© The Associated Press
The Bitcoin donation can be used to support Donald Trump as a New York court considers whether to reverse a $5 million settlement between the CFTC and Gemini.
Google is rolling out facial recognition for account recovery, allowing users to verify their identity with a face scan instead of traditional recovery methods.
The post Google Account Recovery Now Needs Your Face And Your Face Alone first appeared on Redmond Pie.
Japan’s latest crypto law changes have revived the country’s spot Bitcoin ETF discussion, but the important part is the timeline. This is not an approval story today. It is a regulatory groundwork story, and that means investors need to be patient.
The Japanese Cabinet submitted the Bill for Partially Amending the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and the Payment Services Act to the 221st session of the National Diet, moving crypto assets toward treatment as financial assets under the FIEA rather than only payment instruments under the Payment Services Act.
That sounds technical, because it is. But it could matter a lot.
If crypto assets sit under a financial-assets framework, Japan’s Financial Services Agency has a clearer path to build rules for investment products, including the kind of structure that could eventually support spot Bitcoin ETFs.
The key word is eventually.
Legal classification shapes what financial products can exist.
If crypto is treated mainly as a payment instrument, regulators focus on exchange use, transfers, custody, and consumer protection. If crypto is treated as a financial asset, the conversation widens into investment products, disclosure rules, market conduct, taxation, investor eligibility, and fund structures.
That is why Japan’s FIEA shift matters.
It does not automatically create a Bitcoin ETF. But it moves crypto closer to the legal category where investment trust rules and securities-market oversight can do the work.
For asset managers, that is important because ETF products need a clear regulatory foundation. They need rules around custody, valuation, creation and redemption, market surveillance, disclosures, and investor protection. Those rules are hard to build if the underlying asset sits in the wrong legal bucket.
Japan’s latest legislation starts to solve that structural problem.
Japan has a long history with crypto, and not all of it has been easy.
The country was one of the earliest major markets to regulate crypto exchanges seriously, partly because of painful exchange failures in earlier cycles. That history made Japanese regulators cautious, especially around retail investor protection and custody standards.
So Japan moving slowly on spot Bitcoin ETFs is not surprising.
The US approved spot Bitcoin ETFs after years of rejection, litigation, surveillance-sharing debates, and market-structure scrutiny. Other jurisdictions have taken their own routes. Japan’s process was always likely to be careful, rule-heavy, and tied to broader legal reforms.
That may frustrate traders who want a quick ETF headline, but it is consistent with how Japan tends to handle financial regulation.
The upside is that once a framework is in place, it may be more durable.
The 2028 timeline needs to be treated properly.
A target launch window does not mean products are approved. It does not mean investors can buy a Japanese spot Bitcoin ETF now. It does not mean every asset manager is ready to launch immediately.
It means regulators and financial institutions have a possible runway.
That runway could involve final rules, investment trust amendments, tax adjustments, custody standards, market infrastructure, and product filings. Firms such as large brokers and asset managers may prepare in anticipation, but preparation is not approval.
This is where crypto headlines often get too excited.
“Japan moves toward Bitcoin ETFs” is fair. “Japan approves Bitcoin ETFs” is not.
The difference matters because investors can misread regulatory progress as immediate market access.
Japan’s crypto ETF discussion is not only about listing permission.
Tax treatment matters too. If crypto products are taxed in a way that makes them unattractive compared with other investment vehicles, ETF demand may be weaker than expected. If tax rules become more investor-friendly, regulated products could become more competitive.
Product design also matters.
Will Japan allow only Bitcoin first? Could Ethereum follow? What custody rules will apply? Will products be available to retail investors? What disclosure standards will asset managers face? How will exchanges and market makers support liquidity?
Those details will determine whether a future ETF market is meaningful or merely symbolic.
If the framework develops properly, Japan could become an important Asian market for regulated crypto investment products.
It has deep capital markets, a large retail investor base, major financial institutions, and a strong regulatory culture. A spot Bitcoin ETF in Japan would not only be another product. It would signal that one of Asia’s most important financial systems is comfortable putting Bitcoin into a mainstream investment wrapper.
That would matter for regional adoption.
But the path is still long.
The latest legislation is a foundation, not the finished building. The FSA still needs to shape the rules, institutions need to prepare products, and lawmakers may still need to settle related tax and investor-protection questions.
So the right takeaway is measured optimism.
Japan is not racing into spot Bitcoin ETFs. It is creating the legal conditions that could make them possible later. For a market as cautious and important as Japan, that is still a meaningful step.
This article is based on Japan Financial Services Agency materials relating to the FIEA and Payment Services Act amendments.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
This report is based on information released in disclosures at primary source documentation.
Kraken’s UK presence is a good example of how crypto regulation actually works in practice: not as one broad approval, but as a patchwork of registrations, permissions, services, and limits.
The exchange operates in the UK through several FCA-regulated entities. Payward Limited is listed as a registered cryptoasset business for anti-money laundering purposes. Payward Services Limited holds an Electronic Money Institution license. Crypto Facilities Limited is FCA-authorized as an investment firm tied to derivatives activity.
That is a serious regulatory footprint, but it needs precise language.
This is not the same as saying Kraken has one sweeping UK “crypto custody license” that covers every activity under a future regime. The UK’s broader licensing framework for crypto custody and trading is still moving toward implementation, with applications expected to open on September 30, 2026, and the regime scheduled to take effect on October 25, 2027.
For users and institutions, that distinction matters.
Crypto companies often want a simple regulatory headline.
“Licensed.” “Approved.” “Registered.” “Regulated.”
Those words sound reassuring, but they can hide important differences.
A cryptoasset AML registration is not the same as a custody license. An EMI license is not the same as authorization to run a crypto exchange. A derivatives permission is not the same as approval for all spot trading and custody services.
Kraken’s UK structure shows why that nuance matters.
The company has built a regulated presence through multiple entities, each covering different activities. That can make the business more credible to users and institutions, but it does not mean every product is protected in the same way.
For example, FCA cryptoasset registration is primarily about anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing compliance. It does not mean customers receive the same protections they might expect from bank deposits or traditional investment products.
That is not a criticism of Kraken. It is simply how the UK framework works.
The timing is important.
The UK has been gradually moving toward a fuller crypto regulatory structure, especially around custody, trading venues, stablecoins, and market conduct. But that future regime is not the same as the current registration system.
Applications for the new framework are expected to open before the regime fully takes effect, giving firms time to prepare. Once implemented, the rules should create clearer obligations for crypto custody and trading services.
Until then, companies operate through existing categories: AML registration, e-money permissions, investment firm authorization, and other regulated-activity permissions where relevant.
That creates a messy middle period.
Some firms are regulated for certain functions, but not in the broad way consumers might assume. Others may be registered for AML but not authorized for investment services. The wording matters because users can misunderstand what protections they have.
Even with those caveats, Kraken’s UK setup is significant.
Maintaining multiple regulated entities is not easy. It requires compliance teams, reporting, policies, audits, governance, and ongoing engagement with regulators. For institutional clients, that matters because they want counterparties that can operate inside existing legal frameworks.
Kraken has also been one of the longer-standing exchanges in the market, and its UK footprint gives it a base to compete as the country’s rules mature.
That could become more important once the new regime arrives.
Firms that already have regulated operations, compliance infrastructure, and relationships with the FCA may be better positioned than offshore platforms trying to enter late. The UK wants crypto activity to move into a more supervised environment, and established players have an incentive to meet that demand.
The most important point for users is protection.
A regulatory registration does not automatically mean crypto assets are covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. It does not remove platform insolvency risk. It does not make volatile assets safe. It does not guarantee every product offered by an exchange carries the same regulatory status.
That is why careful wording is not just legal pedantry.
It affects user expectations.
If a platform says it is registered or regulated, users need to ask: for what activity, under which entity, and with what protections?
Kraken’s UK structure gives a useful case study because it includes several pieces of the regulatory puzzle, but not a single all-purpose label.
The broader takeaway is that UK crypto regulation is moving from registration toward fuller licensing.
That should make the market clearer over time. Firms will know what permissions they need. Users will have a better sense of protections. Regulators will have more direct oversight of custody and trading activity.
But during the transition, precise language is essential.
Kraken’s regulated UK entities show that major exchanges are preparing for a more formal era of crypto oversight. The company has built meaningful regulatory infrastructure, and that gives it a stronger position as the UK framework develops.
Still, the correct read is not “Kraken has a broad UK custody license.”
The better read is that Kraken already operates through multiple FCA-regulated entities, while the UK’s more comprehensive crypto regime is still on the way.
That distinction may sound small, but in crypto regulation, it is everything.
This article is based on FCA register information relating to Kraken-linked entities.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
This report is based on information released in disclosures at primary source documentation.
Bitcoin Magazine
Elizabeth Warren Claims Clarity Act Would Help Trump — And ‘Criminals and Cartels’
Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren has blasted the Clarity Act draft bill, claiming it would allow criminals and cartels to move money.
Speaking in a video statement on X Wednesday, Warren hinted that the potential law would allow President Donald Trump to make money from crypto.
Lawmakers are currently mulling over the latest draft of the Clarity Act, which aims to set in stone digital asset regulation. The latest draft bans officials and their families from issuing or promoting crypto.
“This latest draft bill would make it easier for criminals, oh, and cartels and terrorists to move money and finance their operations — and it fails to protect investors and our financial system,” Warren said in the video.
The new draft of the Senate GOP crypto bill does nothing to stop President Trump from making his next $1.4 billion from crypto.
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) July 22, 2026
It’ll supercharge Trump’s crypto corruption.
This bill should be dead on arrival. pic.twitter.com/HuNY52n3ex
“It’s going to a vote on the floor. There’s a glaring omission: it does not stop Donald Trump from cashing in on his presidency.”
“This isn’t regulation — this is a giveaway. This bill should be dead on arrival,” added Warren.
But X users added clarification to Warren’s video, highlighting that the Senate GOP’s updated draft includes ethics provisions banning federal officials from issuing or sponsoring digital assets.
Warren has long been a crypto critic, initially arguing that billions of dollars go missing every year thanks to tax dodging crypto users.
Most recently, Warren has called for a probe into the Trump family’s top crypto ventures.
President Trump campaigned on a ticket to help the crypto space but some Washington lawmakers have criticized the way the Trump family has profited from digital asset ventures, such as the Republican’s meme coin, TRUMP, and World Liberty Financial project.
Trump and the White House have always denied any conflicts of interest.
Senate Republicans began circulating new text of the bill this week, ahead of a possible floor vote.
US banking representatives, regulators and crypto bigwigs have been meeting at the White House to work on the Clarity Act since last year.
The bill was passed by the House of Representatives but banking chiefs raised concerns over stablecoins and the yield they will potentially pay customers.
Banking representatives have warned they could lose their deposit base and, in turn, their ability to lend to U.S. businesses if companies are allowed to pay rewards on stablecoins.
On Thursday, Goldman Sachs chairman and CEO David Solomon became one of the first big bankers to throw his support behind the bill.
This post Elizabeth Warren Claims Clarity Act Would Help Trump — And ‘Criminals and Cartels’ first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.
The exchange also introduced AI trading tools and a developer kit as part of a broader push to build financial infrastructure for autonomous AI agents.
Reddit's reported review of its Google AI partnership highlights growing publisher concerns that AI-powered search is changing the economics of web traffic.
The post Reddit Rethinks Google AI Partnership as AI Search Reshapes Publishing appeared first on TechRepublic.
Apple patched a Hide My Email flaw that could expose real inbox addresses, after a researcher reportedly flagged the issue more than a year earlier.
The post Apple Fixes Hide My Email Bug After Yearlong Delay appeared first on TechRepublic.
Chick-fil-A disclosed a credential stuffing attack affecting customers across 10 states, underscoring the risks of password reuse and account takeover.
The post One Password Mistake Helped Hackers Access Chick-fil-A Account appeared first on TechRepublic.
Login
