Coinbase CEO Says Banks Are Working to Undermine the President’s Crypto Agenda The chief executive of Coinbase has accused major banking institutions of attemptCoinbase CEO Says Banks Are Working to Undermine the President’s Crypto Agenda The chief executive of Coinbase has accused major banking institutions of attempt

Coinbase CEO Accuses Banks of Working Against the President’s Crypto Agenda

2026/02/08 02:03
6 min read

Coinbase CEO Says Banks Are Working to Undermine the President’s Crypto Agenda

The chief executive of Coinbase has accused major banking institutions of attempting to weaken the US president’s cryptocurrency agenda, escalating tensions between the traditional financial sector and the digital asset industry at a critical moment for crypto regulation in the United States.

The remarks were made publicly by Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, and were highlighted this week by Cointelegraph on X. Following confirmation of the statement, hokanews cited the comments as part of its broader coverage of political and regulatory developments shaping the future of cryptocurrency in the US.

Armstrong’s comments reflect growing frustration within the crypto industry, as companies argue that banks and financial incumbents are resisting policy changes that could expand digital asset adoption and integration into the mainstream financial system.

Source: XPost

A Renewed Clash Between Crypto and Traditional Finance

Speaking amid ongoing regulatory debates in Washington, Armstrong suggested that certain banking institutions are actively lobbying against policies that would support the president’s crypto agenda. While he did not name specific banks, he argued that entrenched financial interests view cryptocurrency as a competitive threat rather than an innovation opportunity.

According to Armstrong, banks have used their influence to slow regulatory clarity, limit access to banking services for crypto firms, and discourage lawmakers from embracing pro-crypto reforms.

The banking industry has long maintained that its concerns center on consumer protection, financial stability, and anti-money laundering compliance. Crypto leaders, however, increasingly argue that these concerns are being used to justify resistance to structural change.

The Political Context

The comments come as the US government weighs several policy initiatives related to digital assets, including market structure legislation, stablecoin frameworks, and regulatory jurisdiction between federal agencies.

The president’s crypto agenda, while still evolving, has been framed by supporters as an effort to balance innovation with oversight. Industry leaders say clearer rules would encourage investment and reduce uncertainty that has driven crypto activity offshore.

Banks, meanwhile, have urged caution, warning that rapid crypto integration could introduce systemic risk if not carefully managed.

Cointelegraph Confirmation and Media Reporting

The statement gained attention after being shared by Cointelegraph on X, prompting wider discussion among policymakers, investors, and financial analysts. After verifying the source of the comments, hokanews cited the development in line with standard journalistic practice, framing the remarks as part of an ongoing industry-government dialogue.

Mainstream media outlets have similarly presented the comments as indicative of broader institutional tensions rather than a personal dispute.

Why Banks Are Wary of Crypto

Banks have historically played a central role in financial intermediation, payments, and credit creation. Cryptocurrencies challenge that model by offering peer-to-peer transactions, decentralized finance platforms, and alternative settlement systems.

Financial institutions have raised concerns about volatility, fraud, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance. They also face pressure from regulators to ensure that any involvement with crypto does not expose them to legal or reputational risk.

Crypto executives counter that many of these risks exist in traditional finance and argue that blockchain transparency can, in some cases, improve oversight.

Access to Banking Services Remains a Key Issue

One of the most persistent complaints from crypto firms has been difficulty accessing banking services. Several digital asset companies have reported account closures, delayed payments, or outright refusals from banks.

Armstrong has previously described this phenomenon as a form of informal de-risking, where banks avoid entire industries rather than manage perceived regulatory exposure.

The issue has become central to the debate over whether the financial system is adapting fairly to technological change.

Industry Reaction

Armstrong’s comments have been widely discussed across the crypto industry, with some executives echoing his concerns and others calling for more constructive engagement with banks.

Supporters argue that banks are defending legacy systems at the expense of innovation. Critics caution that framing the issue as a political conflict risks oversimplifying complex regulatory challenges.

Analysts note that collaboration between banks and crypto firms has increased in recent years, even as tensions remain.

Regulatory Stakes

The outcome of the current policy debate could shape the US crypto market for years to come. Clearer regulations could attract institutional capital and encourage responsible innovation. Prolonged uncertainty, on the other hand, may push companies to relocate operations abroad.

Armstrong’s remarks highlight the stakes involved as lawmakers balance competing interests from financial incumbents, technology firms, and consumer advocates.

Broader Implications for the Crypto Market

The public nature of the comments underscores how politicized cryptocurrency has become in the US. What began as a niche technology discussion has evolved into a broader debate about financial power, competition, and regulatory philosophy.

As banks and crypto companies continue to lobby policymakers, the direction of US crypto policy remains uncertain.

What Comes Next

No immediate policy changes followed Armstrong’s remarks, but they add pressure to an already active regulatory environment. Lawmakers are expected to continue hearings and negotiations over crypto legislation in the coming months.

Whether the president’s crypto agenda advances will likely depend on political compromise, regulatory coordination, and the evolving relationship between traditional finance and the digital asset sector.

hokanews will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as verified information becomes available through official channels.

hokanews.com – Not Just Crypto News. It’s Crypto Culture.

Writer @Ethan
Ethan Collins is a passionate crypto journalist and blockchain enthusiast, always on the hunt for the latest trends shaking up the digital finance world. With a knack for turning complex blockchain developments into engaging, easy-to-understand stories, he keeps readers ahead of the curve in the fast-paced crypto universe. Whether it’s Bitcoin, Ethereum, or emerging altcoins, Ethan dives deep into the markets to uncover insights, rumors, and opportunities that matter to crypto fans everywhere.

Disclaimer:

The articles on HOKANEWS are here to keep you updated on the latest buzz in crypto, tech, and beyond—but they’re not financial advice. We’re sharing info, trends, and insights, not telling you to buy, sell, or invest. Always do your own homework before making any money moves.

HOKANEWS isn’t responsible for any losses, gains, or chaos that might happen if you act on what you read here. Investment decisions should come from your own research—and, ideally, guidance from a qualified financial advisor. Remember: crypto and tech move fast, info changes in a blink, and while we aim for accuracy, we can’t promise it’s 100% complete or up-to-date.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 7, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — HitPaw, a leader in AI-powered visual enhancement solutions, announced Comfy, a global content creation platform, is
Share
AI Journal2026/02/08 09:15
Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

A Journalist gave a brutal review of the new Melania documentary, which has been criticized by those who say it won't make back the huge fees spent to make it,
Share
Rawstory2026/02/08 09:08
Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Prominent analyst Cheeky Crypto (203,000 followers on YouTube) set out to verify a fast-spreading claim that XRP’s circulating supply could “vanish overnight,” and his conclusion is more nuanced than the headline suggests: nothing in the ledger disappears, but the amount of XRP that is truly liquid could be far smaller than most dashboards imply—small enough, in his view, to set the stage for an abrupt liquidity squeeze if demand spikes. XRP Supply Shock? The video opens with the host acknowledging his own skepticism—“I woke up to a rumor that XRP supply could vanish overnight. Sounds crazy, right?”—before committing to test the thesis rather than dismiss it. He frames the exercise as an attempt to reconcile a long-standing critique (“XRP’s supply is too large for high prices”) with a rival view taking hold among prominent community voices: that much of the supply counted as “circulating” is effectively unavailable to trade. His first step is a straightforward data check. Pulling public figures, he finds CoinMarketCap showing roughly 59.6 billion XRP as circulating, while XRPScan reports about 64.7 billion. The divergence prompts what becomes the video’s key methodological point: different sources count “circulating” differently. Related Reading: Analyst Sounds Major XRP Warning: Last Chance To Get In As Accumulation Balloons As he explains it, the higher on-ledger number likely includes balances that aggregators exclude or treat as restricted, most notably Ripple’s programmatic escrow. He highlights that Ripple still “holds a chunk of XRP in escrow, about 35.3 billion XRP locked up across multiple wallets, with a nominal schedule of up to 1 billion released per month and unused portions commonly re-escrowed. Those coins exist and are accounted for on-ledger, but “they aren’t actually sitting on exchanges” and are not immediately available to buyers. In his words, “for all intents and purposes, that escrow stash is effectively off of the market.” From there, the analysis moves from headline “circulating supply” to the subtler concept of effective float. Beyond escrow, he argues that large strategic holders—banks, fintechs, or other whales—may sit on material balances without supplying order books. When you strip out escrow and these non-selling stashes, he says, “the effective circulating supply… is actually way smaller than the 59 or even 64 billion figure.” He cites community estimates in the “20 or 30 billion” range for what might be truly liquid at any given moment, while emphasizing that nobody has a precise number. That effective-float framing underpins the crux of his thesis: a potential supply shock if demand accelerates faster than fresh sell-side supply appears. “Price is a dance between supply and demand,” he says; if institutional or sovereign-scale users suddenly need XRP and “the market finds that there isn’t enough XRP readily available,” order books could thin out and prices could “shoot on up, sometimes violently.” His phrase “circulating supply could collapse overnight” is presented not as a claim that tokens are destroyed or removed from the ledger, but as a market-structure scenario in which available inventory to sell dries up quickly because holders won’t part with it. How Could The XRP Supply Shock Happen? On the demand side, he anchors the hypothetical to tokenization. He points to the “very early stages of something huge in finance”—on-chain tokenization of debt, stablecoins, CBDCs and even gold—and argues the XRP Ledger aims to be “the settlement layer” for those assets.He references Ripple CTO David Schwartz’s earlier comments about an XRPL pivot toward tokenized assets and notes that an institutional research shop (Bitwise) has framed XRP as a way to play the tokenization theme. In his construction, if “trillions of dollars in value” begin settling across XRPL rails, working inventories of XRP for bridging, liquidity and settlement could rise sharply, tightening effective float. Related Reading: XRP Bearish Signal: Whales Offload $486 Million In Asset To illustrate, he offers two analogies. First, the “concert tickets” model: you think there are 100,000 tickets (100B supply), but 50,000 are held by the promoter (escrow) and 30,000 by corporate buyers (whales), leaving only 20,000 for the public; if a million people want in, prices explode. Second, a comparison to Bitcoin’s halving: while XRP has no programmatic halving, he proposes that a sudden adoption wave could function like a de facto halving of available supply—“XRP’s version of a halving could actually be the adoption event.” He also updates the narrative context that long dogged XRP. Once derided for “too much supply,” he argues the script has “totally flipped.” He cites the current cycle’s optics—“XRP is sitting above $3 with a market cap north of around $180 billion”—as evidence that raw supply counts did not cap price as tightly as critics claimed, and as a backdrop for why a scarcity narrative is gaining traction. Still, he declines to publish targets or timelines, repeatedly stressing uncertainty and risk. “I’m not a financial adviser… cryptocurrencies are highly volatile,” he reminds viewers, adding that tokenization could take off “on some other platform,” unfold more slowly than enthusiasts expect, or fail to get to “sudden shock” scale. The verdict he offers is deliberately bound. The theory that “XRP supply could vanish overnight” is imprecise on its face; the ledger will not erase coins. But after examining dashboard methodologies, escrow mechanics and the behavior of large holders, he concludes that the effective float could be meaningfully smaller than headline supply figures, and that a fast-developing tokenization use case could, under the right conditions, stress that float. “Overnight is a dramatic way to put it,” he concedes. “The change could actually be very sudden when it comes.” At press time, XRP traded at $3.0198. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/09/18 11:00