USDC 價格

$GRVT Stablecoin issuer Circle urged the European Commission to revise reserve requirements in its response to a consultation on reviewing the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA). In Thursday’s summary of its response, the USDC and EURC issuer said mandatory bank-deposit requirements expose stablecoin issuers to banking-sector credit and counterparty risks. Circle faced those risks firsthand in March 2023, when USDC temporarily lost its dollar peg after the company disclosed that $3.3 billion of its reserves were held at Silicon Valley Bank. The funds were subsequently made available after US authorities protected the bank’s depositors. The consultation, which closed Wednesday, sought feedback on how MiCA is working and whether it remains fit for purpose as crypto markets develop. Responses will inform the Commission’s assessment of the regulation and activities beyond its current scope. Related: MiCA focus shifts from rulemaking to supervision, ESMA chair says Circle aligns with central bank on reserve requirements MiCA currently requires e-money token issuers to hold at least 30% of reserves in commercial bank deposits, with a higher minimum of 60% for significant issuers, according to Circle. Circle backed reconsidering the mandatory deposit minimums and replacing them with a more flexible minimum asset liquidity requirement, agreeing with the European Central Bank. The company also called for removing two reserve concentration limits that impose a 35% cap on exposure to a single sovereign and a ceiling on deposits with each counterparty equivalent to 1.5% of that bank’s total assets. The stablecoin issuer also urged the Commission to preserve “multi-issuance,” through which a European Union-authorized entity and a foreign-regulated counterpart co-issue a stablecoin. Restricting that structure would push users toward offshore providers outside MiCA’s protections, Circle argued. Related: 50,000 Europeans call on EU to ease stablecoin rewards restrictions in MiCA review Industry groups seek changes to onchain market rules The Hyperliquid Policy Center also responded to the consultation, urging the Commission to treat crypto perpetual futures under the EU’s existing securities and derivatives framework, the second Markets in Financial Instruments Directive, or MiFID II. The group called for requirements tailored to perpetual futures’ market structure and recognition of public blockchain records as a way to meet transparency and recordkeeping obligations. The Global Blockchain Business Council recommended clearer token classification, proportionate stablecoin safeguards and less duplication between MiCA and payment-services rules. On cross-border stablecoin issuance, GBBC called for clear redemption responsibilities, enforceable reserve rebalancing and an accountable EU supervisory framework. Magazine: Stablecoins can drain from banks and nations at lightning speed

$GRVT European stablecoin issuers are making the case for regulated US dollar tokens, arguing that Europe’s push to strengthen the euro does not eliminate businesses’ need for dollar liquidity. AllUnity, a German stablecoin issuer, launched its US dollar-pegged stablecoin USDAU on Wednesday, expanding its MiCA-regulated lineup beyond European currencies. “In global trade and FX markets, the US dollar is the glue,” AllUnity CEO Alexander Höptner told Cointelegraph, adding: “For European corporates to make cross-border payments globally, offering only a euro stablecoin isn’t enough.” European issuers’ push into dollar stablecoins comes as the EU reviews its MiCA framework and the ECB continues to raise concerns about stablecoins reinforcing the dollar’s global dominance. Europe cannot “wish away” dollar demand Stable Mint CEO James Bennett said demand for dollar stablecoins in Europe reflects practical business needs rather than something policymakers can simply steer toward the euro. “Dollar stablecoins are where the demand is, and Europe can’t wish that away,” Bennett told Cointelegraph. “What Europe can control is who issues them to European users, and under which rules.” Stable Mint’s USDSM stablecoin has moved more than $380 million onchain across 3.8 million transfers and is held by more than 2,600 addresses, according to figures provided by the company as of Wednesday. Related: Circle urges EU to revise stablecoin reserve rules in MiCA review Fiat Republic CEO Adam Bialy similarly pointed to demand from crypto platforms and stablecoin companies seeking round-the-clock dollar settlement. “The demand we are seeing is driven by practical needs, not speculation,” Bialy told Cointelegraph, adding that a regulated dollar token can reduce friction in cross-border settlement between Europe, the UK and North America. Not “euro versus dollar” Societe Generale-FORGE (SG-Forge), the digital asset subsidiary of French banking group Societe Generale, said the goal should be a diversified market rather than opposition to dollar stablecoins. “We believe the objective is not to oppose dollar stablecoins, but to foster a diversified and resilient ecosystem where users can access both euro and dollar-denominated digital cash solutions within a robust regulatory framework,” a spokesperson for the company told Cointelegraph. Related: ECB launches Pontes to settle tokenized assets without stablecoins SG-FORGE said its USD CoinVertible (USDCV), launched in 2025, has attracted interest for trading, settlement, collateral management and treasury operations. Despite growing interest, Europe-issued dollar stablecoins remain tiny compared with Tether USDt (USDT) and Circle’s USDC. CoinGecko puts USDSM and USDCV at about $13 million each, versus $184 billion for USDT and $74 billion for USDC. Market capitalization of USDCV and USDSM versus USDT and USDC. Source: CoinGecko AllUnity’s Höptner framed the market similarly, saying the opportunity is “not ‘US versus Europe’” but building interoperable financial infrastructure connecting dollar liquidity with European banks and businesses. Magazine: MiCA cracks down on USDT in Europe... but no one else cares

$GRVT TL;DR Stablecoin Pilot: Lloyds and Visa completed a seven-day live pilot that settled $750,000 in payment obligations using USDC, testing stablecoin settlement between a major UK banking group and Visa. Faster Settlement: Funds reached Visa in under an hour, including during weekends, highlighting how blockchain-based settlement could reduce delays. Multi-Chain Test: The trial used Lloyds’ Canton Network node and a separate public blockchain supported by Visa and demonstrating interoperability. Lloyds and Visa completed a seven-day live stablecoin settlement pilot involving $750,000 in payment obligations, marking what Lloyds described as the first stablecoin settlement trial between Visa and a major UK banking group. The initiative focused on the settlement process that takes place between financial institutions rather than customer payments. For Lloyds and Visa, the goal was to explore whether stablecoins could improve the speed, transparency and flexibility of cross-border fund transfers. Lloyds purchased USDC through UK-regulated digital asset exchange Archax to carry out a series of U.S. dollar settlement transactions. The volume was booked through Lloyds’ Corporate Markets branch in Jersey before being transferred to Visa in the United States. According to the bank, funds reached Visa in under an hour, including over the weekend. Testing Stablecoin Settlement in Real Conditions The Lloyds and Visa pilot moved beyond theoretical discussions by using live payment obligations in a real-world environment. The seven-day test covered multiple U.S. dollar settlement obligations totaling $750,000 and examined how stablecoins could work alongside existing settlement processes. According to Lloyds, Lloyds and Visa assessed the impact of blockchain-based settlement on transaction speed, operational efficiency and visibility into fund movements. Traditional cross-border settlement can take a day or more when transactions are initiated outside standard banking hours. The pilot demonstrated that settlement activity could continue around the clock, including weekends and holidays. Peter Left, Head of Digital Assets at Lloyds, said the trial allowed the bank to test those capabilities in a practical setting rather than relying solely on theoretical models. How the Pilot Used Multiple Blockchain Networks A notable aspect of the trial was its use of different blockchain infrastructures. How Lloyds and Visa approached interoperability was a key part of the experiment. Lloyds operated its own node on the Canton Network and used the platform’s configurable privacy features. The test also showed Lloyds and Visa working across separate blockchain environments, with Visa supporting settlement on an unnamed public blockchain. The arrangement demonstrated the ability to complete settlement activity across different networks. What the Results Could Mean For Lloyds and Visa, the results highlighted the potential for faster access to funds and improved liquidity management. Greater certainty around settlement timing may help institutions manage obligations more efficiently, particularly outside traditional banking schedules. Beyond the immediate trial, Lloyds and Visa said the initiative forms part of broader efforts to explore digital assets and tokenized forms of money as tools for modernizing the movement of value between businesses and financial institutions.

$CTRNEW TL;DR: Judge Jennifer L. Rochon of the Southern District of New York dismissed the class action lawsuit over the $LIBRA, $M3M3  tokens with prejudice on September 29, 2026. The complaint accused the defendants of operating an unlawful enterprise that allegedly siphoned 44.6 million USDC and 249,665 SOL from liquidity pools. The court determined that the alleged activity spanned only six months, an insufficient timeframe to establish a pattern of continuity under the federal RICO Act. A U.S. federal judge has dismissed a class action lawsuit tied to the token launches of memecoins $LIBRA, $M3M3, ending the ongoing litigation brought against Hayden Davis, Kelsier Ventures, former Meteora CEO Benjamin Chow, and Meteora itself. The 81-page ruling, issued on Tuesday, September 29 in the Southern District of New York, concluded that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the legal standards required to support racketeering and fraud allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted the dismissal with prejudice and formally denied leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs Omar Hurlock and Anuj Mehta alleged that the defendants leveraged corporate entities, digital wallets, and liquidity pools to improperly profit from token launches. The legal action invoked the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), New York state business statutes, and unjust enrichment claims. According to the court order cited in market reports, the primary hurdle for the plaintiffs was the lack of continuity required under RICO. The alleged unlawful enterprise purportedly operated from October 2024 until the lawsuit was officially filed on March 17, 2025. Judge Rochon ruled that an operational duration of roughly six months does not represent a sufficiently substantial time period to establish closed-ended continuity for an organized conspiracy claim. Furthermore, the court noted that the complaint outlined a single scheme, five defendants, a single discrete goal, and wire fraud as the sole underlying predicate offense. Under the ruling, this structure fails to establish the requisite pattern of continuous racketeering activity demanded by federal law. Court Findings on Meteora’s Structure and the Defendants Claims directed against the Meteora protocol also failed to withstand judicial scrutiny. The lawsuit characterized Meteora as an unincorporated association, a designation the judge rejected due to insufficient evidence. To support that assertion, the plaintiffs pointed to a 4-of-7 multi-signature wallet used to authorize software updates. The court clarified that holding administrative keys to push code updates is not legally equivalent to a seven-member board executing joint commercial decisions. Similarly, no actionable basis was found against former company executive Benjamin Chow. The plaintiffs based their claims on comments made in group calls and informal remarks; however, the ruling determined that no concrete facts evidenced a deliberate fraudulent intent. In their initial complaint, the plaintiffs alleged that wallets associated with Kelsier bought $M3M3 while the liquidity pool was frozen in order to dump into subsequent market demand. In the case of $LIBRA, the filing alleged the extraction of 44.6 million USDC and 249,665 SOL from liquidity reserves. Judge Rochon emphasized that these metrics represented unverified assertions by the litigants rather than established judicial facts, noting that proceedings concluded prior to reaching the evidentiary discovery phase. The plaintiffs also attempted to add other tokens—such as $MELANIA, ENRON, and TRUST—to the litigation, a request the court denied as it failed to cure the complaint’s underlying structural defects. With the federal claims dismissed, the court also found a lack of personal jurisdiction to keep Davis and Kelsier subject to New York courts. The dismissal with prejudice brings the proceedings in the Southern District of New York to a close, while separate ancillary matters and administrative inquiries surrounding $LIBRA remain ongoing across other regulatory venues.