Tag: CRYPTOS FoxBusiness

Fake $XRP Platform Vanished After Collecting Investor Funds

The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency announced July 30 that investigators had apprehended three people accused of operating a fraudulent $XRP investment platform, according to Korean newspaper Chosun. Authorities allege the group collected approximately 3.4 million $XRP from 71 investors between Oct. 16 and Oct. 23 before closing the website and disappearing.

The suspects allegedly promoted Fxrpntwork.com through portal blogs, online articles, and Youtube videos while promising guaranteed principal and monthly returns between 1.5% and 1.8%. Investors were instructed to move $XRP from South Korean exchanges through overseas platforms before transferring the assets into wallets controlled by the group.

Seoul police warned prospective cryptocurrency investors to verify official sources carefully before transferring assets to unfamiliar wallets or unverified platforms:

“Do not be misled by unverified information on YouTube or other platforms. Verify official sources before investing.”

Investigators arrested two 29-year-old suspects and plan to refer the case against a 34-year-old alleged accomplice to prosecutors while pursuing another 29-year-old suspect abroad. Police obtained an Interpol Red Notice for the overseas suspect and continued examining additional participants accused of building and promoting the fraudulent website.

Fraudsters Copied Flare and FXRP Branding

The alleged operators used the names Flare Network and FXRP to make their platform appear connected to legitimate blockchain infrastructure. Flare’s official FAssets system is designed to represent assets such as $XRP on the Flare network through overcollateralized mechanisms, allowing those tokens to participate in decentralized applications.

Ripple has warned that cryptocurrency impersonation schemes frequently copy trusted names, logos, videos, websites, and executive identities to create false credibility. Interpol has also identified financial fraud as an increasingly organized cross-border threat, with criminal networks using digital platforms and rapid transfers to move proceeds across jurisdictions before authorities can intervene.

Guaranteed Returns Remain a Common Crypto Fraud Signal

Impersonation scams involving $XRP have increasingly relied on counterfeit promotions, fabricated endorsements, and promises that victims will receive more tokens after sending funds.

Warnings about expanding $XRP impersonation schemes have emphasized that legitimate companies do not request cryptocurrency transfers through unsolicited promotions, particularly when scammers combine familiar branding with urgent instructions or guaranteed returns. A fraud case involving fake “no-risk” cryptocurrency returns further illustrates how guaranteed-profit claims can be used to attract victims.

FBI data on billions of dollars in cryptocurrency scam losses shows that cryptocurrency investment fraud continues producing substantial losses across borders, often through fake dashboards and fabricated account balances. An international cryptocurrency scam crackdown resulting in 276 arrests also targeted networks accused of moving victims’ assets through layered wallets, exchanges, and overseas financial channels.

South Korean investigators froze 17.3 billion won in virtual assets shortly after detecting the alleged scheme, although approximately 10 billion won moved during the investigation. Wallet analysis later identified 27.3 billion won in transfers connected to the addresses, prompting authorities to examine whether additional victims and accomplices remain unidentified.

$XRP‘s range trading continues as price chugs near the crucial $1 support. $XRP held above the $1.02 support for all of July, a feat that remained significant and saw it close the month in the green, gaining 2.18%.

$XRP faced choppy price action in July, albeit price held above the important level of $1. The price tested support in the range between $1.02 and $1.06 during the month, making this a crucial zone to watch. However, as August begins, bears seem to be testing this crucial price zone, seeking to break it.

The price of $XRP is currently $1.06, performing multiple tests in the $1.05 and $1.06 range within the last 24 hours.

card

$XRP recorded its first green month since April when it closed July up 2.18%. The $1.02 support is now being watched, with a decline potentially testing $1.00, a strong support for $XRP price. The positive sign is that $XRP has held above $1.00 so far in 2026. Resistance levels are at the weekly MA 200 and 50 at $1.80 and $1.21, respectively.

Key XRPL features to land in August

August may be a noteworthy month for $XRP Ledger upgrades, with five amendments set to arrive in the week ahead.

According to Jazzi Cooper, RippleX head of product, the upcoming release of xrpld 3.3.0 includes five amendments. These are Confidential MPT, which brings native privacy to Multi-Purpose Tokens (MPTs) on $XRP Ledger; Batch, which enables up to eight transactions across different accounts to execute atomically in a single ledger.

Permission Delegation allows institutions to delegate narrowly scoped transaction permissions without handing over full signing authority; Sponsored Fees and Reserves allow a sponsor such as a bank, issuer, or platform to pay $XRP transaction fees and account reserves on behalf of another account. Dynamic MPT allows issuers of Multi-Purpose Tokens to define, at issuance, exactly which properties may be updated over time.

According to Cooper, the xrpld 3.3.0 release is currently anticipated for next week.

Digital Asset Acquisition Corp., the SPAC seeking to combine with the parent of regulated bank Old Glory Bank, postponed the shareholder vote on the deal to 10 a.m. Eastern Time on Aug. 14 from July 31.

The original meeting date fell two days after the stated July 29 redemption deadline. DAAQ said in a July 31 filing that it would continue soliciting proxies but gave no reason for the delay.

The postponement did not automatically reopen redemptions. DAAQ’s final prospectus says investors could withdraw a redemption request through the deadline and afterward only with the company’s consent before closing. The filing does not say whether DAAQ has approved any post-deadline withdrawals.

Capital gap meets the cash test

The parent company at the center of the deal is Old Glory Holding Company. The bank was below two distinct capital thresholds going into the vote window. The final prospectus said its Tier 1 leverage ratio remained below the ordinary 4% adequately capitalized threshold as of June 29, putting Old Glory in technical noncompliance with a merger-agreement covenant. Old Glory considered that noncompliance nonmaterial, according to the filing.

A May 2024 consent order from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and Oklahoma State Banking Department sets a much higher requirement. It requires a 14% Tier 1 leverage ratio while the order remains in effect, along with regulator-reviewed capital and business plans and prior consent for dividends and bonuses. Separately, prompt-corrective-action rules restrict growth, capital distributions, acquisitions, branches and new business lines while the bank is undercapitalized.

The holding company’s consolidated financial disclosures say its capital is not expected to cover operating losses and minimum regulatory capital needs over the next 12 months, creating substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.

Management identifies cash from the merger as a mitigation, but says closing depends on other parties and market conditions and is not assured. The warning is not a declaration that the bank is insolvent or about to close.

The merger agreement requires at least $50 million of closing aggregate cash, calculated from trust cash remaining after redemptions, PIPE proceeds actually received, and proceeds to be received from other transaction financing. The party benefiting from the condition can waive it in a signed writing where lawful.

DAAQ reported $178.58 million of trust securities and 17.25 million redeemable public shares as of March 31. That historical balance does not show what will be available at closing. The postponement filing disclosed neither the July redemption tally nor the remaining trust cash.

The July 7 prospectus also said no PIPE or other transaction financing had been entered into or obtained. A June filing said DAAQ intended to negotiate non-redemption agreements, but the attached form identified no executed investor or committed share amount.

Approval timing remains uncertain. As of the final prospectus, a Federal Reserve application was pending, and Nasdaq approval of the combined company’s initial listing remained a closing condition. The July 31 filing announced neither approval, though its silence does not establish their current status.

DAAQ now has two more weeks to chase votes, while the deal’s cash picture remains murky. Investors need the redemption count and firm funding commitments to see whether it can clear the $50 million closing test, plus a fresh capital ratio to gauge Old Glory Bank’s shortfall.

Saylor Pushes Back on Viral Bitcoin Sale Claim

Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor pushed back Aug. 1 on reports that Strategy Inc. (Nasdaq: MSTR) had newly authorized up to $5 billion in bitcoin sales. His response followed a widely circulated social media post that presented the company’s existing capital-management framework as a fresh decision, prompting concern about potential selling pressure.

Saylor characterized the claim as recycled information and explained that the authorization was announced June 29 as part of the company’s Digital Credit Capital Framework. He reiterated that the program permits bitcoin sales for defined corporate purposes and that Strategy had announced no additional bitcoin sale authorization.

Filing Shows How the Program Operates

A July 6 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recorded 3,588 bitcoin sold for $216 million between June 29 and July 5, following Strategy’s first bitcoin sale since 2022 of 32 $BTC to help fund preferred-stock dividend payments. It later issued $263.5 million in common stock without purchasing additional bitcoin, opting instead to increase cash reserves and liquidity. Those actions reflected the company’s broader effort to balance bitcoin holdings with funding requirements tied to its growing portfolio of preferred securities.

In another X post on Aug. 1, Saylor clarified that Strategy announced the $BTC Monetization Program on June 29, 31 days before reporting its second-quarter results, rather than after posting a quarterly loss. He added that Strategy has never maintained a “never sell” policy, the program requires no bitcoin sales, and the company expects to remain a net buyer over time.

Under the framework, management retains $1.25 billion in unused reserve-building capacity and may direct bitcoin sale proceeds toward dividends, interest, repurchases, taxes, fees, and transaction expenses. Analysts have argued that this flexibility could lower the risk of forced sales during periods of financial or market pressure.

Investors Debate the Framework’s Shareholder Impact

Market observers remain divided over the structure. Supporters view it as a way to preserve liquidity and meet obligations without relying on hurried bitcoin disposals, while critics warn that supporting STRC near its $100 target could place added costs on common shareholders through higher dividends or further asset sales.

The June framework remains unchanged and authorizes sales only for specified corporate purposes. It has no fixed expiration date, and management may modify, suspend, or terminate it as market conditions, liquidity requirements, and corporate priorities change.

Any sale outside the framework’s approved purposes or established limits would require additional authorization from the company’s board.

That has changed. The same structure is now applied well outside crypto. Traders can hold perpetual positions on gold, major currency pairs, and equities and stock indexes, settled onchain, on venues that did not exist three years ago. Decentralized platforms list synthetic exposure to individual large-cap stocks alongside bitcoin and ether, and centralized exchanges are extending perpetual products into commodities and indices. The growth is not incremental.

According to CoinDesk Research, real-world-asset perpetual volumes reached a record $211 billion in May 2026, roughly sixteen times their level of about $12 billion in the fourth quarter of 2025, with equity perps alone climbing 121% month over month to $54 billion. CoinDesk has reported analysts who expect equity perps to eventually surpass crypto perps in volume. The direction is worth stating plainly: while crypto is said to be moving toward traditional finance, traditional assets are moving onto the market structure crypto built.

The reason is practical. Perpetual markets are continuous, globally accessible, and settled on infrastructure that does not close on weekends or at the end of a session. For an asset such as gold or a large-cap stock, that is a materially different proposition from the one incumbent venues offer: no borrowing desk to arrange a short, no contract to roll before expiry, no settlement window to wait through. The instrument spread because it is more useful to trade, not because it was marketed.

While exploits in crypto often grab headlines because of the sheer amount of money that gets stolen, Coates emphasized that many of these hacks actually originate outside of blockchain compromises themselves. “In many cases, it is an operational security issue or a Web2 issue that led to a key compromise,” he said.

This will only prove to be more difficult as artificial intelligence advances gives attackers better tools to exploit security practices.

“The social engineering piece is going to get a lot worse because of the power of AI and deepfakes,” Coates said. “We should expect full spoofed phone calls with voices of people that we know… there’s really no reason this won’t hyperscale.

To prevent that, Coates thinks crypto needs to come up with better systems that remain secure and work when people fall for these scams.

“You cannot fully prevent anyone from falling victim,” he said. “Eventually, you will be fooled because the cons are that good.” Organizations should thus have multiple layers of various degrees of security controls, so “when someone gets fooled, the other things take over to protect you.”

For the longer-term, the question of quantum computing largely looms on various crypto ecosystem’s futures, including that of Solana.

The future of the CLARITY Act, which aims to regulate the cryptocurrency market in the US, may depend on the Trump administration’s response to the new bipartisan ethics proposal.

According to cryptocurrency journalist Eleanor Terrett, the Trump administration is considering a counter-proposal drafted by Republican Senator Thom Tillis and Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego. This proposal would authorize state attorneys general to prosecute federal officials if the Justice Department fails to enforce ethics and conflict-of-interest rules.

The new proposal aims to address Democrats’ concerns that enforcing ethics clauses directly through the Justice Department, which is under the Trump administration, will not provide sufficient safeguards. A previous draft supported by the White House had drawn criticism for leaving enforcement authority with the Justice Department and for restrictions to expire in January 2029.

According to Terrett, the White House is expected to evaluate the proposal over the weekend. If the parties reach an agreement on the ethical provisions, the Senate vote on the CLARITY Act could proceed. However, the bill needs the support of 60 senators to pass the procedural vote, and currently, the necessary support has not yet been secured.

The bill, which passed the Senate Banking Committee with a 15-9 vote, aims to define the limits of SEC and CFTC authority over crypto assets and create a comprehensive market structure for the sector. The bill also includes settlement provisions regarding stablecoin yields and some legal protections for software developers who do not offer custody services.

The compromise reached in stablecoin regulation restricts interest-like payments based solely on holding tokens, while allowing rewards linked to transactions, payments, loyalty programs, or platform usage. This attempts to strike a balance between banks’ concerns about deposit outflows and crypto companies’ demands to maintain their reward programs.

If agreement on ethical provisions cannot be reached, the CLARITY Act’s progress in the Senate could be halted again, and regulatory uncertainty regarding stablecoin rewards and the implementation of the GENIUS Act provisions could persist.

*This is not investment advice.

The negative premium period on the US-based cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase, caused by the Bitcoin price falling below Binance’s, has reached its longest period to date.

According to CoinGlass data, the Coinbase Bitcoin Premium Index remained in negative territory for 75 consecutive days between May 19 and August 1. The index’s final value was recorded at -0.0959%, marking the longest period of negative premium seen since the indicator’s inception.

The previous record was a 40-day streak of negative premium recorded between January 16 and February 24. The current period also significantly surpassed the approximately 30-day period of negative premium seen during the “October 10 crash” last year.

The Coinbase Bitcoin Premium Index measures the difference between Bitcoin prices on Coinbase Pro and Binance. An index that remains in negative territory for an extended period indicates that the Bitcoin price on Coinbase is lower than on Binance. This typically signals weakening buying pressure or increasing selling pressure in the US market.

However, concluding that US institutional investors are exiting Bitcoin or that there is capital outflow from the country based solely on this indicator is not considered accurate. The index can also be affected by market liquidity, trading hours, investor profiles, and regional demand differences between exchanges.

*This is not investment advice.