterparty risk perceptions and can simplify negotiations with institutional partners wary of exposure to individuals with criminal records. In some contexts, it can also influence professional restrictions or licensing outcomes tied to “good character” provisions.

It does not, however, undo corporate settlements already paid or monitoring arrangements attached to Binance’s U.S. compliance journey. Regulators, both domestic and international, will continue to evaluate the exchange’s current controls, not its founder’s criminal record alone. In other words: clemency can change the optics and some constraints, but compliance still rules the day.

Why the pardon matters for Binance

Why the pardon matters for Binance

For Binance, the world’s largest exchange by trading volume, CZ’s pardon arrives as the company continues to iterate on governance, AML/KYC procedures, and its relationships with regulators. Some analysts argue that clemency could accelerate U.S. re-engagement—particularly if the administration pairs its rhetoric with clearer guidance and a pathway for exchanges to operate with bank-like compliance standards in certain business lines. Others caution that any renewed U.S. foothold will depend on sustained audits, strong transaction monitoring, and transparent risk management that meets (or exceeds) what traditional finance expects. Wired and Politico reporting suggests the administration is using the pardon to telegraph a friendlier stance toward crypto market infrastructure, which may embolden Binance to explore deeper U.S. partnerships under a more predictable rulebook.

Outside the U.S., the signal is equally potent. Jurisdictions in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia that have been crafting MiCA-like frameworks or licensing regimes may interpret the pardon as a reduction in geopolitical friction around Binance and CZ. That, in turn, could ease local banking relationships and fiat on-ramp integrations—critical levers for retail adoption and institutional liquidity. Yet, none of this obviates the requirement for robust controls. A pardon does not grant a pass on sanctions screening, travel-rule implementation, or counter-terrorist financing (CTF) safeguards; if anything, the spotlight on Binance’s future adherence just grew brighter.

Market reaction: relief rally or regulatory whiplash?

Traders thrive on clarity, and CZ’s pardon offers a form of resolution—even if it’s controversial. Market participants often price legal tail risk into the valuation of exchange tokens, the liquidity profile of order books, and the fees exchanges can command. By removing a major cloud hanging over Binance’s founder, the market could view the exchange’s long-term operational risk as modestly lower. At the same time, headline-driven volatility is common around such inflexion points: a burst of optimism can be met with caution as policymakers and enforcement agencies recalibrate.

If the administration follows the pardon with consistent policy guidance, the market reaction may evolve from a knee-jerk spike to a steadier repricing of U.S. crypto risk premiums. Conversely, if congressional backlash metastasizes into legislative roadblocks or aggressive state-level actions, the initial rally could fade. Early coverage from mainstream and industry outlets captured both the celebratory tone among pro-crypto voices and the alarm among veteran financial-crime hawks, underscoring the two-track narrative likely to persist for months.

Washington’s split screen: praise, outrage, and the politics of crypto

The pardon has created an immediate partisan flashpoint. Prominent Democrats—including Rep. Maxine Waters and Sen. Elizabeth Warren—portrayed the decision as political favoritism that risks normalizing weak AML enforcement in digital assets. Industry-friendly lawmakers and entrepreneurs, meanwhile, heralded it as long-overdue recognition that the U.S. must balance risk mitigation with competitiveness. Coverage highlighted starkly different lenses: to supporters, CZ’s missteps were addressed through fines and imprisonment, and clemency is a forward-looking invitation to build in America; to critics, the message is that deep pockets and political connection can override accountability.

The political subtext matters. If crypto becomes an explicit plank in economic-growth strategy, expect moves to harmonize agency oversight, clarify commodity versus security status for tokens, and streamline stablecoin frameworks. If opposition hardens, expect hearings, inspector-general probes, and attempts to tighten AML statutes specific to crypto exchanges and DeFi gateways. Either path shapes how exchanges, custodians, Web3 startups, and traditional banks coordinate risk and opportunity.

Compliance after clemency: what changes—and what doesn’t

It’s tempting to see a pardon as a regulatory reset. It isn’t. U.S. exchanges still must implement rigorous KYC, transaction surveillance, and sanctions screening under OFAC and BSA rules. Cross-border platforms face the FATF Travel Rule, source-of-funds verification for fiat bridges, and enhanced due diligence for higher-risk jurisdictions. What does change is the temperature of the room: counterparties may feel more comfortable engaging with a founder whose legal liabilities have been formally forgiven, reducing friction for advisory roles, fundraising, or corporate governance initiatives.

For Binance, renewed U.S. ambitions would hinge on demonstrating not merely compliance adequacy but excellence—automated SAR processes, independent audits, and analytics-first risk operations that resemble Tier-1 banks. The company’s path forward likely involves continued cooperation with monitors, implementing real-time risk scoring, and hardening custody controls. A pardon can make these investments more likely to pay off by improving access to U.S. capital markets and institutional partners—but the investments themselves remain non-negotiable.

Global competition: Will a U.S. pivot pull liquidity onshore

Global competition: will a U.S. pivot pull liquidity onshore?

The world has been conducting a multi-year experiment: push crypto talent and liquidity offshore and watch where it agglomerates. During the most intense enforcement period, volumes and talent migrated toward jurisdictions offering clear licensing. If the U.S. now projects a more welcoming stance—paired with credible consumer safeguards—some portion of liquidity could return. That’s especially true for institutional crypto flows that prefer strong rule of law and deep capital markets.

However, Dubai, Singapore, and parts of the EU have established lead positions via streamlined licensing and proactive supervisory dialogue. The U.S. would need to match that clarity while preserving its enforcement reputation. The likely outcome is a multipolar market where onshore and offshore liquidity interlock through compliant bridges. In that model, Binance benefits from optionality, while U.S. platforms gain onshore credibility and access to traditional capital. The pardon doesn’t guarantee such an equilibrium—but it makes it more plausible by lowering headline risk around one of the industry’s most visible figures. Wired’s reporting even suggests the move could ease Binance’s route back to certain U.S. touchpoints, pending regulators’ comfort.

Investor lens: what portfolio managers and traders should evaluate

Investors should think in layers. First, reassess headline risk premiums on exchange-exposed assets and liquidity-sensitive tokens. Second, scrutinize how any post-pardon policy signals translate into draft bills, rulemakings, or no-action letters that redefine what’s permissible for custody, staking, derivatives, and stablecoins. Third, watch how banks, payment processors, and fintech rails respond—reopening fiat on-ramps and off-ramps is a critical test of whether this is optics or structural change.

Lastly, evaluate governance. Binance’s internal controls, board composition, and transparency practices will tell you more about long-term risk than any single political decision. A founder’s pardon can catalyze confidence, but only strong corporate governance and demonstrable risk management will sustain it.

The controversy: conflict-of-interest concerns and perceptions

Critics have raised questions about potential conflicts, pointing to reports of growing ties between political figures and crypto ventures. Some outlets have suggested financial connections between Trump-aligned businesses and crypto projects, and opponents argue the pardon could be perceived as political pay-to-play. Whether or not such ties shaped the outcome, the optics will remain a talking point that influences legislative and public sentiment. Expect continued investigative reporting, hearings, and ethics debates—especially if the administration pursues additional clemency or policy reform that benefits high-profile crypto actors. Mainstream coverage (Politico, Guardian, WSJ, Wired) underscores how the pardon will be read not just as policy but as politics.

What this means for founders and builders

For founders, the message is double-edged. On the one hand, the U.S. is signalling a willingness to engage with Web3 innovation, potentially clarifying paths to compliant growth. On the other hand, the compliance bar is only rising. If you’re building exchanges, wallets, custody, stablecoins, or DeFi protocols, this is the moment to over-invest in AML, on-chain analytics, and risk. Consider building with real-name controls for sensitive flows, automated sanctions updates, and proactive dialogue with regulators. A friendlier Washington doesn’t absolve you from the work; it invites you to help shape standards that can scale.

See More: Best Cryptocurrency Trading Platform for Beginners 2025

Could this reshape enforcement priorities?

A single pardon doesn’t rewrite the U.S. Code, but it often signals enforcement priorities. We may see:

Emphasis on prospective compliance improvements

Regulators could prioritize forward-looking remediation and “fix-first” outcomes over retroactive punishment—particularly for firms that demonstrate measurable risk reduction and submit to independent oversight.

Consolidation of guidance across agencies

A durable policy pivot requires harmonization. Expect attempts to resolve overlapping mandates of the SEC, CFTC, FinCEN, and bank regulators. Stablecoin legislation could lead, given its intersection with payments, CBDCs, and consumer protection.

Targeted actions against willful bad actors

Even in a friendlier environment, willful repeat offenders and facilitators of ransomware, terror finance, or sanctions evasion will remain high-priority targets. The lesson: build boldly, but build cleanly.

The bottom line

CZ’s pardon is historic for crypto markets, but it doesn’t absolve the industry of its most pressing responsibilities. The opportunity is to take this policy thaw and turn it into a compliance renaissance—one that proves transparent, auditable, and consumer-safe crypto can thrive in America. If Binance and its peers seize that chance, the sector may finally outgrow the reputational drag of the last cycle and step into a more mature, regulated future.

Conclusion

President Trump’s pardon of Binance founder Changpeng Zhao is a defining moment for digital assets. It closes one chapter—legal jeopardy for one of the sector’s most visible leaders—and opens another: a contest to set intelligent rules that welcome innovation while combating abuse. For Binance, the door to deeper U.S. engagement may be open a crack wider; what happens next depends on sustained excellence in compliance, transparent governance, and constructive policy dialogue. For investors and builders, the mandate is clear: treat this not as an escape from scrutiny but as a chance to professionalise crypto at scale. A kinder tone from Washington can accelerate adoption; only disciplined risk management will sustain it.

FAQs

Q: Did the pardon erase Changpeng Zhao’s conviction entirely?

A U.S. presidential pardon forgives the offense and removes many legal disabilities associated with a conviction. The underlying facts and corporate settlements remain part of the public record, but the clemency clears CZ’s federal criminal record for the pardoned offenses, easing certain business and travel constraints.

Q: Does this mean Binance can immediately return to full U.S. operations?

Not automatically. Any expanded U.S. presence by Binance still depends on regulatory approvals, ongoing monitoring, and demonstrable AML/KYC controls. The pardon improves optics and may facilitate partnerships, but licensing and supervision are separate processes.

Q: How did we get here—what was Zhao originally charged with?

CZ pleaded guilty in 2023 to violations tied to AML and sanctions controls. Binance agreed to a $4.3 billion settlement, and Zhao served a four-month sentence; prosecutors had sought three years, but the court imposed a much lighter term.

Q: Why is the decision controversial in Washington?

Supporters see the pardon as a pro-innovation reset; critics call it political favoritism that could weaken deterrence against financial crime. High-profile lawmakers voiced strong objections, and further hearings or oversight actions are possible.

Q: What should crypto investors and builders watch next?

Look for concrete policy steps—stablecoin bills, clearer agency guidance, and licensing pathways—alongside how banks and payment networks respond. Also monitor Binance’s governance and compliance enhancements, which will determine whether optimism translates into durable market access.

Explore more articles like this

Subscribe to the Finance Redefined newsletter

A weekly toolkit that breaks down the latest DeFi developments, offers sharp analysis, and uncovers new financial opportunities to help you make smart decisions with confidence. Delivered every Friday

By subscribing, you agree to our Terms of Services and Privacy Policy

READ MORE

ADD PLACEHOLDER