EU watchdog wants insurers’ crypto holdings 100% covered, citing volatility
The European Union’s insurance authority has proposed a blanket rule that would mandate insurance firms to maintain capital equal to the value of their crypto holdings as part of a measure to mitigate risks for policyholders.
The new proposal — made by the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority in a Technical Advice report to the European Commission on March 27 — would set a far stricter standard than other asset classes, such as stocks and real estate, which don’t even need to be half-backed.
“EIOPA considers a 100% haircut in the standard formula prudent and appropriate for these assets in view of their inherent risks and high volatility,” it said in a separate statement.
Such a measure would fill a regulatory gap between the Capital Requirements Regulation and Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), EIOPA said, noting that the European Union’s regulatory framework for insurers currently lacks specific provisions on crypto assets.
Circle argued in January that a blanket 100% stress factor on crypto assets didn’t account for lower-risk stablecoins. Source: Circle
EIOPA outlined four options for the European Commission to consider — one: make no changes; two: mandate an 80% “stress level” to crypto assets; and three: mandate a 100% stress level to crypto asset.
The stress level percentages determine how much capital firms need to hold to stay solvent.
The fourth option called on the European Commission to consider the risks of tokenized assets more broadly.
EIOPA said option three would be the most appropriate option.
“An 80% stress to the value of crypto-asset exposures does not appear sufficiently prudent,” whereas “a 100% stress is more appropriate and aligns with one of the approaches to the transitional treatment of crypto-assets under CRR,” EIOPA said.
The 100% stress refers to the assumption that the crypto asset prices could fall by 100% and that diversification — spreading the risk across different assets — wouldn’t not reduce this stress. EIOPA pointed out that Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH) have fallen 82% and 91%, respectively, in the past.
A 100% capital charge for crypto assets would reflect a far stricter approach compared to stocks, which range between 39% and 49%, and real estate, which incurs a 25% capital charge, according to solvency capital requirements laid out in the Commission Delegated Regulation 2015/35.
EIOPA said a 100% capital charge for crypto asset-related (re)insurance undertakings shouldn’t be “overly burdensome” and that there would be no material costs for policyholders.
“The capital requirements would fully capture the risk of crypto-asset with a positive impact on policyholder protection in case there are material exposures in the future.”
Related: Tabit offers USD insurance policies backed by Bitcoin regulatory capital
EIOPA acknowledged that the share of crypto-asset (re)insurance undertakings accounts for just 655 million euros or 0.0068% of all undertakings in Europe — even referring to it as “immaterial.”
“At the same time crypto assets are high risk investments which may result in total loss of value,” EIOPA said, explaining why it recommends option three.
Luxembourg and Sweden could be hit hardest by the proposed rule
Insurers in Luxembourg and Sweden are likely to be the most affected, according to a Q4 2023 report cited by EIOPA, which found that these two countries accounted for 69% and 21% of all crypto asset-related exposures among (re)insurance undertakings.
Ireland, Denmark and Liechtenstein also accounted for 3.4%, 1.4% and 1.2% of the undertakings.
Most of these undertakings are structured within funds, such as exchange-traded funds, and held on behalf of unit-linked policyholders, EIOPA noted.
Split of crypto-asset exposure proxy per European country in Q4 2023. Source: EIOPA
EIOPA, however, acknowledged that a broader adoption of crypto assets in the future may require a more “differentiated approach.”
Magazine: Crypto fans are obsessed with longevity and biohacking: Here’s why
Lawmakers in the US Senate Banking Committee voted to advance the nomination of Paul Atkins to be a member of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), paving the way for a full floor vote in the chamber.
In an April 3 executive session of the banking committee, lawmakers voted 13-11 for Atkins to serve two consecutive terms as an SEC commissioner, taking over former Chair Gary Gensler’s term and another term ending in 2031.
Atkins’ nomination will soon go to the Republican-controlled Senate for a full floor vote, where many experts suggest he is likely to be confirmed.
Senator Tim Scott addressing lawmakers on April 3. Source: US Senate Banking Committee
Before calling for a vote, committee chair Tim Scott said Atkins would bring “much-needed clarity for digital assets.” Ranking member Elizabeth Warren reiterated earlier concerns about Trump’s SEC pick helping “billionaire scammers” like former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried and Tesla CEO Elon Musk “actively trying to destroy” federal agencies.
This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.
The US Treasury Department sanctioned eight cryptocurrency wallet addresses linked to Russian crypto exchange Garantex and the Houthis.
The United States Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned eight crypto addresses that data from blockchain forensic firms Chainalysis and TRM Labs had linked to the organizations. Two are deposit addresses at major crypto platforms, while the other six are privately controlled.
Visualization of transaction flow related to OFAC sanctions. Source: Chainalysis
The addresses in question reportedly moved nearly $1 billion worth of funds linked to sanctioned entities. Most of the transactions funded Houthi operations in Yemen and the Red Sea region.
Slava Demchuk, a crypto-focused money laundering specialist and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime consultant told Cointelegraph that “the inclusion of Houthi-linked wallets reflects a broader recognition of crypto’s role in geopolitical conflicts and terrorism financing.” He added:
“The implications are far-reaching — compliance frameworks must adapt swiftly, attribution efforts will intensify, and decentralized platforms may face increased scrutiny.“
Demchuk highlighted that the situation reshapes the regulatory landscape. According to him, crypto “is now firmly within the scope of international security.
Who are the Houthis?
The Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, are a Yemeni political and armed movement that emerged from the Zaidi Shia community. Originating as a revivalist and reformist group, they later became a major force in Yemen’s ongoing conflict.
Related: US DOJ says it seized Hamas crypto meant to finance terrorism
In recent years, the Houthis have engaged in attacks against both military and civilian vessels in the Red Sea with missiles and drones. In January, US President Donald Trump designated the group as a foreign terrorist organization.
The announcement noted that “the Houthis’ activities threaten the security of American civilians and personnel in the Middle East, the safety of our closest regional partners, and the stability of global maritime trade.” The group was recently struck by a US bombing campaign.
Related: Binance claims’ no special relationship’ with Hamas, argues to dismiss lawsuit
Garantex: Russia’s crypto laundromat
Garantex is a Russian crypto exchange that was sanctioned and shut down in early March after purportedly helping money-laundering efforts. At the time, Tether — the leading stablecoin operator and issuer of USDt — froze $27 million in USDt on the platform, forcing it to halt operations.
The platform has reportedly shifted millions of dollars as it sought to reboot under its new brand, “Grinex.”
In mid-March, officials with India’s Central Bureau of Investigation announced the arrest of Lithuanian national Aleksej Bešciokov, who was alleged to have operated the cryptocurrency exchange Garantex.
The arrest of the alleged Garantex founder was based on US charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business and conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
Magazine: Financial nihilism in crypto is over — It’s time to dream big again
Lawmakers in the US states of Minnesota and Alabama filed companion bills to identical existing bills that if passed into law, would allow each state to buy Bitcoin.
The Minnesota Bitcoin Act, or HF 2946, was introduced to the state’s House by Republican Representative Bernie Perryman on April 1, following an identical bill introduced on March 17 by GOP state Senator Jeremy Miller.
Meanwhile, on the same day in Alabama, Republican state Senator Will Barfoot introduced Senate Bill 283, while a bi-partisan group of representatives led by Republican Mike Shaw filed the identical House Bill 482, which allows for the state to invest in crypto, but essentially limits it to Bitcoin (BTC).
Twin Alabama bills don’t explicitly name Bitcoin
Minnesota’s Bitcoin Act would allow the state’s investment board to invest state assets in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies and permit state employees to add crypto to retirement accounts.
It would also exempt crypto gains from state income taxes and give residents the option to pay state taxes and fees with Bitcoin.
Source: Bitcoin Laws
The twin Alabama bills don’t explicitly identify Bitcoin, but would limit the state’s crypto investment into assets that have a minimum market value of $750 billion, a criterion that only Bitcoin currently meets.
26 Bitcoin reserve bills now introduced in the US
Introducing identical bills is not uncommon in the US and is typically done to speed up the bicameral legislative process so laws can pass more quickly.
Bills to create a Bitcoin reserve have been introduced in 26 US states, with Arizona currently the closest to passing a law to make one, according to data from the bill tracking website Bitcoin Laws.
Arizona currently leads in the US state Bitcoin reserve race. Source: Bitcoin Laws
Pennsylvania was one of the first US states to introduce a Bitcoin reserve bill, in November 2024. However, the initiative was reportedly eventually rejected, with similar bills also killed in Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming.
Related: North Carolina bills would add crypto to state’s retirement system
Montana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota and Wyoming are the five states thathave rejected Bitcoin reserve initiatives. Source: Bitcoin Laws
According to a March 3 report by Barron’s, “red states” like Montana have faced setbacks to the Bitcoin reserve initiatives amid political confrontations between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.
Additional reporting by Helen Partz.
Magazine: Financial nihilism in crypto is over — It’s time to dream big again
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway