Trump wins crypto bank license, White House seeks few good pirates

The bill would prohibit the OCC and other federal banking oversight agencies from issuing licenses to entities owned or controlled by a president, vice-president, spouses and children of these individuals, member of Congress, federal appointee or a “special Government employee.”

Ten other Senate Dems may have signed on as co-sponsors, and Trump critics may find it cute to call WLF “world bribery financial,” but this bill has approximately zero chance of passage in the current Congress.

Back to the top ↑

Treasury no longer interested in companies’ beneficial owners

Other Trump critics were quick to point out that WLF’s OCC approval came just days after Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) made the surprise announcement that it would “permanently remove the requirement for U.S. companies and U.S. persons to report beneficial ownership information to FinCEN under the Corporate Transparency Act.”

Not content with merely abolishing this requirement going forward, FinCEN also stated that it “will delete previously reported information by U.S. persons—now exempt from the reporting requirements—from the beneficial ownership information database.”

It’s perhaps worth noting that a UAE-linked investment fund’s purchase of a 49% stake in WLF, a few days before Trump took his oath of office in January 2025, didn’t become public knowledge for over a year. The UAE also loomed large in the $2 billion purchase of USD1 a few months after Trump’s inauguration, as well as the Witkoff-negotiated deal that followed, allowing the UAE to buy microchip technology previously under embargo.

While FinCEN’s shift was framed by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent as “a victory for common sense and American small businesses,” Sen. Warren called it “a gift to cartels, criminals, and U.S. adversaries that exploit shell companies to move millions through our financial system.” Warren noted that Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio once championed the rule as “the most significant anti-corruption and money laundering law in decades.”

Back to the top ↑

Avast, ye crypto swabs

Not content with turning the clock back to 2020, the White House appears set on returning America to the Middle Ages, or at least the 19th century.

On August 12, Trump issued a memo on Expanding Capabilities to Transnational Cyber-Enabled Crime, in which he vowed to unleash “the ingenuity of the private sector” against Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs) that are “harming American citizens.”

Full guidance on this plan is due in 60 days, but basically, the feds are looking to enlist would-be tech privateers who can meet “appropriate levels of technical proficiency,” pass a vetting process, and submit to a few other cursory inspections. Assuming they pass, these groups would be authorized to “conduct Cyber Surveillance Operations and Cyber Effects Operations against foreign Cyber-Enabled Transnational Criminal Organizations (CE-TCOs).”

The “cyber effects operations” cited above are defined as resulting in “the manipulation, disruption, denial, degradation, or destruction of information systems, networks, physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by information systems, or information resident thereon.”

Companies wouldn’t be allowed to engage in any action involving ‘critical outcomes,’ aka anything likely to result in loss of life or injury, or “rise to the level of use of force or armed attack under international law.”

And CE-TCOs would exclude any group that is “an institutional part of a foreign government or wholly operated under a foreign government’s direction.” So relax, North Korea’s state-sponsored Lazarus Group of crypto hackers, you’re off the hook.

The privateers’ activities would be overseen by reps from the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Homeland Security, each of whom will need to sign off on any action before it’s taken. Companies will have to sign contracts, “maintain a bond or escrow” of at least $1 million that would be forfeited should they fail to comply with the terms of their contracts.

Curiously, beyond the reference to contracts, the memo contains no specifics on how these private entities might be compensated for their cyber-defense of American citizens. Do they get to keep any or all digital assets that might be obtained from the cyber bad guys?

In a tweet promoting Trump’s memo, White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt appeared to suggest there was a more tangible reward to this than just the gratitude of the administration. “Letters of marque are in our Constitution, making privateers as American as apple pie.” Said letters expressly authorized pirates-turned-patriots to keep the booty they seized from enemy ships, so naked capitalism appears definitely in play here.

Witt added that “cybercrime cost Americans nearly $21B last year, up 26% YoY and climbing, with about a third of it involving crypto.” Trump’s directive, “while not crypto-specific, is a major step toward shutting down the scammers who exploit crypto to prey on Americans.”

Back to the top ↑

Chainalysis v TRM v USA

Some observers have suggested the would-be privateers might be better at surveillance than actual attacks. That said, you can probably eliminate blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis from joining the privateer parade, given that it’s just filed a lawsuit against the U.S. federal government.

On July 1, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) awarded a sole-source contract to blockchain sleuths (and Chainalysis rival) TRM Labs. The contract, worth nearly $95 million, is for “TRM forensic software and support services to support Homeland Security Task Force Investigations.”

A redacted copy of ICE’s filing explaining why it didn’t put the contract up for bids says Homeland Security identified TRM as “the only source that is uniquely positioned to deliver the [REDACTED]” needed by the agencies involved.

Another section of the filing indicates that the feds were seeking “advanced analytical and artificial intelligence (AI) platform support services, including skilled intelligence analysts and technology solutions capable of real-time monitoring, tracing, and disruption of illicit financial flows.”

On July 27, Chainalysis filed a complaint against the U.S. government protesting its “arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable decision” to conduct the sole-source bid. The filing was sealed due to it containing “confidential and proprietary information and trade secrets” that Chainalysis claims would cause “competitive harm” to the company were they made public.

TRM filed a motion to intervene the following day, and oral arguments are expected on September 2. The government has requested a final ruling by September 10 so that it can get on with the task at hand.

Back to the top ↑

Fairshake, dirty dealings

Finally, the crypto sector’s reputation as a free-spending force that politicians either kowtow to or face removal from office took another hit last Tuesday (11).

Fairshake, the largest crypto-focused political action committee (PAC), stayed out of Minnesota’s Democratic Senate primary race, but execs from Fairshake corporate contributors like Coinbase (NASDAQ: COIN) spent over $165,000 backing Angie Craig, who lost the race to Peggy Flanagan.

Craig lost despite outspending Flanagan by more than 4x, including $10 million from so-called ‘dark money’ groups that don’t reveal their backers. Flanagan’s supporters referenced Craig’s “crypto billionaire dark money backers,” and Flanagan herself made Craig’s crypto support an issue, saying her opponent was “funded by crypto and AIPAC [American-Israel Public Affairs Committee] and health insurance companies.”

Crypto groups like Fairshake have had their share of wins during the 2026 primary season, but they’ve also had some costly failures. Earlier this month, Fairshake’s Democrat-focused offshoot Protect Progress spent $2 million in a failed bid to secure incumbent Rep. Shri Thanedar’s spot on November’s ballot for Michigan’s 13th District.

In March, Fairshake et al spent $10 million in a losing bid to prevent Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton from securing the Dem nomination to replace the outgoing Sen. Dick Durbin.

Tuesday (18) brings the results of the Dem primary for Florida’s 24th District, where Protect Progress has spent over $2 million opposing Oliver Gilbert, a Miami-Dade County Commissioner looking to replace the retiring Rep. Frederica Wilson.

Ahead of that vote, some of the Protect Progress-funded anti-Gilbert TV commercials and mailers have been called out for “using fake Miami Herald headlines to make its case.” Making that allegation? The Miami Herald.

The ads in question paint Gilbert as supporting Trump’s immigrant deportation push and voting in favor of a $15 million plan to allow the Hard Rock Stadium to host FIFA World Cup matches, which the ads claim helped line the pocket of a “MAGA Donor’s Company.”

The Herald’s analysis of these ads found that the latter article doesn’t mention Gilbert by name (it was a unanimous County Commission vote), but the Fairshake ads “make it appear as though the entire story was about him.” The other ‘headlines’ rest on similarly shaky foundations.

In response, the Herald quoted Gilbert saying “what else would you expect from crypto con artists trying to buy a Democratic primary?” Punchbowl News’ Brendan Pedersen subsequently reported that Gilbert started running ads explaining how “Trump and his crypto con artist billionaires just put a target on my back” while he “fight[s] to protect seniors from crypto scams.” Perhaps, but recent polling shows Gilbert currently trailing state Sen. Shevrin Jones by double-digits.

Back to the top ↑

Watch: Blockchain’s big fix for affiliate marketing