The post Stablecoin News: JPMorgan Flags Compliance Risks, Halts Banking Services for Stablecoin Firms appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. JPMorgan froze stablecoinThe post Stablecoin News: JPMorgan Flags Compliance Risks, Halts Banking Services for Stablecoin Firms appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. JPMorgan froze stablecoin

Stablecoin News: JPMorgan Flags Compliance Risks, Halts Banking Services for Stablecoin Firms

JPMorgan froze stablecoin startup accounts over compliance risks, highlighting growing pressure on banks as regulations tighten across global crypto markets.

JPMorgan has frozen banking accounts linked to several stablecoin startups in recent months. The action shows increased compliance pressure on the banks dealing with crypto transactions. Moreover, the move makes obvious risks associated with high-risk jurisdictions. As a consequence, there is now more stringent banking scrutiny of stablecoin firms.

JPMorgan Freezes Accounts Over Compliance and Sanctions Exposure

The Information reported that JPMorgan froze accounts that were associated with Blindpay and Kontigo. Both firms were operating in high-risk markets, one of them being Venezuela. According to the report, sanctions exposure elicited serious concerns. Therefore, the bank moved to protect itself from the regulatory risk.

JPMorgan identified action in sanctioned or high-risk jurisdictions as a major issue. Venezuela continues to be under a large number of international sanctions. As a result, transactions related to such regions activate increased compliance reviews. Banks need to sidestep the threats of violations to preserve license.

Another concern was a lack of identity verification practices. One firm was reported to have permitted transactions without full identification of the customer. This is antithetical to Know Your Customer requirements. As a result, it increased Anti-Money Laundering compliance risks for the bank.

Related Reading: JPMorgan Ventures Into Crypto Trading to Expand Wall Street Access | Live Bitcoin News

The report also stated a huge increase in chargebacks from new customers. Chargebacks are frequently the indicators of fraud or weaknesses in the verification process. Therefore, JPMorgan saw this trend as a warning sign. Such patterns can drive up operational and reputational risk.

JPMorgan stressed the decision was not anti-stablecoin. A spokesperson said the bank’s ongoing support of business compliant with stablecoins. Recently, JPMorgan even helped go public with a stablecoin firm. However, specific violation caused action in these cases.

Blindpay was one of the listed startups that were affected by the report. The company specializes in payments of stablecoins in emerging markets. While growth was rapid, there were reported lagging controls on compliance. This imbalance probably made JPMorgan’s response to it.

Regulatory Pressure Intensifies for Stablecoins and Banks

Stablecoins are working in a quickly evolving regulatory landscape. Banks that do business with these firms need to comply with stringent oversight standards. Therefore, compliance failures among the clients directly affect banking partners. This dynamic makes rising caution behaviour across the sector.

Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing rules continue to be key requirements. Transactions must be monitored and screened against sanctions lists by banks. Stablecoin companies that do not implement these controls are introducing a high level of risk. As a result, banks might limit exposure.

Transparency requirements also apply to stablecoin issuers. Many jurisdictions require one-to-one reserve support. Further, issuers are required to publish regular audits or attestations. These measures are taken to ensure the safety of users as well as financial stability.

Data sharing obligations also make compliance difficult. Enforcement of the Travel Rule is done by the Financial Action Task Force. This is a rule provided that requires sender and recipient data to be shared for big transactions. Stablecoin platforms are required to develop systems to support such disclosures.

In July 2025, the United States approved the GENIUS Act. The law provided a federal framework for stablecoins. It requires stringent reserve, redemption and compliance standards. Issuers must comply with these rules in order to operate legally.

The GENIUS Act brought more clarity and also a greater expectation for enforcement. Banks now have clearer guidelines with which to on-board stablecoin clients. As a result there has been considerably less tolerance for compliance gaps. This shift has implications for startups who are trying to access traditional banking.

JPMorgan’s moves point to wider industry wariness. As regulations develop, banks might further restrict exposure to high-risk crypto activity. Ultimately, compliance readiness is going to determine which stablecoin firms will survive and scale.

Source: https://www.livebitcoinnews.com/jpmorgan-flags-compliance-risks-halts-banking-services-for-stablecoin-firms/

Market Opportunity
Startup Logo
Startup Price(STARTUP)
$0.0003812
$0.0003812$0.0003812
-2.95%
USD
Startup (STARTUP) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Here’s How Consumers May Benefit From Lower Interest Rates

Here’s How Consumers May Benefit From Lower Interest Rates

The post Here’s How Consumers May Benefit From Lower Interest Rates appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Topline The Federal Reserve on Wednesday opted to ease interest rates for the first time in months, leading the way for potentially lower mortgage rates, bond yields and a likely boost to cryptocurrency over the coming weeks. Average long-term mortgage rates dropped to their lowest levels in months ahead of the central bank’s policy shift. Copyright{2018} The Associated Press. All rights reserved. Key Facts The central bank’s policymaking panel voted this week to lower interest rates, which have sat between 4.25% and 4.5% since December, to a new range of 4% and 4.25%. How Will Lower Interest Rates Impact Mortgage Rates? Mortgage rates tend to fall before and during a period of interest rate cuts: The average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage dropped to 6.35% from 6.5% last week, the lowest level since October 2024, mortgage buyer Freddie Mac reported. Borrowing costs on 15-year fixed-rate mortgages also dropped to 5.5% from 5.6% as they neared the year-ago rate of 5.27%. When the Federal Reserve lowered the funds rate to between 0% and 0.25% during the pandemic, 30-year mortgage rates hit record lows between 2.7% and 3% by the end of 2020, according to data published by Freddie Mac. Consumers who refinanced their mortgages in 2020 saved about $5.3 billion annually as rates dropped, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Similarly, mortgage rates spiked around 7% as interest rates were hiked in 2022 and 2023, though mortgage rates appeared to react within weeks of the Fed opting to cut or raise rates. How Do Treasury Bonds Respond To Lower Interest Rates? Long-term Treasury yields are more directly influenced by interest rates, as lower rates tend to result in lower yields. When the Fed pushed rates to near zero during the pandemic, 10-year Treasury yields fell to an all-time low of 0.5%. As…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 05:59
Two new wallets withdrew 26,241 ZEC from Binance within 12 hours, worth $13.5 million.

Two new wallets withdrew 26,241 ZEC from Binance within 12 hours, worth $13.5 million.

PANews reported on December 28 that, according to Lookonchain monitoring, two newly created wallets withdrew 26,241 ZEC (US$13.5 million) from Binance in the past
Share
PANews2025/12/28 09:13
Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security

BitcoinWorld Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security Ever wondered why withdrawing your staked Ethereum (ETH) isn’t an instant process? It’s a question that often sparks debate within the crypto community. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin recently stepped forward to defend the network’s approximately 45-day ETH unstaking period, asserting its crucial role in safeguarding the network’s integrity. This lengthy waiting time, while sometimes seen as an inconvenience, is a deliberate design choice with profound implications for security. Why is the ETH Unstaking Period a Vital Security Measure? Vitalik Buterin’s defense comes amidst comparisons to other networks, like Solana, which boast significantly shorter unstaking times. He drew a compelling parallel to military operations, explaining that an army cannot function effectively if its soldiers can simply abandon their posts at a moment’s notice. Similarly, a blockchain network requires a stable and committed validator set to maintain its security. The current ETH unstaking period isn’t merely an arbitrary delay. It acts as a critical buffer, providing the network with sufficient time to detect and respond to potential malicious activities. If validators could instantly exit, it would open doors for sophisticated attacks, jeopardizing the entire system. Currently, Ethereum boasts over one million active validators, collectively staking approximately 35.6 million ETH, representing about 30% of the total supply. This massive commitment underpins the network’s robust security model, and the unstaking period helps preserve this stability. Network Security: Ethereum’s Paramount Concern A shorter ETH unstaking period might seem appealing for liquidity, but it introduces significant risks. Imagine a scenario where a large number of validators, potentially colluding, could quickly withdraw their stake after committing a malicious act. Without a substantial delay, the network would have limited time to penalize them or mitigate the damage. This “exit queue” mechanism is designed to prevent sudden validator exodus, which could lead to: Reduced decentralization: A rapid drop in active validators could concentrate power among fewer participants. Increased vulnerability to attacks: A smaller, less stable validator set is easier to compromise. Network instability: Frequent and unpredictable changes in validator numbers can lead to performance issues and consensus failures. Therefore, the extended period is not a bug; it’s a feature. It’s a calculated trade-off between immediate liquidity for stakers and the foundational security of the entire Ethereum ecosystem. Ethereum vs. Solana: Different Approaches to Unstaking When discussing the ETH unstaking period, many point to networks like Solana, which offers a much quicker two-day unstaking process. While this might seem like an advantage for stakers seeking rapid access to their funds, it reflects fundamental differences in network architecture and security philosophies. Solana’s design prioritizes speed and immediate liquidity, often relying on different consensus mechanisms and validator economics to manage security risks. Ethereum, on the other hand, with its proof-of-stake evolution from proof-of-work, has adopted a more cautious approach to ensure its transition and long-term stability are uncompromised. Each network makes design choices based on its unique goals and threat models. Ethereum’s substantial value and its role as a foundational layer for countless dApps necessitate an extremely robust security posture, making the current unstaking duration a deliberate and necessary component. What Does the ETH Unstaking Period Mean for Stakers? For individuals and institutions staking ETH, understanding the ETH unstaking period is crucial for managing expectations and investment strategies. It means that while staking offers attractive rewards, it also comes with a commitment to the network’s long-term health. Here are key considerations for stakers: Liquidity Planning: Stakers should view their staked ETH as a longer-term commitment, not immediately liquid capital. Risk Management: The delay inherently reduces the ability to react quickly to market volatility with staked assets. Network Contribution: By participating, stakers contribute directly to the security and decentralization of Ethereum, reinforcing its value proposition. While the current waiting period may not be “optimal” in every sense, as Buterin acknowledged, simply shortening it without addressing the underlying security implications would be a dangerous gamble for the network’s reliability. In conclusion, Vitalik Buterin’s defense of the lengthy ETH unstaking period underscores a fundamental principle: network security cannot be compromised for the sake of convenience. It is a vital mechanism that protects Ethereum’s integrity, ensuring its stability and trustworthiness as a leading blockchain platform. This deliberate design choice, while requiring patience from stakers, ultimately fortifies the entire ecosystem against potential threats, paving the way for a more secure and reliable decentralized future. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1: What is the main reason for Ethereum’s long unstaking period? A1: The primary reason is network security. A lengthy ETH unstaking period prevents malicious actors from quickly withdrawing their stake after an attack, giving the network time to detect and penalize them, thus maintaining stability and integrity. Q2: How long is the current ETH unstaking period? A2: The current ETH unstaking period is approximately 45 days. This duration can fluctuate based on network conditions and the number of validators in the exit queue. Q3: How does Ethereum’s unstaking period compare to other blockchains? A3: Ethereum’s unstaking period is notably longer than some other networks, such as Solana, which has a two-day period. This difference reflects varying network architectures and security priorities. Q4: Does the unstaking period affect ETH stakers? A4: Yes, it means stakers need to plan their liquidity carefully, as their staked ETH is not immediately accessible. It encourages a longer-term commitment to the network, aligning staker interests with Ethereum’s stability. Q5: Could the ETH unstaking period be shortened in the future? A5: While Vitalik Buterin acknowledged the current period might not be “optimal,” any significant shortening would likely require extensive research and network upgrades to ensure security isn’t compromised. For now, the focus remains on maintaining robust network defenses. Found this article insightful? Share it with your friends and fellow crypto enthusiasts on social media to spread awareness about the critical role of the ETH unstaking period in Ethereum’s security! To learn more about the latest Ethereum trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Ethereum’s institutional adoption. This post Crucial ETH Unstaking Period: Vitalik Buterin’s Unwavering Defense for Network Security first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 15:30