The US Monitoring Authority crushed the theory of “Crypto 2.0”

1. The organizers are retreating against the demands for the targeting of unfair encryption.
2. The encryption companies face audit on legal compliance and financial risks.
3. Wrong information about FDIC protection raises concerns.

The Wall Street Watchdog collection stabbed the allegations that financial organizers were fairly targeted the encryption industry. Before a hearing on February 6 by the Supervision and Investigation Committee affiliated with the Financial Services Committee of the House I pushed against “The stifling of point 2.0”.

This theory indicates that the American organizers have deliberately ended digital asset companies, and it is a demand that industrial leaders and some legislators have been repeated. Olisiok argued that the industry put itself under organizational scrutiny by engaging in doubtful activities.

She pointed to the collapse of banks such as Silvergate, Signature, and Silicon Valley Bank as evidence of the financial instability of Crypto. These failures sparked a major economic turmoil, which caused warnings between the organizers about the risks that were not examined to the sector.

The increasing financial risks from Crypto

According to reports, the rapid growth of digital currencies has entered the market instability, as severe price fluctuations affect investors and financial institutions. The total maximum digital asset market increased to $ 3 trillion in 2021 before declining about one billion dollars in 2022, only for the reversion after 2014. Bitcoin alone witnessed up to 30 % drops for one day, which enhances the concerns that depend on speculation .

Besides market fluctuations, companies were also accused of misleading consumers. Reports indicate that some companies falsely claimed their property by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

This wrong information has the ability to run the bank, as customers mistakenly believe their assets. The organizers have developed these deceptive practices, but they have not yet imposed severe penalties, which caused criticism of indulgence.

The effect of Crypto on policy and public trust

The impact of the digital asset industry extends beyond the markets, with significant spending on political campaigns. In the 2024 elections, the encryption groups were said to have poured nearly $ 200 million in advertisements targeting legislators who criticize digital assets.

Despite this aggressive pressure, many voters are still skeptical of encryption, linking him to financial fraud, money laundering and economic instability. Organizers insist that banks have the right to evaluate risk when providing services, including encryption companies.

While arguing the coding advocates with broader bank access, the International Energy Agency groups confirm that supervision is necessary to prevent regular financial harm. As the discussion continues, the industry faces increasing pressure to comply with the current financial laws or risk more audit by legislators and organizers.

Related reading: The amazing fourth quarter: Solana application revenue rises to 840 million dollars, an increase of 213 %