Remember when crypto regulation in the US was just a big question mark? It still is, but now there's a lot more paperwork involved – and a lot more lawyers.
A report alleges that CFTC officials who raised concerns about prediction markets faced disciplinary action, including suspensions. This internal friction highlights ongoing debates around the regulatory treatment of these novel financial instruments.
The SEC has given the nod for Nasdaq to list Bitcoin index options, a move that could redefine institutional access to the volatile digital asset. But the devil, as always, is in the regulatory details.
The Senate's markup of the U.S. Clarity Act, a significant piece of digital-asset legislation, is underway. Yet, the bitcoin market appears remarkably calm, ignoring the high stakes involved.
The path to regulating the crypto market is rarely straightforward. Case in point: the latest iteration of the CLARITY Act.
Kalshi Inc. thought its prediction markets were financial instruments. Massachusetts' Supreme Court, however, saw a lot of gambling. The legal battle is far from over.
Another week, another regulatory showdown over prediction markets. While suits in D.C. and state capitols duke it out, the real question remains: who's actually making money off this circus?
Venture capital giant Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) has weighed in on the tumultuous regulatory landscape for prediction markets, filing a letter with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) that argues against state-level attempts to ban these novel platforms.
Venture capital titan Andreessen Horowitz is going to bat for prediction markets. Their target? The patchwork of state-by-state regulations they claim are hamstringing innovation.
Bitcoin recaptured the $78,000 mark, buoyed by a crucial Senate compromise on stablecoin yield legislation. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 continues its ascent to new record highs.
A temporary restraining order from the CFTC has slammed the brakes on Arizona's criminal case against prediction market Kalshi. This federal intervention signals a brewing conflict over regulatory authority.
For years, US sports teams wanted fan tokens. Regulatory chaos kept them on the sidelines. Now? The game has changed.