Dapp

Dapps are digital applications that run on a P2P network of computers rather than a single server, typically utilizing smart contracts to ensure transparency and uptime. In 2026, Dapps have achieved mass-market appeal through Account Abstraction, allowing for a "Web2-like" user experience with the security of Web3. This tag covers the entire ecosystem of decentralized software—from social media and productivity tools to governance platforms and identity management.

5026 Articles
Created: 2026/02/02 18:52
Updated: 2026/02/02 18:52
CRA targets 2,500 Dapper Labs users in NFT tax probe

CRA targets 2,500 Dapper Labs users in NFT tax probe

Canada’s CRA won a court order forcing Dapper Labs to hand over data on 2,500 users, marking a major escalation in the country’s crypto tax enforcement drive. The Canada Revenue Agency has obtained a court order requiring Dapper Labs to…

Author: Crypto.news
How BlockchainFX Became the Best Crypto to Buy Under $1 — Beating AVAX and ADA For Upside Potential

How BlockchainFX Became the Best Crypto to Buy Under $1 — Beating AVAX and ADA For Upside Potential

The post How BlockchainFX Became the Best Crypto to Buy Under $1 — Beating AVAX and ADA For Upside Potential appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Crypto Projects With 2025 now in its final chapter, the market has split into two camps: investors who remain tied to major altcoins, and those actively hunting for early-stage opportunities before the 2026 cycle takes off. Popular giants like AVAX and ADA are still respected, still relevant, and still heavily traded — but their growth trajectory has begun to stabilise. That shift has created space for a new class of sub-$1 contenders, and among them, BlockchainFX ($BFX) is emerging as the most aggressively accumulated and most frequently discussed. With the presale sitting at an accessible $0.03, the token preparing for a $0.05 launch, and early buyers still able to unlock 30% extra tokens through the BLOCK30 bonus, BFX has quickly become a standout pick for investors looking for meaningful upside without chasing hype coins. Here’s how BlockchainFX compares to market heavyweights AVAX and ADA as December’s buying pressure builds. BlockchainFX ($BFX): The Sub-$1 Contender With Real Market Pull What has pushed BlockchainFX into the “best crypto under $1” category isn’t just its low valuation — plenty of cheap tokens exist. The difference is that BFX is already delivering what most presales only promise. The team has launched a fully functioning multi-market trading platform where users can trade crypto, stocks, forex, commodities and ETFs from a single interface. This positions BFX in a category that appeals not only to crypto enthusiasts but also to traditional traders looking for a unified, compliant gateway. Two developments have accelerated its December traction: Regulatory clearance: BlockchainFX has secured an international trading licence from the Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority — a milestone most early projects never achieve before launch. Consistent demand: With 18,800 participants and $11.9M raised, BFX is seeing steady accumulation rather than hype-driven spikes. This kind of behaviour from both retail buyers and mid-sized…

Author: BitcoinEthereumNews
$0.03 to $0.05 Launch Price: How BlockchainFX Became the Best Crypto to Buy Under $1 — Beating AVAX and ADA For Upside Potential

$0.03 to $0.05 Launch Price: How BlockchainFX Became the Best Crypto to Buy Under $1 — Beating AVAX and ADA For Upside Potential

Popular giants like AVAX and ADA are still respected, still relevant, and still heavily traded — but their growth trajectory […] The post $0.03 to $0.05 Launch Price: How BlockchainFX Became the Best Crypto to Buy Under $1 — Beating AVAX and ADA For Upside Potential appeared first on Coindoo.

Author: Coindoo
Cardano’s Midnight Secures NIGHT Token Listing on Binance, ADA Soars 4%

Cardano’s Midnight Secures NIGHT Token Listing on Binance, ADA Soars 4%

The post Cardano’s Midnight Secures NIGHT Token Listing on Binance, ADA Soars 4% appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The world’s leading crypto exchange Binance announces support for Midnight network’s native token NIGHT. The Binance listing NIGHT token sparks speculation within the Cardano community, triggering ADA price to climb by 4% within hours on Monday. Binance Announces Support for Cardano’s Midnight, Securing NIGHT Token Listing Binance Alpha to list Cardano privacy chain Midnight’s NIGHT token, according to an announcement in an X post on December 8. The exchange added that eligible users can claim their airdrop using Binance Alpha points once trading opens on December 9. Binance will share more details about Midnight support soon. Midnight stated that the Binance listing will help introduce NIGHT to a larger audience and encourage more users to join the Midnight network. It will also expand NIGHT’s reach and speed up the adoption of privacy features across Web3. The Midnight zero-knowledge proof network is designed to provide enhanced privacy features for decentralized applications (dApps) on Cardano. This positions it as a competitor to other privacy chains such as Zcash and Monero. Notably, crypto exchange such as Bybit, HTX, Bitpanda and others have already announced NIGHT token listing. Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson reacted to recent announcements, sharing details on the upcoming launch of Midnight. You all ready for next week?https://t.co/DKhriaWM3O — Charles Hoskinson (@IOHK_Charles) December 8, 2025 ADA Price Jumps 4% as Crypto Community Reacts ADA price soared by more than 4% to $0.435 as traders responded immediately to Binance’s Midnight (NIGHT) token listing announcement. The 24-hour low and high were $0.407 and $0.437, respectively. Furthermore, trading volume has increased by 85% over the past 24 hours, indicating a massive rise in interest among traders. Recently, crypto analyst Ali Martinez highlighted buy signals for Cardano by Supertrend and TD Sequential. Cardano will pick up upside momentum after breaking above the 50-day moving average at…

Author: BitcoinEthereumNews
High-leverage stablecoin arbitrage tool? A detailed analysis of Fluid's 39x leverage strategy and the duality of its "low liquidation penalty".

High-leverage stablecoin arbitrage tool? A detailed analysis of Fluid's 39x leverage strategy and the duality of its "low liquidation penalty".

Fluid is an interesting, difficult-to-understand, and highly controversial DeFi protocol. As a "new" DeFi protocol launched in 2024, its peak TVL exceeded $2.6 billion, and it still has $1.785 billion in TVL. With a trading volume of $16.591 billion over the past 30 days, Ethereum's mainnet trading volume accounts for 43.68% of Uniswap's total trading volume. This is a remarkable achievement. Fluid combines lending with a DEX, accepting LPs (such as ETH/wBTC) as collateral, allowing LPs to still earn fees while providing collateral. Fluid calls this Smart Collateral. Okay, it seems rather ordinary. Image generated by Nano Banana Pro - Gemini AI based on the original text. Smart Debt is a unique design feature of Fluid. Normally, in lending, users borrow money and pay interest. In Fluid smart debt, users also borrow LP trading pairs. That's right. If you want to borrow 1000 USDT, you will borrow 500 USDT + 500 USDC. The trading pair borrowed by the user will be automatically deposited into Fluid DEX as liquidity. In other words, users can choose to withdraw the funds for other purposes, just like a regular loan, or they can choose to pledge LPs to borrow from LPs and then deposit them into the DEX to earn more transaction fees. Essentially, smart debt encourages borrowers to leverage LPs within Fluid for revolving lending. This protocol increases liquidity, attracts more traders, and allows LPs to earn more transaction fees. This is precisely the flywheel that Fluid ultimately aims to build. Therefore, if you have studied Fluid, you will see many articles describing Fluid as a "DEX-on-lending" protocol, and this is the reason. The Fluid architecture is like a composite structure; you can think of it as a main road and auxiliary roads, a trunk and tributaries, a two-layer cake, or anything like that. The core underlying component is the unified Liquidity Layer, a smart contract used to store the liquidity of all assets. It is responsible for managing all the money and handling deposits, withdrawals, loans, and repayments. Above the liquidity layer are multiple sub-protocols and Vault. The sub-protocols have their own business logic, but they do not directly hold assets. Instead, they use the liquidity layer to manage the deposit and withdrawal of funds. The various sub-protocols are interconnected through a liquidity layer. For example, assets deposited by a user through a lending sub-protocol can be lent out by other Vault sub-protocols; Assets deposited through smart lending can be lent out by Vault and simultaneously provide trading liquidity for DEX sub-protocols. Ordinary users only need to interact with the various sub-protocols to conduct deposit or loan operations, without having to directly access the liquidity layer. Specific operating methods Typical lending agreements: Alice deposits: 100 ETH (single token) Bob lends out: 5000 USDC (single token) Fluid method: Usage 1: Ordinary Loans Just like Aave and Compound, you deposit collateral and your wallet receives a loan, except that the loan is lent out by LPs, such as USDT + USC, and the loan can be used anywhere. Use Case 2: Smart Debt While both involve depositing collateral and lending to limited partners (LPs), the difference lies in the fact that the Fluid protocol directly injects this money into Fluid's DEX trading pool. Users earn transaction fees through debt, and the liquidity pool expands its liquidity through debt. Then, users can revolve the loan. This means using LPs as collateral to borrow from other LPs, then collateralizing again to borrow more, and so on in a continuous cycle. The official documentation gives a theoretical maximum leverage of 39 times based on a 95% LTV (Loan-to-Value) calculation. What are the trade-offs of Fluid? Fluid attempts to unify lending and trading within a single liquidity layer. To achieve this unification, certain compromises must be made, and these compromises are precisely the root cause of additional losses suffered by limited partners (LPs) during volatile market conditions. In Uniswap V3, when the market price exceeds the LP price range, users only temporarily lose to earn transaction fees, and their positions become 100% of a single asset (e.g., all converted to USDC). This is impermanent loss, and the loss may disappear once the price returns to its normal range. Fluid rebalancing transforms "impermanent loss" into "permanent loss". Fluid automatically adjusts the liquidity price range for certain Valuts in order to maintain high capital utilization or to maintain lending health (preventing liquidation). For example, Suppose the price of ETH drops from 3000 to 2800. 1) Uniswap V3 Manual LP: The LP price range is still 2900-3100. Therefore, you would currently hold 100% ETH. If you choose to remain inactive and the price returns to 3000, the LP will return to its initial state with no additional loss. 2) Fluid Automatic Rebalancing: In order to ensure active liquidity (or for risk control), the protocol will automatically perform "rebalancing" when it detects that the price has fallen below the range. At the 2800 level, a portion of the LP's ETH must be sold and converted into USDC to regain liquidity in the new 2700-2900 range. The consequence is that this "sell" action is a real transaction, selling the tokens at a lower price. If the ETH price subsequently rebounds quickly back to 3000, as mentioned before, Uniswap V3 user assets will remain unaffected, and the token pair allocation provided by LPs will return to its original state. In order to recover the price, the Fluid protocol must rebalance when the price rises by buying back ETH with USDC. However, because it was sold at a low price before, it is now being bought back at a high price. This is actually a case of "selling low and buying high," a type of operation that frequently occurs in volatile markets, and this type of loss is known as LVR (Loss-Versus-Rebalancing). Why does Fluid need to be rebalanced? Because LP trading pairs play a very important role in Fluid in order to connect lending and DEX using a unified liquidity layer, even the loans made through lending are trading pairs. Therefore, Fluid had to introduce a concept – “Shares”. In Uniswap V3, LPs are non-fungible, and withdrawals are made via NFTs. Your actions only affect yourself. In order for liquidity to be usable by lending protocols (collateral and debt), Fluid must design its liquidity pools to be homogeneous. LPs do not hold specific "ETH in this price range," but rather "x% of the entire pool." When the agreement triggers rebalancing and causes the aforementioned "buy low, sell high" attrition, the total net asset value of the entire pool decreases. Since LPs hold shares, the price of a share = total pool assets / total number of shares, and the share price will fall directly. Therefore, unlike in Uniswap V3, LPs cannot choose "I will not participate in this adjustment and I will hold on to it"; in Fluid LPs, they are forced to participate in the rebalancing. For another example, Assume the price of ETH is 1000 USDC. Invest LP 1 ETH + 1000 USDC (total value $2000). At this point, the price dropped, with ETH falling from 1000 to 800. 1. Uniswap V3 (Do not operate) As prices fall, traders sell ETH, forcing LPs to buy it. This reduces USDC and increases ETH in the LP pool. Eventually, at the low of 800, the LP pool becomes 100% ETH (let's say approximately 2.2 ETH, with no USDC remaining). The current LP holdings are worth 2.2 ETH, or 1760 USDT. Although they are at a paper loss, the LPs hold a large amount of ETH. 2. Fluid Forced Rebalancing The same situation occurs. The price falls below the lower limit of the range set by Fluid. The protocol determines that the current range (900-1100) is invalid. In order for Vault to continue generating fees (or for lending health), the range must be moved to near the current price, such as 720-880. The key issue is that establishing the new 720-880 range requires 50% ETH + 50% USDC. However, your current position is entirely in ETH. Therefore, a forced action is implemented: Fluid must sell half of your ETH at the 800 price level and convert it back to USDC. Therefore, 1.1 ETH was sold for 880 USDC, which was then used to form a new LP with the remaining 1.1 ETH. The current value is 1.1 ETH + 880 USDC = 1760. However, at this point, your ETH holdings have decreased from 2.2 to 1.1. In effect, Fluid forced you to "cut your losses" at this bottom. At this point, the price rebounded, and the price of ETH rose from 800 back to 1000. Uniswap V3 (Lie flat, no operation required) As the price rebounded, the 2.2 ETH held were gradually bought up and converted back to USDC. The price returned to 1000, and the LP position reverted to 1 ETH + 1000 USDC (ignoring transaction fees). Total value 2000 U, impermanent loss has disappeared. Fluid Forced Rebalancing Prices rebounded, and the new range of 720-880 became invalid again. It is necessary to rebalance and move the range back to 900-1100. Currently, there are only 880 USDC and 1.1 ETH. If the price breaks through 880, the LPs will only have USDC, because the ETH has been bought. At this point, the LPs' positions are all in USDC, totaling 1760 USDC, which is the 880 USDC they initially held plus the amount they sold later. The protocol rebalances when the ETH price reaches 1000, buying ETH with regular USDC to maintain a 50:50 ETH:USDC value. At this point, the LP's position is 0.88 ETH and 880 USDC. The total value is 1760 USDC, a loss of 240 USDC compared to the initial total value of 2000 USDC. Moreover, this 240 U is a permanent loss. The subsequent Fluid DEX v2 upgrade addresses the pain point of permanent loss during rebalancing by transferring the wear and tear costs to arbitrageurs in a "smarter" way, thereby significantly reducing this permanent loss. First, there is a dynamic fee mechanism. When prices fluctuate sharply, the transaction fee will increase accordingly to compensate for the rebalancing losses of LPs. Secondly, a "buffer zone" is set up for the oracle; if it is just a brief insertion, no rebalancing will be performed. Then, LPs are allowed to customize price ranges, with wider options available; rebalancing only occurs when prices exceed these ranges. Asymmetric LP positions are also permitted, meaning the token pair does not need to maintain a constant 50:50 ratio. If that's the case, why does Fluid have a TVL of $1.785 billion and account for 43.68% of Uniswap's trading volume in the past 30 days? Fluid masks or offsets permanent wear and tear through extreme capital efficiency and low-risk strategies for specific assets. Wear and tear comes from frequent rebalancing caused by sharp price fluctuations. But what if, however, the prices between LP token pairs didn't fluctuate? For stable pegged assets like USDC/USDT or ETH/wstETH, rebalancing wear is virtually zero. However, Fluid's mechanism allows for leverage of up to 39x on these assets. Furthermore, the returns include both lending and DEX revenue. Therefore, Fluid's focus is actually on stablecoins, ETH and its LST assets, and BTC-related liquid assets, as shown in the data below. Source: https://dune.com/entropy_advisors/fluid-liquidity Another point is that Fluid's liquidation mechanism differs from typical lending agreements, with liquidation penalties as low as 0.1%. If a lending agreement like Aave needs to be liquidated, external MEV Bots can take the collateral at a discount to help with the liquidation. This "discount" is the liquidation penalty, designed to prevent losses from margin calls. Aave's penalty is 5%. A unified liquidity layer allows Fluid to eliminate the need for external clearing, instead completing clearing directly on its own DEX. The system automatically sells a portion of the collateral to repay the debt. Therefore, penalties can be as low as 0.1% plus slippage. This is actually a favorable trade-off brought about by a unified liquidity layer, which also benefits high leverage. Therefore, Fluid is very beneficial for revolving loans of stable asset LPs such as USDC/USDT or ETH/wstETH, and will also attract stablecoin investment whales and aggressive on-chain traders. Can I buy $FLUID tokens? To be honest, I'm not sure. Currently, there is no necessary connection between protocol revenue and coin price, although the Instadapp community and team have repeatedly hinted at or discussed Fluid's revenue distribution issue. However, the protocol revenue is not currently being distributed to token holders. Summarize Tradeoffs are an extremely important, even primary, consideration in blockchain project design. To achieve core features, certain necessary conditions must be met, and these conditions, in turn, constrain the project. Fluid is a project with a prominent trade-off. It is believed that the project team designed it from the outset to build a unified liquidity layer, expanding liquidity through lending and DEX features. The stablecoin LP and ETH and its LPT token trading pairs are the best entry point for expanding liquidity through leveraged cyclical lending.

Author: PANews
zkSync Plans 2026 Lite Rollup Deprecation with Safe $50M User Fund Withdrawals

zkSync Plans 2026 Lite Rollup Deprecation with Safe $50M User Fund Withdrawals

The post zkSync Plans 2026 Lite Rollup Deprecation with Safe $50M User Fund Withdrawals appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. zkSync Lite deprecation in 2026 will safely retire the original Layer-2 rollup, allowing users to withdraw $50 million in funds to Ethereum Layer-1 without interruption. The move shifts focus to advanced zkSync Era and ZK Stack, ensuring continued innovation in Ethereum scaling. zkSync Lite, launched in 2020, will sunset in 2026 as development pivots to full-featured alternatives like zkSync Era. Users can continue bridging funds back to Ethereum mainnet during the orderly deprecation process. Approximately $50 million in assets remain on the network, per L2BEAT data, highlighting the need for timely migrations. Discover zkSync Lite deprecation details for 2026: safe fund withdrawals and Ethereum L2 evolution. Stay informed on zkSync Era upgrades—read now for secure crypto strategies! (152 characters) What is zkSync Lite Deprecation? zkSync Lite deprecation refers to the planned retirement of zkSync’s original Layer-2 rollup, zkSync Lite (also known as zkSync 1.0), scheduled for 2026. This Ethereum scaling solution, introduced in June 2020, provided low-cost token transfers, atomic swaps, and NFT minting but lacked smart contract support, limiting its utility as DeFi and dApps expanded. The zkSync team has described this as a “planned, orderly sunset for a system that has served its purpose,” ensuring no impact on newer products like zkSync Era while prioritizing user fund security. Launched amid Ethereum’s early scaling challenges, zkSync Lite processed millions of transactions efficiently using zero-knowledge proofs. Over five years, it bridged significant value but saw declining activity as more advanced Layer-2 solutions emerged. The deprecation announcement, shared via zkSync’s official channels, emphasizes that withdrawals to Ethereum Layer-1 will remain operational throughout and beyond the process, addressing concerns for the approximately $50 million in user funds still held on the network, according to L2BEAT analytics. How Will zkSync Lite Deprecation Affect Users? The zkSync Lite deprecation process is designed with user…

Author: BitcoinEthereumNews
Crypto Market Sees Notable Growth: Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP Lead

Crypto Market Sees Notable Growth: Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP Lead

Bitcoin surges, hitting $91,600.91, with strong weekly growth potential. Ethereum rises 11.2%, showcasing continued dominance in decentralized applications. Lucidum and Moonbeam soar, signaling strong altcoin market interest growth. The cryptocurrency market has been showing positive momentum as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP experience notable gains. Bitcoin, the largest digital currency by market cap, is currently priced at $91,600.91, marking a 2.1% increase in the past 24 hours and a 6.7% rise over the past week. This upward movement has contributed to Bitcoin’s market capitalization of $1.83 trillion, reinforcing its dominant position in the market. As the leader of the crypto space, Bitcoin’s performance plays a crucial role in driving market trends. Ethereum, the second-largest cryptocurrency, has also been on an upward trajectory. With a price of $3,138.03, Ethereum has seen a 3% rise over the last 24 hours and a 11.2% increase over the past seven days. Ethereum’s strong performance is backed by its expanding ecosystem, with a market cap now sitting at $378.46 billion. Its decentralized applications (dApps) and ongoing upgrades are expected to sustain this growth, highlighting Ethereum’s continued importance in the crypto ecosystem. XRP, another major player, has remained steady, currently trading at $2.08. Over the past 24 hours, XRP has risen by 1.7%, and it has gained 2.5% over the past week. With a market cap of $125.59 billion, XRP continues to perform well in a highly competitive environment, maintaining its position among the top cryptocurrencies. Also Read: Cardano’s Charles Hoskinson Hints at Big News on Monday – ADA Community Buzzing Emerging Altcoins Surge in Value While Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP lead the way, several altcoins have also been seeing significant growth. Lucidum (LUCIC), for instance, has surged by 50.8% in the last 24 hours, bringing its price to $0.3019. With a trading volume of $648.64 million, Lucidum has shown strong investor interest and potential for future growth. Similarly, Moonbeam (GLMR) has risen by 48.6%, now priced at $0.04074. With a 24-hour trading volume of $79.89 million, Moonbeam’s solid performance demonstrates the growing interest in new and emerging projects within the cryptocurrency market. Altcoins like these are gaining momentum as investors look beyond the established cryptocurrencies for opportunities in the rapidly evolving market. Their strong growth highlights how innovation within the crypto space is driving new interest and diversifying the market. Market Outlook and Future Trends While Bitcoin and Ethereum continue to lead the market, the performance of altcoins like Lucidum and Moonbeam suggests that the cryptocurrency landscape is evolving. These altcoins reflect the growing trend of diversification in the market, as investors seek new opportunities outside the traditional top coins. As the market matures, it will be interesting to see how both major cryptocurrencies and emerging altcoins continue to shape the future of digital finance. The crypto market is experiencing significant growth, with major coins like Bitcoin and Ethereum driving the upward trend, while altcoins are also showing impressive gains. The market’s overall resilience and potential for further growth offer promising opportunities for both new and experienced investors alike. Also Read: XRP Amazing Streak Continues, Here’s What’s Happening The post Crypto Market Sees Notable Growth: Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP Lead appeared first on 36Crypto.

Author: Coinstats
Robinhood Targets Indonesia with Major Acquisitions to Tap Fast-Growing Crypto Market

Robinhood Targets Indonesia with Major Acquisitions to Tap Fast-Growing Crypto Market

        Highlights:  Robinhood expands in Indonesia through two acquisitions supported by strong local crypto activity. Local licenses help Robinhood enter the market faster and meet rising regulated-service demand. Indonesia’s high adoption ranking and fast trading growth strengthen Robinhood’s long-term regional plans.  Robinhood has announced a big expansion plan after agreeing to buy PT Pedagang Aset Kripto, a licensed Indonesian digital financial asset trader, and Buana Capital, an Indonesian brokerage. Both companies work in Indonesia’s financial sector, and the deal gives Robinhood a ready base with approved local licenses. The company said that more than 19 million people invest in Indonesia’s capital market, and about 17 million trade crypto. This shows why Robinhood expects strong demand in the country.  According to Reuters, Robinhood announced plans to acquire Indonesian brokerage firm Buana Capital Sekuritas and licensed crypto trader Pedagang Aset Kripto, marking its official entry into the Indonesian market. The deal is expected to close in the first half of 2026, with… — Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) December 8, 2025  Robinhood Plans Full Trading Access for Indonesian Users Robinhood plans to adjust local operations first and then add more products. This includes giving Indonesian users access to United States stocks and crypto markets once the systems are connected. The company expects the deal to finish in the first half of 2026, but it did not share any price details. Patrick Chan, who leads operations in Asia, said the company feels positive about the region. He said Indonesia is growing fast in trading and is a strong place for Robinhood to continue its mission to make finance open for everyone. He also noted that interest from local investors is very high. Indonesia’s strong global ranking makes the country more attractive for new entrants. Chainalysis placed Indonesia seventh in the 2025 adoption index and said it leads Southeast Asia. The ranking is supported by heavy trading activity. Reuters reported that national crypto transactions reached more than 650 trillion Indonesian rupiah last year, equal to about $39.7 billion, after tripling from the year before. This growth trend gives Robinhood a clear reason to move fast as it tries to capture rising demand for regulated crypto services. Buying a brokerage that already follows Indonesian rules offers a smoother entry than applying for licenses from the start. Getting a licensed digital asset trader also reduces the steps needed before launching its own crypto products. Robinhood said Indonesian users may later get full access to all its trading features once the company finishes internal changes and matches its systems with local rules. Buana Capital customers will not face any service breaks, as the firm will keep operating normally during the transition. Strategic Acquisitions Support a Broader Entry Into Asian Markets Robinhood has been growing in many regions since last year. That year, it launched its services in Europe and the United Kingdom, and then started an active phase of buying new companies. In November, it bought a firm connected to the collapsed FTX group as part of its move into prediction markets. This product line has grown fast inside the company and was described in November as one of its strongest sources of revenue.  Robinhood is introducing a new futures and derivatives exchange and clearinghouse, deepening our investment in Prediction Markets and better positioning us to deliver innovative products to our customers. More in our newsroom: https://t.co/Hqv6EMXZiD pic.twitter.com/JXDkp3c2Tr — Robinhood (@RobinhoodApp) November 25, 2025  The new plan in Indonesia helps Robinhood expand its global presence and reach a large number of crypto traders. The company said it plans to grow its products once both acquisitions are completed. This shows a wider push into Asian markets after building a stable regulatory base.    eToro Platform    Best Crypto Exchange   Over 90 top cryptos to trade Regulated by top-tier entities User-friendly trading app 30+ million users    9.9   Visit eToro eToro is a multi-asset investment platform. The value of your investments may go up or down. Your capital is at risk. Don’t invest unless you’re prepared to lose all the money you invest. This is a high-risk investment, and you should not expect to be protected if something goes wrong. 

Author: Coinstats
Canada’s Tax Agency Flags Massive Crypto Non-Compliance but Brings Zero Charges Since 2020

Canada’s Tax Agency Flags Massive Crypto Non-Compliance but Brings Zero Charges Since 2020

Canada’s tax authority, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), has clawed back more than C$100 million (AU$109 million) through audits targeting cryptocurrency users, yet it has not filed any criminal charges since 2020. The CRA’s 35-person crypto audit team has reviewed over 230 cases and estimates that roughly 40 per cent of taxpayers using digital asset […] The post Canada’s Tax Agency Flags Massive Crypto Non-Compliance but Brings Zero Charges Since 2020 appeared first on Crypto News Australia.

Author: Cryptonews AU
Mobile-first approach: The path for banks as Crypto products

Mobile-first approach: The path for banks as Crypto products

Author: Zuo Ye In the West, finance is a means of social mobilization, and it can only be effective when the "state-society" is separated or even opposed. However, in large Eastern countries where the state and family are structurally similar, social mobilization relies on water conservancy projects and governance capabilities. We'll begin here by recounting the phenomenon I've observed: after a decade of hasty Ethereum + dApp narratives, DeFi has shifted its focus to the Apple Store's Consumer DeFi mobile app competition. Compared to exchanges and wallets that were listed on major app stores early on, DeFi, which has always been based on web platforms, arrived very late. Compared to virtual wallets and digital banks that target niche markets of low-income and credit-poor individuals, DeFi, which cannot solve the credit system problem, arrived too early. Amid this dilemma, there is even a narrative of human society transitioning from monetary banking to fiscal monetary policy. The Ministry of Finance regains control of the currency. The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks. Consumer-grade DeFi takes Aave and Coinbase's built-in Morpho as its entry point, directly targeting end users. However, our story must begin with the issuance process of modern currencies to complete the background of DeFi Apps surpassing DeFi dApps. Gold and silver are not naturally currency. When humans need to exchange on a large scale, commodities emerge as a general equivalent. Due to their various characteristics, gold and silver were eventually accepted by the entire human society. Throughout human societies before the Industrial Revolution, regardless of political system or level of development, metal coinage was the mainstream, and the monetary system was essentially managed by the finance department. The "central bank-bank" system we are familiar with is actually a very recent story. In the early days, developed countries generally followed the process of establishing a central bank to handle banking crises when necessary, including the Federal Reserve, which we are most familiar with. Throughout this historical process, the finance department, as an administrative branch, has been in an awkward position of diminishing power. However, the "central bank-bank" system is not without its flaws. In the central bank's management of banks, banks rely on the interest rate spread between deposits and loans to earn profits, while the central bank influences banks through the reserve requirement ratio. Image caption: The role of the interest rate spread and the reserve requirement ratio. Image source: @zuoyeweb3 Of course, this is a simplified and outdated version. The simplification omits the process of the money multiplier. Banks do not need to have 100% reserves to issue loans, hence the leverage effect. The central bank will not force banks to have full reserves; instead, it needs to use leverage to adjust the money supply of the entire society. The only ones who suffer are the users. Deposits outside of reserves lack a rigid guarantee of redemption. When neither the central bank nor the banks are willing to pay the price, the users become the necessary cost of money supply and withdrawal. Outdated means that banks no longer fully accept the central bank's command. The most typical example is Japan after the Plaza Accord, which effectively launched QE/QQE (officially known as quantitative easing, commonly known as excessive money printing). Under the command of extremely low or even negative interest rates, banks cannot benefit from the interest rate spread between deposits and loans, and banks will choose to lie flat. Therefore, central banks will directly intervene to buy assets, thereby bypassing banks to supply money. This is exemplified by the Federal Reserve buying bonds and the Bank of Japan buying stocks. The entire system is becoming increasingly rigid, causing the most important clearing ability of the economic cycle to completely fail: Japan's huge zombie companies, the TBTF (Too Big to Fall) Wall Street financial giants formed after 2008 in the United States, and the emergency intervention after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in 2023. What does all this have to do with cryptocurrency? The 2008 financial crisis directly spurred the creation of Bitcoin, and the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in 2023 directly triggered a wave of opposition to CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies) in the United States. In a House vote in May 2024, Republicans unanimously voted against developing CBDCs and instead supported private stablecoins. The latter logic is somewhat convoluted. We might think that after Silicon Valley Bank, as a crypto-friendly bank, collapsed and even caused a significant decoupling of USDC, the United States should turn to supporting CBDC. However, in reality, the Federal Reserve's dollar stablecoin or CBDC has formed a de facto confrontation with the US Treasury stablecoin led by the executive branch and Congress. The Federal Reserve itself originated from the chaos and crisis of the post-"free dollar" system in 1907. After its establishment in 1913, it was an odd situation of "gold reserves + private banks" coexisting. At that time, gold was directly managed by the Federal Reserve until 1934 when its management was transferred to the Treasury Department. Before the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, gold was always the reserve asset of the US dollar. However, after the Bretton Woods system, the US dollar is essentially a fiat currency, or a stablecoin based on US Treasury bonds. This conflicts with the Treasury Department's position. From the public's perspective, the US dollar and US Treasury bonds are two sides of the same coin, but from the Treasury Department's perspective, US Treasury bonds are the true form of the US dollar, and the Federal Reserve's private nature is interfering with national interests. Returning to cryptocurrencies, especially stablecoins, those based on US Treasury bonds grant the Treasury and other administrative departments the power to issue currency outside the Federal Reserve. This is why Congress cooperates with the government to ban the issuance of CBDCs. Only by looking at it from this perspective can we understand the appeal of Bitcoin to Trump. Family interests are just a pretext. The fact that the entire administrative system can accept Bitcoin only shows that the pricing power of crypto assets is profitable for them. Image caption: Changes in USDT/USDC reserves Image source: @IMFNews The underlying assets of today's mainstream USD stablecoins are nothing more than USD cash, US Treasury bonds, BTC/ETH and other interest-bearing bonds (corporate bonds). However, in reality, USDT/USDC are reducing the proportion of USD cash and shifting significantly to US Treasury bonds. This is not a short-term move under the interest-earning strategy, but rather a coordination with the shift from USD stablecoins to US Treasury stablecoins. The internationalization of USDT is nothing more than buying more gold. The future stablecoin market will only be a three-way competition between US Treasury stablecoins, gold stablecoins, and BTC/ETH stablecoins. There won't be a direct confrontation between US dollar stablecoins and non-US dollar stablecoins. Surely no one truly believes that euro stablecoins will become mainstream! By using stablecoins based on US Treasury bonds, the Treasury regained the power to issue currency, but stablecoins cannot directly replace the money multiplier or leverage issuance mechanisms of banks. Treating banks as DeFi products Physics has never truly existed, and neither has the commodity attribute of money. In theory, the historical mission of the Federal Reserve should have ended after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, just like the First and Second United States Banks. Therefore, the Federal Reserve has continued to play a role in regulating prices and stabilizing financial markets. As mentioned earlier, under the background of inflation, the central bank can no longer influence the money supply through the reserve requirement ratio. Instead, it directly intervenes to purchase asset packages. This leverage mechanism is not only inefficient, but also unable to clear out inferior assets. The progress and crisis of DeFi are giving us another option. Allowing crises to exist and occur is itself a clearing mechanism at work, forming a framework where the "invisible hand" (DeFi) is responsible for the leverage cycle and the "visible hand" (US Treasury stablecoins) is responsible for the underlying stability. In short, on-chain assets are actually beneficial to regulation, as information technology can penetrate the web of ignorance. In terms of specific implementation methods, Aave builds its own C-end App to directly connect with users, Morpho uses Coinbase to adopt a B2B2C model, and Spark in the Sky ecosystem abandons the mobile terminal and focuses on serving institutional clients. The specific mechanisms of the three can be further subdivided. Aave is a combination of end-users + institutional clients (Horizon) + official risk control. Morpho is a combination of risk control by the administrator + front-end outsourcing to Coinbase. Spark itself is a sub-DAO of Sky and is derived from a fork of Aave. It mainly targets institutions and the on-chain market, which can be understood as temporarily avoiding Aave's dominance. Sky is unique in that it is an on-chain stablecoin issuer (DAI->USDS) that hopes to expand its scope of use. It is fundamentally different from Aave and Morpho. Pure lending protocols need to remain sufficiently open to attract various assets, so Aave's GHO is unlikely to have a future. Sky needs to strike a balance between USDS and lending openness. After Aave voted against USDS as a reserve asset, people were surprised to find that Sky's own Spark also didn't really support USDS, while Spark was embracing PYUSD issued by PayPal. Although Sky hopes to balance the two by setting up different sub-DAOs, this inherent conflict between stablecoin issuers and open lending protocols will accompany Sky's development for a long time. In contrast, Ethena acted decisively, partnering with Hyperliquid's front-end product, Based, to promote the HYPE/USDe spot trading pair and offer rebates. Ethena directly embraced the existing ecosystem, such as Hyperliquid, temporarily abandoning the need to build its own ecosystem and public chain, and focusing on its role as a single stablecoin issuer. Currently, Aave is the closest to a fully-featured DeFi app and is a near-bank-level product. Starting from the wealth management/yield sector, it directly reaches end users and hopes to use its brand and risk control experience to migrate traditional mainstream customers to the blockchain. Morpho, on the other hand, hopes to learn from the USDC model, link itself with Coinbase to amplify its intermediary role, and facilitate deeper cooperation between more fund managers and Coinbase. Image caption: Morpho and Coinbase partnership model Image source: @Morpho Morpho represents another extreme open approach: USDC + Morpho + Base => Coinbase. Behind the $1 billion loan amount lies the heavy responsibility of challenging USDT and blocking USDe/USDS through the Yield product. Coinbase is the biggest beneficiary of USDC. What does all this have to do with US Treasury stablecoins? For the first time, the central role of banks has been bypassed in the entire process of generating stablecoin on-chain revenue and acquiring off-chain customers. This does not mean that banks are not needed, but rather that banks are increasingly becoming intermediaries for deposits and withdrawals. Although on-chain DeFi cannot solve the problem of the credit system, and there are many issues such as the capital efficiency of over-collateralization and the risk control capabilities of the manager's vault. However, permissionless DeFi stacks can indeed play a role in leverage cycles, and the collapse of a manager's vault can indeed serve as a market clearing mechanism. Under the traditional "central bank-bank" system, third-party or fourth-party clients such as payment providers, or powerful large banks, are all susceptible to secondary clearing, which can impair the central bank's ability to conduct thorough management and lead to misjudgments of the economic system. In the modern "stablecoin-lending protocol" system, no matter how many times a loan is revolved or how great the risk of the manager's vault is, it can be quantified and transparent. The only thing to be careful about is not trying to introduce more trust assumptions, such as off-chain negotiation and early intervention by lawyers, as this will lead to low efficiency in the use of funds. In other words, DeFi will not defeat banks through permissionless regulatory arbitrage, but rather through capital efficiency. More than a century after central banks established their control over currency issuance, the Treasury system is for the first time bypassing its entanglement with gold and reconsidering regaining control of the currency system. DeFi will also bear the heavy responsibility of re-issuing new currencies and clearing out assets. There will no longer be a distinction between M0/M1/M2; there will only be a distinction between US Treasury stablecoins and DeFi utilization rates. Conclusion Crypto sends its greetings to all its friends, hoping they will witness a spectacular bull market after a long bear market, while the overly impatient banking industry will be the first to go. The Federal Reserve's attempt to set up Skinny Master Accounts for stablecoin issuers and the OCC's efforts to quell banks' concerns about stablecoins poaching deposits are all actions driven by banking anxiety and regulatory self-preservation measures. Let's consider the most extreme scenario: if 100% of US Treasury bonds were minted into stablecoins, if 100% of the yield from these stablecoins were distributed to users, and if 100% of the yield was invested in US Treasury bonds by users, would MMT become a reality or fail completely? Perhaps this is the significance of Crypto: in the current era of AI, we need to rethink economics by following in Satoshi Nakamoto's footsteps and try to depict the real-world significance of cryptocurrencies, rather than blindly following Vitalik's lead.

Author: PANews