Connect with us

Published

on

How Coinbase is looking to drive crypto voters to the polls

WASHINGTON — In the first few years after founding Coinbase, CEO Brian Armstrong shied away from Washington, D.C. But as his ambitions for his crypto exchange scaled, so too did his need to curry favor on Capitol Hill.

“About five or six years ago, we realized that crypto was getting big enough that we needed to go really engage actively in a policy effort, so I started coming out to D.C.,” Armstrong, who started Coinbase in 2012, told CNBC in September, following a day of meetings with political leaders.

Now, it’s practically Armstrong’s full-time job, and Coinbase’s money is all over the nation’s capital. The company was one of the top corporate donors this election cycle, giving more than $75 million to a group called Fairshake and its affiliate PACs, including a fresh pledge of $25 million to support the pro-crypto super PAC in the 2026 midterms. Armstrong personally contributed over $1.3 million to a mix of candidates up and down the ballot.

The tech industry’s biggest names have dotted Washington for years to try and push their agendas as their market caps have expanded, but for Coinbase, the matter is potentially existential.

SEC Chair Gary Gensler sued the firm last year over claims that it sells unregistered securities. A judge has since ruled that the case should be heard by a jury. Coinbase has fought back vociferously, and has also said that it wants to work with regulators to come up with a proper set of laws governing the nascent industry.

Meanwhile, Coinbase faces a growing list of competitors.

In the company’s latest quarterly earnings report last week, Coinbase missed on the top and bottom lines due to lower transaction revenues and a drop in subscription and services revenues. The shares plummeted 15%.

Data from CCData shows the exchange is losing spot market share to industry rivals like Crypto.com. And investors have many new options for accessing bitcoin and ethereum since the SEC greenlit spot funds this year. BlackRock’s ETF chief Samara Cohen told CNBC that 75% of its bitcoin buyers are crypto investors who are new to Wall Street.

Washington can’t save Coinbase from the competition, but the company is betting that, with favorable lawmakers in place, it can be the leader in a thriving industry rather than under the constant threat of lawsuits and Wells notices.

Armstrong said his D.C. visits normally took place once or twice a year. Then it got to be at least a quarterly occasion. And the pace has only increased.

“In the beginning, a lot of people didn’t know what crypto was,” Armstrong said of his earlier trips. Now, “the discussion has advanced, really, to, how do we pass clear rules, create legislation in the United States?”

Coinbase's legal chief on crypto's 2024 election spending

An SEC sans Chair Gensler

Paul Grewal, Coinbase’s chief legal officer, attended a fundraiser in San Francisco in June that raised $12 million for former President Donald Trump. It was hosted by venture capitalist David Sacks, a former Trump critic who became an outspoken supporter when he became the Republican nominee.

Grewal later joined a fundraiser in Nashville in July for the former president.

Trump has never shown much of an aptitude for the nuances of crypto, but he’s welcomed the industry’s financial support. He was applauded in the summer, when he vowed to fire Gensler as head of the SEC if he wins.

Grewal told CNBC that he’s had “many conversations” behind closed doors with both the Trump camp as well as Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign. Heading into Election Day on Tuesday, the candidates were in a virtual dead-heat.

“What I think we’re hearing from both campaigns is they get it,” Grewal said. “They understand that in swing state after swing state, there are enough voters who care about crypto that the candidate and their campaigns need to give voice to the concerns of those voters in supporting sensible rules for crypto, sensible legislation coming out of Congress, and that’s very encouraging.”

Grewal said that Trump “came earlier to this pro-crypto view,” but said that Harris recognizes the need for “an agenda focused on promoting sensible rules for crypto as much as any other technology.”

But Coinbase has stayed out of the presidential contest and focused its finances exclusively on Congressional races, as the company looks to help assemble a group of lawmakers with favorable views of the industry.

The Stand With Crypto Alliance, launched by Coinbase last year, has developed a grading system for House and Senate candidates across the country.

In the Ohio Senate race, for example, the organization gives Democratic incumbent Sen. Sherrod Brown, who chairs the banking committee, an “F” grade, versus an “A” grade for his Republican rival Bernie Moreno, a blockchain entrepreneur. Some $40 million of crypto money has been directed at defeating Brown, and one PAC has paid for five ads designed to boost awareness of Moreno. The race is very close and is crucial in determining which party will control the Senate.

Stand with Crypto, which has enrolled 1.4 million advocates across the country, is also working to mobilize digital asset owners living in swing states. This effort involved a cross-country bus tour through battlegrounds focused on getting these residents registered to vote.

Crypto climbs and bitcoin nears all-time high ahead of U.S. election

“It’s really extraordinary, given how razor-thin the margin of victory was in the 2020 election, to see crypto not only be an issue, but potentially a determinative issue in terms of the presidential cycle,” Faryar Shirzad, Coinbase’s chief policy officer, said in an interview.

Shirzad said that last year, he and his team concluded that the only way to get politics out of crypto was “to build our own political operation.” He said the goal is to “neutralization the politicization of the crypto issue and talk about it on the merits.”

Coinbase is far from alone. Nearly half of all corporate money raised this election comes from crypto firms.

Fairshake, one of the top spending PACs this cycle, told CNBC it’s raised around $170 million this election and disbursed approximately $135 million.

Ripple Labs is another one of Fairshake’s top political donors.

The company, which has spent more than $100 million battling Gensler, has given around $50 million to Fairshake. Several executives have also contributed to a mix of Democratic and Republican candidates in races across the country.

Ripple’s head of U.S. public policy, Lauren Belive, told CNBC at a fintech conference in Las Vegas that the company was motivated by the SEC’s overreach.

“We really wanted to put people into office that could learn about this technology and understand this technology, because we need Congress to act and to create federal statutes and not have this enforcement regime,” said Belive. She added the regulator has issued over 100 enforcement actions against crypto-aligned companies.

Crypto donor Chris Larsen on why he's giving millions to the Harris campaign

The crypto voter

Bitcoin slumps to $67,000 level on eve of U.S. election: CNBC Crypto World

Continue Reading

Environment

California announces lawsuit to resist Congress’ illegal attacks on clean air

Published

on

By

California announces lawsuit to resist Congress' illegal attacks on clean air

California will go to court to protect its clean air in the face of illegal attacks by republicans in Congress, said California Governor Gavin Newsom today.

Earlier today, the US Senate voted to revoke California’s waiver to set its own clean air rules using the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The House previously voted on a similar measure earlier this month.

For more than half a century, California has asked for and been granted this waiver that allows it to set its own emissions rules. Other states can follow California’s rules (and around 11 states do so, though that amount differs for each rule), as long as they do so exactly, and as long as those rules are stronger than the national ones.

It has this unique authority because California had its own Clean Air Act before the federal Clean Air Act was passed, and because the state had a unique problem with smog at the time and needed stricter rules than the rest of the country. So a carveout was made in the federal law in recognition of this, and California has been granted this waiver over 100 times after following proper rulemaking processes, and denied zero times.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

California’s clean air laws have been effective in reducing pollution, with vehicle-based pollutants dropping by 98% in the last 50 years. But of course, there’s still more to be done, as the LA area remains one of the smoggiest in the country due to factors including geography, high car dependency, heavy shipping traffic, and a lack of public transitt.

Despite the protestations of industry at the time and since, these rules have not made it impossible for them to operate, or sell cars, or profit from selling cars, in California or any other states that follow its rules.

California’s newest set of rules is set to save Californians, and the residents of other states who follow them, hundreds of billions of dollars on health, fuel, and maintenance costs through 2050 by encouraging electrification – and of course will save thousands of lives due to pollution reductions.

Republicans targeted not just California’s regulation on light duty vehicles (ACC II), but also some other truck emissions rules (the ACT and HD low-NOx Omnibus rules), with their CRA action today.

The problem is, Congress does not have the power to revoke this waiver, because that’s not how the CRA works.

The CRA is an until-recently rarely-used Act which allows Congress to disapprove of recent rules set by a federal government agency, and bar that agency from implementing similar rules.

However, California’s waiver is not a rule from a federal government agency, it’s a waiver from the EPA to let California set its own rules. Therefore, the CRA doesn’t apply, as acknowledged by the Senate Parliamentarian, the Government Accountability Office, manymany other legal observers, and even Congress itself, where Senator Mike Lee voted to rescind the waiver, despite saying clearly that it “cannot be reviewed under the Congressional Review Act (CRA).”

It’s also outside the 60 day window allowed for review by the CRA. Stack another violation of law on top of the first one.

So, today’s action by Congress is illegal, and California is now going to court to stop it.

California announces lawsuit to protect clean air

Hot on the heels of republicans declaring their desire to raise health and fuel costs for Americans, and their opposition to clean air, California Governor Gavin Newsom came out with a response, committing to taking the issue to court, as California has done (and won) in the face of previous republican attacks on clean air.

Gov. Newsom declared his opposition to the republican plan to “Make America Smoggy Again” today, saying:

“This Senate vote is illegal. Republicans went around their own parliamentarian to defy decades of precedent. We won’t stand by as Trump Republicans make America smoggy again — undoing work that goes back to the days of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan — all while ceding our economic future to China. We’re going to fight this unconstitutional attack on California in court.”

-California Governor Gavin Newsom

California Attorney General Rob Bonta also spoke at the press conference, saying:

“With these votes, Senate Republicans are bending the knee to President Trump once again. The weaponization of the Congressional Review Act to attack California’s waivers is just another part of the continuous, partisan campaign against California’s efforts to protect the public and the planet from harmful pollution. As we have said before, this reckless misuse of the Congressional Review Act is unlawful, and California will not stand idly by. We need to hold the line on strong emissions standards and keep the waivers in place, and we will sue to defend California’s waivers.”

In its press release, the California Governor’s Office pointed to the decades of precedent upholding California’s waiver, which is protected by the Clean Air Act. It also pointed out that the California Air Resources Board was established under Governor Ronald Reagan, and waivers were first granted by President Richard Nixon.

Both of these individuals are republicans, though from a time before the party had fallen quite so far down the rabbit hole of openly wishing harm on Americans.

California goes on to talk about how Congress’ actions make driving less affordable by raising fuel and health costs, hand over the keys to the auto industry to China by slowing down the US auto industry’s transition to EVs, and harm the climate leadership of California, the most productive state and the 4th largest economy in the world, which has grown by 78% since the year 2000 while cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20% since then.

California did not yet file the lawsuit, merely stated its intent to do so today. But courts have ruled in favor of California many times in the past in cases related to its authority to protect its own air, most recently doing so in December.

Clean air groups also offered their support for California’s lawsuit. The Environmental Defense Fund said:

“We stand with California’s leaders in protecting the health and safety of millions of people from harmful vehicle pollution. The state’s clean air standards for new cars and trucks protect children’s lungs and the communities where they grow up from smog and soot. They help farmers, builders, and others who work outdoors breathe easier. They reduce the climate pollution that fuels deadly wildfires, droughts, and other disasters. They save hard-earned money at the pump — and they save thousands and thousands of lives”

-Vickie Patton, General Counsel, Environmental Defense Fund

While the EDF did not yet join the lawsuit (as it hasn’t been filed), a number of nonprofits joined another California lawsuit against an illegal freeze on charging funds today, so we may expect future comment from the groups involved in that lawsuit.


On another note, republicans took action to cut the rooftop solar credit today. That means you could have only until the end of this year to install rooftop solar on your home, before republicans raise the cost of doing so by an average of ~$10,000. So if you want to go solar, get started now, because these things take time and the system needs to be active before you file for the credit.

To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – ad*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla Model Y compared to ‘Tesla killer’ Xiaomi YU7: it’s not even close

Published

on

By

Tesla Model Y compared to 'Tesla killer' Xiaomi YU7: it's not even close

Here we compare the specs of the new Tesla Model Y (Chinese version) to the newly unveiled Xiaomi YU7, a vehicle dubbed the ‘Tesla killer’.

For years, we laughed at people using the term ‘Tesla killer’ for new electric vehicles. To this day, even as Tesla’s sales are declining, it’s a bit dumb to use the term since no single EV is going to “kill” Tesla.

However, there’s one that is as close to do it as we have seen so far.

Earlier this year, we reported on how Xiaomi’s first electric vehicle, the SU7, had a major negative impact on Tesla’s Model 3 sales in China.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

At the time, we reported that the bigger concern for Tesla was that the Chinese electronics giant was now planning to launch a new EV, the YU7, aimed at competing against Tesla’s popular Model Y.

The Xiaomi YU7 was unveiled today, and we can now provide a side-by-side specs comparison that highlights Tesla’s problem in China.

Tesla Model Y vs Xiaomi YU7

The only thing that is missing about the YU7 as of the time of writing is the price, but it is expected to be very similar to Model Y and even likely to undercut by a bit.

Specs Tesla Model Y RWD Tesla Model Y Long Range AWD Xiaomi YU7 Standard (RWD) Xiaomi YU7 Pro (AWD) Xiaomi YU7 Max (AWD)
Launch Date January 2025 January 2025 July 2025 (expected) July 2025 (expected) July 2025 (expected)
Price (CNY) ¥263,500 ¥303,500 ~¥250,000 (est.) Not announced Not announced
Price (USD) ~$36,600 ~$42,200 ~$34,700 (est.) Not announced Not announced
Dimensions (L x W x H) 4,797 x 1,920 x 1,624 mm 4,797 x 1,920 x 1,624 mm 4,999 x 1,996 x 1,600 mm 4,999 x 1,996 x 1,600 mm 4,999 x 1,996 x 1,600 mm
Wheelbase 2,890 mm 2,890 mm 3,000 mm 3,000 mm 3,000 mm
Weight 1,921 kg 1,992 kg Not specified 2,405 kg 2,405 kg
Powertrain Single motor RWD Dual motor AWD Single motor RWD Dual motor AWD Dual motor AWD
Power Output Not specified (est. 200-250 kW) Not specified (est. 350-400 kW) 235 kW (315 hp) 508 kW (681 hp) 508 kW (681 hp)
0-100 km/h 5.9 s 4.3 s 5.8 s 4.3 s ~3.2 s
Top Speed 201 km/h 201 km/h 240 km/h 253 km/h 253 km/h
Battery Type LFP NMC LFP LFP Li-ion ternary (CATL)
Battery Capacity ~62.5 kWh ~80 kWh 96.3 kWh 96.3 kWh ~101.7 kWh
Range (CLTC) 593 km 719 km 835 km 750 km 760 km
Charging Architecture 400V 400V 800V 800V 800V
Seating Capacity 5 (7 optional) 5 (7 optional) 5 5 5
Key Features – Updated design – Rear seat touchscreen – FSD-capable – Same as RWD – Higher performance – Panoramic HUD – HyperOS – Larger cabin – Same as Standard – Higher performance – Top-tier performance – Premium interior (assumed)
Autonomous Driving FSD with AI4 computer FSD with AI4 computer Nvidia Thor chip (700 TOPS) Nvidia Thor chip (700 TOPS) Nvidia Thor chip (700 TOPS)

These specs show that the vehicles are extremely similar. The main difference is that Xiaomi packs a lot more batteries into the YU7 than Tesla puts into the Model Y, resulting in a significant difference in range.

To be fair to Tesla, it still dominates in efficiency as it does more with fewer batteries, which is an important skill to have. However, most customers don’t care about that and want a longer range. They don’t care how you make it happen.

Another big difference is the design.

As we previously reported, the Tesla Model Y design refresh looks similar to other Chinese EVs.

Based on the online reception, the Model Y is viewed as having a more tired design that is not as luxurious as the YU7.

That’s particularly true of the exteriors.

It’s a similar situation in the interior, but Xiaomi also outshines Tesla here with more technology, like display along the dash:

Both vehicles feature a large center display where most of the controls are located.

Electrek’s Take

I think Tesla is in trouble in China. The competition is impressive and there are vehicles that clearly directly target Model Y, Tesla’s bread and butter, and there’s no better example than this one.

The only thing missing is pricing, but if it’s priced as expected, which is like the SU7 to the Model 3, it will make it a no-brainer for most buyers.

Also, Xiaomi often gets mentioned as a ‘Tesla killer’ because the vehicles are not only ultra competitive with Tesla, but it is also producing them in high volumes.

SU7 outsold the Model 3 within a year of launching. The YU7 is coming to market within the next 2 months, and it should reach impressive volumes that are going to put pressure on Tesla’s Model Y sales by the end of the year.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Top $TRUMP holders head to crypto dinner with president that Democrats call ‘orgy of corruption’

Published

on

By

Top $TRUMP holders head to crypto dinner with president that Democrats call 'orgy of corruption'

Jonathan Raa | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Nick Pinto is a marketing director at his family’s law firm in New Jersey. He’s also a crypto trader who spent enough money on Donald Trump’s meme coin to win a spot at a private black-tie dinner with the president scheduled for Thursday night.

“I was kind of early in bitcoin and ethereum, so I’ve always been trading crypto,” said the 25-year-old Pinto, who claims he finished number 72 on the leaderboard for the token contest. “Once I saw the announcement that Trump was releasing a coin, I immediately started to purchase it.”

Pinto said in an interview that he spent half a million dollars on the $TRUMP meme token in order to attend the dinner, which is being held at President Trump’s private golf club in Potomac Falls, Virginia, near Washington, D.C. Pinto shared screenshots with CNBC that appear to back up his claim.

The $TRUMP coin, which has no attached asset or underlying value, was launched just ahead of the president’s inauguration in January and has drawn heavy scrutiny from Democratic lawmakers who say President Trump is profiting from his position of power.

The dinner was announced last month and promised to reward the top 220 token owners with “the most exclusive invitation in the world.” The top 25 finishers were also told they would get a private reception with the president, as well as a “special VIP tour.”

President Trump hosts meme coin megadonors amid conflict of interest claims

Democratic senators called the competition a blatant example of “‘pay to play’ corruption” — the coin jumped 50% after the dinner announcement. Earlier this week, the Senate advanced a Trump-backed crypto regulation bill called the GENIUS Act after getting enough Democratic support to clear a potential filibuster.

Guests for Thursday night’s dinner were required to complete a background check, according to a copy of the invitation viewed by CNBC. Attendees were instructed not to arrive before 5:30 p.m., with the dinner starting at 7 p.m. and expected to last three hours.

Pinto doesn’t know what his investment in $TRUMP will get him other than the dinner. He said he thinks the tokens will be usable in a digital Trump golf game that was announced in December and is expected to launch next month, according to a press release.

“There’s a few things that I want to ask him,” Pinto said. “I definitely want to find out if he’s going to want to use this coin in the game. That’s probably my top question, because not many people know about that game.”

The Trump coin team didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Because crypto wallets are pseudonymous, most participants in the competition appeared only as three- to four-letter usernames linked to cryptographic wallet addresses. Many of the winners are tied to international exchanges, according to blockchain analytics firm Inca Digital, raising concern that non-Americans may be paying for the opportunity to try and influence the U.S. president.  

While Pinto is going public about his participation, most of the identities tied to top wallets are unknown. Blockchain data shows that a majority of the top entrants used offshore exchanges barred to U.S. residents. An analysis by Bloomberg revealed that 19 of the top 25 wallets, and more than half of the top 220, are almost certainly owned by individuals operating outside the U.S.

The competition drew an estimated $148 million in purchases from supporters around the world, a massive fundraising haul for a digital asset launched just months ago. Among those attending is Justin Sun, the Chinese-born founder of the TRON blockchain, who confirmed this week that he is the contest’s top-ranked investor.

At current prices, Sun’s stake in $TRUMP is now worth more than $20 million. Sun was also one of the first major backers of World Liberty Financial, the Trump family’s crypto venture, buying at least $75 million of its native token “WLFI.”

In 2023, U.S. regulators accused Sun of illegally selling unregistered securities and artificially inflating token prices. A month into Trump’s second White House term, a federal court filing showed the SEC was in settlement talks with Sun to resolve the civil fraud charges.

Trump hosts exclusive gala for meme coin holders as lawmakers raise ethics concerns

Final leaderboard

MemeCore, a Singapore-based crypto network that was vocal in its quest to secure a spot at the Trump dinner, landed in second place with an investment of around $19.7 million, according to a post on X that the company later deleted. MemeCore didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Some buyers didn’t make the cut.

Freight Technologies, a Houston-based logistics company, said it spent $2 million on $TRUMP tokens as part of what it called a strategic push to “champion fair and free trade” across the U.S.-Mexico border. The company still finished in 250th place. Freight trades on the Nasdaq as a penny stock and has a market cap of about $6.5 million.

The final leaderboard was calculated using a time-weighted formula that factored in both the size and duration of each participant’s holdings. That means early buyers who held onto their tokens consistently, like Pinto, could outrank bigger last-minute spenders.

Investors in $TRUMP, like with other meme coins, have to be prepared for big ups and downs.

Immediately after its launch in January, the Trump coin spiked to a $15 billion market cap before crashing within days. It’s currently worth about $2.1 billion.

That volatility has created stark winners and losers. Blockchain data shows that more than $5.2 billion in profits flowed to the top wallets, while over 590,000 wallets — mostly small retail traders — collectively lost nearly $4 billion.

Since January, more than $324 million in trading fees have been routed to wallets tied to the project’s creators, according to Chainalysis. The token’s code automatically directs a cut of each transaction to these addresses, allowing the team to profit from ongoing activity. The blockchain analytics firm stopped tracking the president’s meme token about two weeks ago, citing a need to refocus resources on paying clients.

The Trump family has reaped enormous financial benefit. Roughly 75% of proceeds from World Liberty Financial and more than 80% of profits from the meme coin have gone directly to the Trump Organization and affiliated entities. The project has also generated hundreds of millions of dollars in trading fees.

Senator Chris Murphy, D-Conn., has introduced legislation that would ban sitting presidents from profiting off meme coins while in office.

In a press conference hours before the dinner, Murphy warned that “just because the corruption is playing out in public where everybody can see, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t rampant, rapacious corruption.” He called tonight’s event “maybe the most corrupt, of all of the corruption.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., went further, describing the gathering as “an orgy of corruption” and accusing Trump of using the presidency “to make himself richer through crypto.” She called for changes to the GENIUS Act that would bar any president from profiting off stablecoin ventures.

With Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress, Democrats have limited ability to force action.

In response to CNBC’s questions about the dinner, Deputy White House Press Secretary Anna Kelly said, “The president is working to secure good deals for the American people, not for himself,” adding that he “only acts in the best interests of the American public.”

Pinto, who paid $500,000 for his invitation and still holds most of his tokens, said the risk is worth it.

“I didn’t put in more than I’m willing to lose,” he said. “I’m fine if it goes to zero.”

WATCH: Bitcoin surges to new record high above $111,000: CNBC Crypto World

Bitcoin surges to new record high above $111,000: CNBC Crypto World

Continue Reading

Trending