Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao played it cool in the hours leading up to the hearing in District of Columbia District Court on Sept. 18, posting a picture of branded merchandise with a cheery message about the company’s interns.
He is likely to pay close attention to the court proceedings, however, as the disagreement between the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Binance.US is at a high pitch after a week of adversarial filings.
Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui is holding a hearing on the SEC’s motion to compel, which Binance has characterized as “unduly burdensome.” The SEC said that Binance is uncooperative, despite agreeing to a consent order on discovery in the SEC’s case against it for unregistered securities operations and other allegations.
Custody of Binance.US customer assets is one of the big questions being put forward by the regulator. SEC Office of Internet Enforcement chief John Reed Stark noted in an X post that Ceffu acknowledges being legally known as Bifinity in its “Terms of Use” page. Bifinity has been identified as part of Binance Group, Stark added. If that is the case, Binance.US customer assets are in practice custodied by Binance and in danger of being siphoned off, observers add.
SEC Lashes Out At Binance, Threatening To Seek A Contempt Order
The litigation war between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Binance continues to heat up exponentially.
Specifically, thanks to some limited “judicial unsealing,” (albeit amid lots of… pic.twitter.com/QhrifkACL4
Binance.US had agreed that only U.S. staff would have access to customer funds.
The newly unsealed sections of the complaint filed by the SEC auditor against Binance, Binance.US and CZ in June found:
“[It] was difficult and sometimes not possible to pull wallet balances en masse as of a historical point in time. This makes it very difficult to ensure the Company is full[y] collateralized at specific points in time.”
This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.
Taiwan could see its first stablecoin launched as early as the second half of 2026 as lawmakers advance new rules for digital assets, according to one of the country’s financial regulators.
According to a Focus Taiwan report on Wednesday, Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) Chair Peng Jin-lon said that, based on the timeline for passing related legislation, a Taiwan-issued stablecoin could enter the market in the second half of 2026.
Should the Virtual Assets Service Act pass in the country’s next legislative session, and accounting for a six-month buffer period for the law to take effect, it would lay the groundwork for the launch of a Taiwanese stablecoin.
Peng said the draft legislation was derived from Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) and would eventually allow non-financial institutions to issue stablecoins. Initially, however, Taiwan’s central bank and the FSC would restrict issuance to regulated entities.
Last year, Taiwan’s policymakers began enforcing Anti-Money Laundering regulations in response to alleged violations by crypto companies MaiCoin and BitoPro. As of December, however, regulated entities in the country have yet to launch a stablecoin pegged to either the US dollar or the Taiwan dollar.
In addition to the FSC’s advancement of stablecoin regulations, Taiwan’s policymakers are reportedly assessing the total amount of Bitcoin (BTC) confiscated by authorities. The move signaled that the nation could be preparing to launch its own strategic crypto stockpile.
Ju-Chun, a Taiwanese lawmaker, called on the government to add BTC to its national reserves in May as a hedge against economic uncertainty.
The country’s reserves include US Treasury bonds and gold, but no cryptocurrencies. Other countries, such as the US, have adopted policies that promote Bitcoin and crypto reserves.
Former US Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler renewed his warning to investors about the risks of cryptocurrencies, calling most of the market “highly speculative” in a new Bloomberg interview on Tuesday.
He carved out Bitcoin (BTC) as comparatively closer to a commodity while stressing that most tokens don’t offer “a dividend” or “usual returns.”
Gensler framed the current market backdrop as a reckoning consistent with warnings he made while in office that the global public’s fascination with cryptocurrencies doesn’t equate to fundamentals.
“All the thousands of other tokens, not the stablecoins that are backed by US dollars, but all the thousands of other tokens, you have to ask yourself, what are the fundamentals? What’s underlying it… The investing public just needs to be aware of those risks,” he said.
Gensler’s record and industry backlash
Gensler led the SEC from April 17, 2021, to Jan. 20, 2025, overseeing an aggressive enforcement agenda that included lawsuits against major crypto intermediaries and the view that many tokens are unregistered securities.
The industry winced at high‑profile actions against exchanges and staking programs, as well as the posture that most token issuers fell afoul of registration rules.
Gary Gensler labels crypto as “highly speculative.” Source: Bloomberg
Under Gensler’s tenure, Coinbase was sued by the SEC for operating as an unregistered exchange, broker and clearing agency, and for offering an unregistered staking-as-a-service program. Kraken was also forced to shut its US staking program and pay a $30 million penalty.
The politicization of crypto
Pushed on the politicization of crypto, including references to the Trump family’s crypto involvement by the Bloomberg interviewer, the former chair rejected the framing.
“No, I don’t think so,” he said, arguing it’s more about capital markets fairness and “commonsense rules of the road,” than a “Democrat versus Republican thing.”
He added: “When you buy and sell a stock or a bond, you want to get various information,” and “the same treatment as the big investors.” That’s the fairness underpinning US capital markets.
On ETFs, Gensler said finance “ever since antiquity… goes toward centralization,” so it’s unsurprising that an ecosystem born decentralized has become “more integrated and more centralized.”
He noted that investors can already express themselves in gold and silver through exchange‑traded funds, and that during his tenure, the first US Bitcoin futures ETFs were approved, tying parts of crypto’s plumbing more closely to traditional markets.
Gensler’s latest comments draw a familiar line: Bitcoin sits in a different bucket, while most other tokens remain, in his view, speculative and light on fundamentals.
Even out of office, his framing will echo through courts, compliance desks and allocation committees weighing BTC’s status against persistent regulatory caution of altcoins.
New figures reveal a 70% year-on-year increase in Cayman Islands foundation company registrations, with more than 1,300 on the books at the end of 2024, and over 400 new registrations already in 2025.
According to a news release from Cayman Finance, many of the world’s largest Web3 projects are now registered in the Cayman Islands, including at least 17 foundation companies with treasuries over $100 million.
Why DAOs are choosing Cayman
The Cayman foundation company has emerged as a preferred tool for DAOs that need to sign contracts, hire contributors, hold IP and interact with regulators, all while shielding tokenholders from personal liability for the DAO’s obligations.
The legal wake‑up call for many communities came in 2024 with Samuels v. Lido DAO, in which a US federal judge found that an unwrapped DAO could be treated as a general partnership under California law, exposing participants to personal liability.
The Cayman foundation company is designed to plug that gap, offering a separate legal personality and the ability to own assets and sign agreements, while giving tokenholders assurance that they are not partners by default.
Rise in Cayman Islands foundation company registrations | Source: Cayman Finance
Add tax neutrality, a legal framework familiar to institutional allocators and an ecosystem of companies that specialize in Web3 treasuries, and it becomes clear why more projects have quietly redomiciled their foundations to Grand Cayman.
Elsewhere, policymakers have made big promises but delivered patchwork. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly pledged to turn the United States into the “crypto capital of the planet,” but at the entity level, only a handful of states explicitly recognize DAOs as legal persons.
Switzerland remains the archetypal onshore Web3 foundation center, with the Crypto Valley region now hosting over 1,700 active blockchain firms, up more than 130% since 2020, with foundations and associations representing a growing share of new structures.
The surge in Web3 foundations coincides with a shift in Cayman’s own regulatory posture — the arrival of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Crypto‑Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), which the Cayman Islands has now implemented via new Tax Information Authority regulations that take effect from Jan. 1, 2026.
CARF will impose due diligence and reporting duties on Cayman “Reporting Crypto‑Asset Service Providers” (entities that exchange crypto for fiat or other crypto, operate trading platforms or provide custodial services), requiring them to collect tax‑residence data from users, track relevant transactions and file annual reports with the Tax Information Authority.
Legal professionals note that CARF reporting under the current interpretation applies to relevant crypto-asset service providers, including exchanges, brokers and dealers, which likely leaves structures that merely hold crypto assets, such as protocol treasuries, investment funds, or passive foundations, off the hook.
“The key question is whether your entity, as a business, provides a service effectuating exchange transactions for or on behalf of customers, including by acting as a counterparty or intermediary or by making available a trading platform.”
In practice, that means many pure treasury or ecosystem‑steward foundations should be able to continue benefitting from Cayman’s legal certainty and tax neutrality without being dragged into full reporting status, so long as they are not in the business of running exchange, brokerage or custody services.