US banks tiptoe toward crypto, awaiting more green lights from regulators
New regulators under US President Donald Trump have signaled more bank-friendly crypto policies. (Envato Elements pic)
NEW YORK : Big US banks are holding internal discussions about expanding into cryptocurrencies as they get stronger endorsements from regulators, but initial steps will be tentative, centering on pilot programmes, partnerships or limited crypto trading, according to four industry executives.
Wall Street giants that had been largely blocked from many crypto activities by strict regulations are poised to grow quickly.
Yet the biggest lenders are still hesitant to be the first among rivals to expand too heavily into crypto in case they fall afoul of changing rules, said the four executives, who declined to be identified since they were discussing internal business plans.
'If a major firm expands without issues, others will be fast followers to run small-scale pilot projects and weigh other business prospects,' the executives said.
Jamie Dimon, CEO of the largest US bank, JPMorgan Chase, ruled out getting into custody – storing crypto assets for clients – or expanding significantly even if regulations ease.
'When I look at the bitcoin universe, the leverage in the system, the misuse in the system, the money laundering issues, trafficking, I'm not a fan of it,' Dimon, a longtime crypto skeptic, told investors last week.
'We're going to allow you to buy it, we're not going to custody it. … I don't think you should smoke, but I defend your right to smoke. I defend your right to buy bitcoin,' he added.
US President Donald Trump vowed to become the first 'crypto president' before he took office.
He has since wooed the industry's elite at the White House, promised to boost the adoption of digital assets and said he aims to create a strategic bitcoin reserve.
While there are welcoming signs, banks are seeking even clearer guidelines from the government clarifying what they can do in crypto, more than half a dozen industry executives said.
'The shift in the stance is encouraging for traditional lenders, but they are still approaching it with caution and viewing the changes in regulation as an opportunity to engage and not a free pass,' said Dario de Martino, A&O Shearman M&A partner who works on crypto-related issues.
Custody businesses to store and manage crypto assets are promising, bankers and executives said, but they have thin margins and potentially pose high risks.
'Most banks are likely to enter custody businesses through partnerships with existing crypto firms,' sources said.
Charles Schwab CEO Rick Wurster told Reuters earlier this month that the traffic lights from financial regulators were flashing 'pretty green' for large firms to grow in crypto.
'The signals have reinforced Schwab's plans to offer spot crypto trading within a year,' he said.
New regulators under Trump have also signaled more bank-friendly crypto policies.
The US office of the comptroller of the currency paved the way for lenders to engage in some crypto activities, such as custody, some stablecoin activities and participation in distributed ledger networks.
The Securities and Exchange Commission also scrapped earlier accounting guidance that made it expensive for banks to deal in crypto.
Bank of America could launch stablecoins, its CEO Brian Moynihan said earlier this year, and the US banking industry will embrace cryptocurrencies for payments if regulations permit them.
'Meanwhile, Morgan Stanley wants to work with regulators to see how it can be a middleman for crypto-related transactions,' CEO Ted Pick said earlier this year.
'The lender is also exploring adding crypto to its e-trade platform,' a source said.
'Some of the large banks are also exploring issuing a joint stablecoin, with the conversations in initial stages,' another banking source said.
Big banks seek more clarity around anti-money laundering rules and supervision before diving deeper into crypto.
They are also asking for consistent guidelines across banking and market regulators before launching new businesses in digital assets, whose values are volatile.
For now, banks are weighing their crypto prospects and running small-scale pilot programmes.
'While a much-improved environment, banks will continue to have concerns around anti-money laundering and regulatory compliance,' said Matthew Biben, co-head of the global financial services group at law firm King & Spalding.
Shifting landscape
'Banks want to understand if they can engage in crypto lending, or if they are allowed to become market makers for digital assets,' one of the banking sources said.
The rules for traditional banking businesses are very well defined and there is complete clarity over what a bank is allowed to do and what is outside their ambit, similar well-defined guidelines are needed for digital assets too.
'The working group on crypto under David Sacks, the Trump-appointed crypto czar, has no representation from banking regulators, which needs to be amended if the big banks are allowed to play any meaningful role in the business,' two banking sources said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malay Mail
23 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
Trump's hubris will deliver the hammer blow to the US and the world — Phar Kim Beng
MAY 31 — In a recent and poignant Time article, economist Richard S Grossman reminds us that when political leaders ignore economists and elevate personal pride over empirical analysis, economic catastrophe is not a possibility — it is a pattern. Grossman draws sharp historical comparisons: President Andrew Jackson's assault on America's nascent central bank and Winston Churchill's ill-fated return to the gold standard. Both decisions were rooted in ideological conviction and personal pride, not evidence or consensus. Now, in the second term of Donald J Trump, history threatens to repeat itself — only this time, on a global scale. Trump's self-referential style of governance risks destabilising not just the US economy but the very foundations of global economic interdependence. His actions echo Jackson and Churchill — but they are also amplified by a kind of hubris unique to this media-saturated age, where policy is shaped more by image than substance, by ego rather than expertise. Jackson's Bank War: Populism at the expense of stability In the early 1830s, President Andrew Jackson waged war against the Second Bank of the United States. Chartered in 1816, the Bank had functioned as a quasi-central institution, restraining inflation and regulating credit. Jackson, however, viewed it as a tool of elite corruption and vetoed its recharter in 1832, allowing it to collapse by 1836. His Specie Circular of 1836, which mandated payment for government land in gold or silver, drained the economy of liquidity and triggered the Panic of 1837. As chronicled by economic historian Peter Temin, this crisis caused GDP to contract by up to 30 per cent, and unemployment skyrocketed. It took nearly a decade for the economy to recover. Jackson's decision, made in defiance of economic logic, delivered a populist victory — and a national calamity. US President Donald Trump speaks with the media after a trip to Pennsylvania, at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, US May 30, 2025. — Reuters pic Churchill's gold standard gambit: Pride in decline Fast forward to 1925. Winston Churchill, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, committed Britain to returning to the gold standard at its pre-World War I parity — despite explicit warnings from economists like John Maynard Keynes. The move drastically overvalued the pound, making British exports uncompetitive and forcing deflationary wage cuts across industry. The economic damage was severe. Between 1921 and 1929, while the United States and France saw GDP gains of 40–50 per cent, Britain lagged behind with under 20 per cent. The North of England sank into chronic unemployment. The General Strike of 1926 and other labour uprisings signalled deep unrest. Churchill, clinging to imperial nostalgia and fiscal orthodoxy, stayed the course until 1931 — when a full-blown crisis forced Britain off the gold standard. Trump's economic nationalism: Narcissism over institutions Trump's second term is shaping up to be a repetition of these self-inflicted traumas. But while Jackson and Churchill made costly decisions for their nations, Trump's impact is transnational. His economic worldview is transactional, driven by an obsession with trade deficits and a conviction that tariffs will restore American greatness. This belief contradicts decades of economic research. Trade deficits are not inherently harmful, nor do tariffs reduce them. They tend to raise prices for consumers and provoke retaliatory measures from trading partners. Yet Trump persists, seemingly convinced that personal instincts are superior to expert counsel. He routinely undermines institutions like the Federal Reserve, publicly attacks international economic bodies such as the WTO, and treats trade as a zero-sum game. His policies, lacking in consistency and long-term logic, have already begun to erode global trust in American reliability — both as a trade partner and as a steward of global finance. From trade policy to global shockwave The world's largest economy cannot afford this kind of unpredictability. In contrast to Jackson and Churchill — whose economic errors had localised effects — Trump's decisions ripple through complex global supply chains, rattle markets, and stoke geopolitical tensions. His tariff wars have hit not just China but also traditional allies like the European Union, Canada, and Japan. The result? A deeply fragmented global trade environment. Allies no longer assume continuity in American policy. Investment flows hesitate. Emerging markets, many of them reliant on exports, suffer. Trump's economic strategy — fuelled by bravado and nostalgia — is incompatible with the integrated global system the US itself helped create. The theatre of strength, the reality of retreat Richard S Grossman rightly points out that Trump's view of tariffs is rooted in a misunderstanding of history. He romanticises the 19th-century Gilded Age, a time of high tariffs, while overlooking its accompanying instability, monopolism, and deep inequality. Trump's policies risk bringing back that era — not as triumph, but as cautionary tale. What truly binds Jackson, Churchill, and Trump is not simply error, but ego — the conviction that personal willpower can override economic complexity. But in Trump's case, this ego is magnified by media spectacle and a disdain for dissent. His economic policy is crafted not through consultation or deliberation, but through impulse. The coming hammer blow The most dangerous consequence of Trump's economic hubris is not just stagflation or market volatility — it is the collapse of global trust. Trust is the glue of the international economic system. When nations can no longer rely on US commitments, the temptation grows to seek alternatives — whether in digital currencies, alternative trade blocs, or parallel security arrangements. This erosion of trust could mark the twilight of US economic leadership. While the dollar remains dominant and American markets deep, overreach can accelerate decline. The American century — once built on openness, innovation, and stable leadership — now risks ending in retreat, with tariffs not as tools of power but as symbols of decline. Trump's economic nationalism, then, is not just policy. It is performance. And like all performances, it ends. The question is whether the final curtain will fall on American economic primacy — or whether institutions, allies, and economists can intervene in time to prevent the hammer blow from becoming permanent. * Phar Kim Beng, PhD, is professor of Asean studies at the International Islamic University Malaysia. ** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Pentagon chief warns of ‘real and imminent' China threat at Shangri-La Dialogue, urges Asian allies to boost defence budgets
In defence forum debut, Hegseth calls for Asian allies to step up Speech could cause consternation among allies Pentagon chief has blasted European allies in past for not spending enough SINGAPORE, May 31 — US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth warned today that the threat from China was real and potentially imminent as he pushed allies in the Indo-Pacific to spend more on their own defence needs. Hegseth, speaking for the first time at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, Asia's premier forum for defence leaders, militaries and diplomats, laid out how the Indo-Pacific region was a priority for the Trump administration. 'There's no reason to sugar coat it. The threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,' Hegseth said, in some of his strongest comments on the Communist nation since he took office in January. He added that any attempt by China to conquer Taiwan 'would result in devastating consequences for the Indo-Pacific and the world', and echoed Trump's comment that China will not invade Taiwan on the president's watch. China views Taiwan as its own territory and has vowed to 'reunify' with the democratic and separately governed island, by force if necessary. It has stepped up military and political pressure to assert those claims, including increasing the intensity of war games around Taiwan. Taiwan's government rejects Beijing's sovereignty claims, saying only the island's people can decide their future. 'It has to be clear to all that Beijing is credibly preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo Pacific,' Hegseth said. But his comments on allies needing to increase spending is likely to cause consternation amongst partners, even though experts said Hegseth would face a relatively friendly audience in Singapore. China's Defence Minister Dong Jun has decided to skip the major Asian security forum and Beijing has sent only an academic delegation. Hegseth has previously taken aim at allies in Europe for not spending more on their own defence. In February, he warned Europe against treating America like a 'sucker' while addressing a press conference at Nato headquarters in Brussels. Yesterday, while delivering the keynote address at the Shangri-La Dialogue, French President Emmanuel Macron said Hegseth was justified in asking Europe to increase its own defence spending. 'It's hard to believe, a little bit, after some trips to Europe that I'm saying this, but thanks to President Trump, Asian allies should look to countries in Europe as a new found example,' Hegseth said. 'It doesn't make sense for countries in Europe to do that while key allies in Asia spend less on defence in the face of an even more formidable threat, not to mention North Korea.' US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth holds a multilateral meeting with Asean defence leaders on sidelines of the IISS Shangri-La Dialogue security summit, in Singapore May 30, 2025. — Reuters pic 'Stepping up' Spending on weapons and research is spiking among some Asian countries as they respond to a darkening security outlook by broadening their outside industrial partnerships while trying to boost their own defence industries, according to a new study by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, the organisation that runs the Shangri-La Dialogue. The spike comes even as the nations spent an average of 1.5 per cent of GDP on defence in 2024, a figure that has kept relatively constant over the last decade, it said. Hegseth suggested during his speech that allies in Europe focus on security on the European continent, so that Washington could focus on the threat posed by China in the Indo-Pacific, alongside more participation by allies in Asia. 'We're pushing our allies in Europe to own more of their security — to invest in their own defence... Thanks to President Trump, they are stepping up,' Hegseth said. But some of the Trump administration's early moves in the Indo-Pacific have raised eyebrows. The US moved air defence systems from Asia to the Middle East earlier this year as tensions with Iran spiked — an effort which took 73 C-17 flights. Hegseth, a former Fox TV host who has spent much of his first months in office focused on domestic issues, spoke to the international audience about issues that he has frequently talked about when in the United States, like 'restoring the warrior ethos.' 'We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace or adopt our politics or ideology. We are not here to preach to you about climate change or cultural issues,' Hegseth said. 'We respect you, your traditions and your militaries. And we want to work with you where our shared interests align.' — Reuters
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Sean ‘Diddy' Combs' legal team uses Instagram posts to question credibility of witness
NEW YORK, May 31 — The defence for Sean 'Diddy' Combs yesterday used upbeat social media posts to attack the credibility of one of the women accusing the music mogul of sexual assault during his federal trial in New York. 'Isn't it true that Mr Combs never had unwanted nonconsensual forcible contact with you?' lawyer Brian Steel said to a former Bad Boys Records assistant testifying under the pseudonym Mia, during questioning that included displays of her personal social media posts. The testimony came as US President Donald Trump pondered aloud if he would offer 55-year-old Combs a pardon during a press conference at the White House yesterday, saying 'I don't know, I would certainly look at the facts.' The facts are still unfolding in a trial that is expected to last into summer, in a case that revolves around Combs's relationship with his former girlfriend, singer Casandra 'Cassie' Ventura. Earlier in the trial Ventura detailed years of alleged abuse and coercive, drug-fueled sex marathons with male prostitutes known as 'freak-offs.' This week, Mia described how her job between 2009 and 2017 became a nightmare as she worked to protect Ventura from Combs's fits of rage, or care for her after the attacks, tending to 'busted lips,' 'bruises' and 'a black eye.' Combs would tell Mia to 'go take care of her,' adding that 'we were not allowed' to go out until her injuries healed enough to conceal, Mia testified Thursday. She also testified that she personally endured abuses, including rapes, while working for Combs, recounting the painful and traumatic episodes with her head bowed. Instagram vs reality During cross examination yesterday, Steel confronted Mia with her social media posts, where she presented a much more positive image of her relationship with her boss. On a courtroom screen displaying Mia's Instagram posts, she called Combs 'an extraordinary cultural phenomenon' and shared affectionate messages on his birthdays. Steel asked how she could publish such posts about a man she now accuses of sexual assault. 'Of course you post the great times,' Mia said. 'Instagram is a place to show how great your life was even if it's not true.' After Mia read her posts aloud, Steel questioned Mia's allegations, to which she replied twice 'everything I said in this courtroom is true.' 'Ask any abuse victim's advocate and they could explain it to you much better than I could.' On Thursday, Mia testified that Combs subjected her to 'sporadic' instances of sexual violence, including at the artist's 40th birthday party at the Plaza Hotel in New York and his private residence in Los Angeles. 'I just froze, I didn't react, terrified and confused,' Mia said about one of the assaults. 'He was the boss or the king, very powerful person,' she said. 'This is years and years before social media, Me Too, or any sort of example where someone had stood up successfully to someone in power such as him,' she added. At the conclusion of the court's proceedings, jurors will have to determine whether that Grammy-winning artist and producer has used his fame, wealth and influence in hip-hop to support a criminal enterprise and sexual trafficking. — AFP
