Tag: CRYPTOS FoxBusiness

While efforts continue to track the funds stolen following the security incident at Bitget, it has been reported that the attackers have begun transferring some assets across chains via THORChain. SlowMist’s on-chain tracking platform, MistTrack, stated that the funds were used in exchange and cross-chain bridging transactions via THORChain.

MistTrack previously recalled that a significant portion of the approximately $1.2 billion in funds stolen in the Bybit attack was also moved between chains via THORChain. The platform stated that addresses linked to the Bitget attack have been publicly identified across the industry and are being actively tracked.

According to MistTrack, the fact that funds originating from a publicly known large-scale attack could still be processed through large-scale cross-chain transactions raises a new debate about the responsibility of decentralized protocols. The platform argued that the principle of “decentralization” should not be used as an automatic justification for processing known stolen funds, and that the responsibility that protocols like THORChain should bear in such cases needs to be discussed industry-wide.

Following this announcement, Bitget CEO Gracy Chen stated that the addresses associated with the attackers had been publicly shared and were still being actively monitored, and issued a formal call to THORChain. Chen requested that the protocol reject transactions originating from those addresses.

Chen said that decentralization is a design principle, but it should not be seen as “a shield to facilitate the movement of stolen funds with known origins.”

THORChain responded to the criticism by emphasizing that the protocol operates in a decentralized and permissionless manner, just like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and $BNB Chain. While expressing regret over the Bitget attack, the team questioned, “How much responsibility should Bitcoin, Ethereum, and $BNB Chain bear when processing known stolen funds?”

*This is not investment advice.

Strategy founder Michael Saylor proposed a comprehensive policy framework for the digital economy, arguing that Bitcoin should be more broadly integrated into the banking and insurance systems.

In his published article, Saylor stated that artificial intelligence will significantly increase the productivity of individuals and businesses, and that the digital asset era needs a “digital rights declaration.” According to Saylor, individuals and companies should have five fundamental rights regarding the creation, issuance, holding, transfer, and use of digital assets.

Saylor, who advocates for simplifying the rules regarding digital asset issuance, said that applying different disclosure obligations based on project size could lower the cost of accessing finance for companies. Saylor suggested that this approach could help approximately 10 million new companies access capital.

Saylor also stated that a clear regulatory path should be created to allow banks, fintech companies, and technology platforms to issue digital dollar products. He argued that organizations issuing digital dollars should also be able to compete on terms of yield.

Saylor, who described Bitcoin as “digital capital,” called for banks to be allowed to offer Bitcoin custody services and provide Bitcoin-backed loans. He also said that a viable regulatory framework should be created so that insurance companies can incorporate Bitcoin into their balance sheets and product designs.

Saylor argued that the 1,250% risk weighting applied to some crypto asset risks under Basel regulations is too strict. He stated that regulations should differentiate between client-based custody services, Bitcoin-backed loans, and banks’ own Bitcoin positions, adding that bank adoption of Bitcoin could be a significant catalyst for the sector’s growth.

Saylor, also touching upon tokenized securities, said that simply moving existing securities onto the blockchain is not enough. He argued that investors should be able to store their assets directly, transfer them freely, and choose different custody or lending service providers.

Regarding privacy, Saylor stated that ordinary and legitimate transactions under $10,000 should not be automatically reported to government agencies simply because they involve the transfer of money or digital assets.

According to Saylor, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the U.S. Treasury Department, banking regulators, and the White House will play a key role in advancing reforms over the next two years.

Saylor, who also criticized the Clarity Act, argued that the regulation placed too much emphasis on restrictions.

*This is not investment advice.

Wall Street Wants the Real Thing Onchain

Investors can already buy tokens carrying the names and price movements of U.S. stocks. There’s a caveat, owning one doesn’t necessarily make you a shareholder. Bullish, Equiniti, Alpaca, Apex Fintech Solutions and Drivewealth formed the Issuer Sponsored Token Coalition on Sept. 24 to change that.

Instead of another crypto wrapper tracking a stock’s price, the group wants tokens tied to a company’s official shareholder register, meaning the onchain record would represent actual ownership rights rather than simply mirror what a share is worth.

Drivewealth CEO Naureen Hassan put the distinction plainly: “Much of what’s marketed today as ‘tokenized equity’ isn’t equity at all. Investors think they own the share, and they don’t.” That difference gets right to the heart of Wall Street’s tokenization experiment. Putting a stock price onchain is one thing. Putting the stock itself there, complete with the legal machinery attached to ownership, is another.

From the Shareholder Book to the Blockchain

Traditional tokenized-stock models often start with a broker holding real shares in custody and minting tokens against them 1:1. The token can provide economic exposure to the stock and, depending on the setup, pass along dividends. But the token holder isn’t necessarily listed on the company’s official shareholder register. That can leave voting rights, proxies and corporate actions sitting in a gray area.

Issuer-sponsored tokenization takes a different route. The public company and its transfer agent are directly involved, tying the token to the official ownership record so voting, dividends, stock splits and other shareholder rights can travel with it. The timing isn’t happenstance.

On Sept. 17, the SEC opened a five-year Innovation Exemption allowing certain Tokenized Securities Venues to operate permissioned automated market makers and liquidity pools for tokenized National Market System stocks. There’s a big condition. Basically, qualifying tokens must provide the same rights and privileges as traditional shares. Tokens that merely track a stock’s price don’t qualify.

Wall Street’s Plumbing Meets the Blockchain

The coalition brings together much of the machinery needed to make that distinction work in practice. Equiniti, which the crypto exchange firm Bullish agreed to acquire in May, serves nearly 3,000 issuer clients and more than 20 million shareholders. Transfer agents maintain the official shareholder books, making Equiniti an important bridge between an issuer’s records and whatever eventually lives onchain.

Alpaca already sits on the other side of the equation. Reporting through mid-2026 put the broker at roughly 94% of tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs, backed by more than $1.5 billion in underlying shares held in custody. Apex provides clearing and broker-dealer infrastructure, while Drivewealth supplies U.S. stock access to investing platforms around the world.

The group plans to tackle technical standards, settlement, custody and interoperability between traditional market infrastructure and blockchains. Members will also meet public-company issuers at the New York Stock Exchange on Oct. 27. No new tokenized stock launched with the coalition.

That’s the curious part. Before Wall Street can put real shares onchain, it first has to make sure a token saying you own one actually means you do.

Senior trader Peter Brandt stated that he maintains his long-standing skepticism towards $XRP, adding that developments within the Ripple ecosystem and collaborations with banks have not changed his view.

Brandt argued that a fundamental distinction should be made between Bitcoin and $XRP. The experienced trader characterized Bitcoin primarily as a “store of value,” while viewing $XRP as a crypto asset focused on transactions and usage.

Brandt stated that while Bitcoin is a speculative tool today, it also possesses store-of-value properties, but he used a rather harsh expression regarding $XRP. The experienced trader, distinguishing Bitcoin from use-oriented assets like $XRP, directly referred to $XRP as a “dumb coin.”

During the interview, the interviewer reminded Brandt of Ripple’s collaborations with banks worldwide and the company’s recent progress, asking if his views on $XRP had changed. Brandt, however, maintained his skepticism towards $XRP.

Brandt first drew attention to $XRP’s supply, arguing that there were question marks regarding the total supply and whether it would expand in the future. However, he acknowledged that $XRP could be used cheaply and effectively in transactions.

However, according to Brandt, the fact that $XRP is a useful trading instrument doesn’t automatically mean the token should become more valuable. Brandt cited the US dollar as an example, saying that while the dollar can also be used very effectively in transactions, people don’t expect it to appreciate in value simply because of that.

The experienced trader stated that this is also his main argument regarding $XRP, saying, “Just because something can be used in transactions doesn’t automatically mean it has to be more valuable.” According to Brandt, the real question mark for $XRP is at what point its use for transactions will translate into real economic value for the token.

Brandt also argued that cryptocurrencies should be categorized according to their use cases. He stated that transaction-focused assets like $XRP and store-of-value assets like Bitcoin should not be evaluated using the same valuation logic, and placed networks like Ethereum, on which applications can be built, in a separate category.

However, Brandt spoke more positively about Ethereum and Solana compared to $XRP. Describing Ethereum as a “good asset,” the trader said he believes both Ethereum and Solana have the potential to reach higher levels. He also stated that he prefers Bitcoin to hold the majority of his cryptocurrency portfolio.

*This is not investment advice.

US spot $XRP exchange-traded funds saw around $38 million in two trading sessions, showing a fresh sign of investor demand.

$XRP has also recovered to around the $1.56 price level, but it has yet to overcome selling pressure near the $1.60 price level. It must overcome this level before the latest rise it is seeing can develop into a stronger one.

Bitwise leads latest $XRP ETF inflows

$XRP ETFs saw $14.89 million in net inflows on September 24, according to SoSoValue data. This was after it saw around $23.17 million in the previous session, bringing the two-day total to just over $38 million.

Bitwise’s fund led the latest daily inflows with $9.91 million. Franklin Templeton followed with $4.98 million, while no net movement could be seen from the other listed products.

The five funds now hold a combined $1.70 billion in assets. Their cumulative net inflows have reached $1.76 billion.

Bitwise’s $XRP holdings have also grown. The fund held 401.42 million tokens on September 23, which is up by 14.18 million from two days earlier.

Its $XRP was worth about $613.89 million, according to Bitwise’s official fund page.

$XRP price faces its next test at $1.60

$XRP traded near the $1.56 price level at the time of this writing, having gained about 2% during the session.

The price has recovered from its recent dip, and it remains above the levels that have supported its rebound. Buyers have also returned, and they have done this with stronger trading activity.

The next challenge now sits around the $1.60 price level. It has approached this area on different occasions, but sellers have not allowed it to hold above that level.

A convincing move through the $1.60–$1.65 price region would show that buyers remain in control. It could also give $XRP room to extend its recovery.

For now, the $1.50 price level is the nearest level to watch if the price drops. If it holds above it, this would help it to preserve the short-term momentum.

If it falls below the $1.50 level, it would make the recovery less convincing and could bring the price back towards the $1.43 price area.

---

Final Summary

• $XRP ETFs attracted approximately $38 million over two trading sessions.
• $XRP has recovered to $1.56 but still faces resistance between $1.60 and $1.65.

---

Privacy has become a practical concern in recent months as developers try to make cryptocurrencies useful for payroll, business payments and everyday spending. Ordinary bitcoin transactions permanently expose amounts and addresses, but once an address is linked to a company or person, other payments associated with it become easier to follow.

Ethereum is also reviewing a proposal for a shared private pool that would let people transfer ether and other tokens without publicly revealing payment details. Its authors cite payroll, treasury management and donations among the uses poorly served by fully public transactions.

How Zcash works

Zcash lets users choose between transparent payments, whose addresses and amounts are public, and shielded payments that encrypt those details. Its shielded pools held about 4.9 million $ZEC on Friday, up 14% from July 30, according to CoinDesk calculations using ZecStats data. That represents roughly 29% of issued coins, worth about $7.8 billion following the rally.

Zcash recorded roughly 63,000 shielded transactions last week, its busiest week for private transfers since 2022 and fourth-highest on record. Across the network, reported transfer volume exceeded $23 billion, the largest weekly total since 2021 and second-highest in its history.

Zcash has attracted both investor money and attention amid those metrics. By early September, $ZEC had gained more than 2,300% over the preceding year and crossed $1,000. It extended the rally above $1,600 on Wednesday.

An $XRP Ledger upgrade expected to activate Sept. 29 has been pushed back by at least 10 days after validator support briefly fell below the level required to turn it on.

The feature, called Batch, would let users submit up to eight transactions together. Its all-or-nothing option could let a buyer pay for a tokenized asset and receive it in one operation, preventing either side of the trade from completing alone.

RippleX’s head of engineering, Ayo Akinyele, previously told CoinDesk that projects were being built around Batch and that Ripple would share more about work with asset managers once the feature went live.

“Some projects are already being built with Batch in mind, so activation would allow that work to move closer to production,” he said. He did not name the partners or give launch dates.

The corrected upgrade, formally named BatchV1_1, regained support from 30 of 35 trusted validators on Sept. 25, according to the XRPL amendment dashboard. That started a fresh two-week countdown, putting its earliest activation at Oct. 9 around 14:46 UTC if support holds.

CleanSpark, Inc. has closed a massive debt deal that puts fresh financial muscle behind its Bitcoin mining and data center ambitions. The Nasdaq-listed company confirmed that its subsidiary, CSDC Finance I, LLC, finalized an offering of $2.276 billion in aggregate principal amount of senior secured notes, one of the largest capital raises tied to a Bitcoin infrastructure firm this year. The transaction, structured through this CleanSpark senior secured notes offering, gives the company a sizable new pool of capital to work with as it continues expanding its footprint in energy-driven data center development.

Key takeaways

• CleanSpark’s subsidiary CSDC Finance I, LLC closed a $2.276 billion offering of senior secured notes carrying a 7.875% interest rate and maturing in 2031.
• The notes were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933 and cannot be offered or sold in the United States without registration or an applicable exemption.
• CleanSpark says it controls more than 1.8 GW of power, land, and data center assets across the United States.
• The company frames its strategy around Bitcoin, energy, operational efficiency, and capital stewardship aimed at shareholder returns.
• CleanSpark points investors to its SEC filings, including its Form 10-K and multiple Form 10-Q reports, for detailed risk disclosures.

CleanSpark closes $2.276 billion senior secured notes offering

The headline number here is hard to miss: $2.276 billion. That’s the aggregate principal amount CSDC Finance I, LLC secured through this note issuance, according to CleanSpark’s own announcement. For a company operating in the Bitcoin mining and energy infrastructure space, this capital raise gives CleanSpark considerable dry powder to deploy.

Details of the debt issuance

CSDC Finance I, LLC is described as a wholly owned subsidiary of CleanSpark, and it’s the entity that formally closed the offering. This structure is common in large corporate debt deals, where a financing subsidiary issues the notes on behalf of the parent company. The deal had been announced prior to closing, meaning CleanSpark had already signaled its intent to raise this capital before finalizing the terms.

Terms and maturity of the notes

The notes carry a fixed interest rate of 7.875% and come due in 2031, giving CleanSpark roughly five years before repayment obligations kick in. That interest rate reflects the cost of capital for a company operating at the intersection of energy markets and Bitcoin mining.

Regulatory framework of the note offering

These notes are not available to the general public in the traditional sense — they sit outside standard US securities registration, which limits who can buy and trade them. CleanSpark stated plainly that the notes “have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933 and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration or an applicable exemption from registration.”

Exemptions from registration under the Securities Act

This is a routine but important distinction in large private note offerings. Without registration, the securities rely on specific legal exemptions to be sold within the US, a structure typically used for institutional or private placement transactions rather than retail investor access.

Limitations on sale and distribution in the U.S.

Because the notes fall outside standard registration, distribution is inherently restricted. This matters for anyone tracking CleanSpark data center financing activity, since it shapes who can actually hold or trade this debt — largely institutional players rather than everyday retail investors.

CleanSpark’s strategic positioning and business focus

CleanSpark describes itself as a market-leading data center developer, and the numbers behind that claim are notable. The company says it controls a portfolio of more than 1.8 GW of power, land, and data centers spread across the United States, positioned to take advantage of what it calls globally competitive energy prices.

Market leadership in data center development and Bitcoin energy infrastructure

According to the company, its business sits “at the intersection of Bitcoin, energy, operational excellence, and capital stewardship,” with infrastructure optimized “to deliver superior returns” to shareholders. This framing places CleanSpark squarely within the broader trend of Bitcoin energy infrastructure firms trying to turn cheap, reliable power into a scalable computing resource.

Portfolio size and infrastructure capacities

The 1.8 GW figure is significant in an industry where power access is often the biggest constraint on growth. Securing this level of energy capacity gives CleanSpark room to expand operations without having to negotiate new power deals from scratch — a competitive advantage in a sector where energy availability can make or break expansion plans.

Why this matters: raising over $2 billion through a US securities offering of this scale reflects institutional lenders’ willingness to participate in the transaction. The notes carry a 7.875% rate, reflecting both the scale of the deal and the risk profile associated with Bitcoin-linked energy businesses.

Forward-looking statements and associated risks

CleanSpark was careful to frame much of this announcement within forward-looking statement language required under US securities law. The company noted that statements about the notes, the offering’s completion, and the intended use of proceeds are inherently uncertain and based on assumptions that may not hold.

Potential factors impacting future performance

Among the risks CleanSpark flagged: volatility in the price of its own securities, shifts in the competitive and regulatory environment it operates within, changes to its business model or strategic initiatives, and variation in how competitors perform. The company also pointed to changes in laws and regulations affecting its operations, along with uncertainty around whether it can successfully execute its business plans and capture new opportunities.

References to SEC filings for detailed risk disclosures

CleanSpark pointed readers toward its Annual Report on Form 10-K covering the fiscal year that ended September 30, 2025, submitted to the SEC on November 25, 2025, along with several Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q addressing the fiscal quarters ending December 31, 2025, March 31, 2026, and June 30, 2026, in order to provide a more complete view of these risks. The company said these filings, along with subsequent SEC submissions, identify and address risks that could cause actual results to differ from what’s described in its forward-looking statements.

In practice, this level of disclosure is standard for a company issuing debt at this scale — regulators expect firms to spell out the uncertainties tied to evolving business models, energy price swings, and shifting regulatory frameworks around both securities law and energy operations. It’s a reminder that even a successful $2.276 billion raise doesn’t erase the underlying volatility that comes with operating in the Bitcoin mining and data center space.

FAQ

What did CleanSpark announce regarding its debt financing?

CleanSpark’s subsidiary closed an offering of $2.276 billion of 7.875% senior secured notes due 2031.

Are the senior secured notes registered under US securities law?

No, the notes are not registered under the Securities Act of 1933 and require exemptions for sale in the US.

What is CleanSpark’s core business focus as stated in the announcement?

CleanSpark is a market-leading data center developer focusing on Bitcoin, energy, operational excellence, and capital stewardship.

What risks does CleanSpark identify in connection with the note offering?

The company highlights risks including market volatility, regulatory changes, evolving business model, and uncertainties detailed in its SEC filings.

Article produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed by the editorial team.