The European Central Bank left interest rates unchanged, maintaining its deposit facility rate at 2.25%.

With Chair Kevin Warsh declining to offer guidance, investors are increasingly forced to infer the Federal Reserve's next move from other officials' remarks. A renewed climb in oil prices, alongside rising tariff-related uncertainty, has revived inflation fears and made the Fed's outlook on additional tightening less clear. On July 23 local time, "Fed whisperer" Nick Timiraos wrote that the Fed's July policy meeting could be among the most difficult to predict in recent years. Higher energy prices, greater risks from U.S. tariff policy, and a visible shift among some officials toward supporting rate hikes are testing the prevailing view that the Fed will simply stand pat. Markets still largely expect the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) to hold the policy rate steady at its July 28–29 meeting, keeping the target range at 3.50% to 3.75%. Even if rates are left unchanged, internal debate is far from settled, and some policymakers are already signaling a case for another hike later this year. At the prior meeting, 18 Fed officials showed clear divisions over whether additional hikes are needed this year, splitting roughly evenly between those anticipating at least one increase and those expecting no change. UBS Chief U.S. Economist Jonathan Pingle said Warsh could become the pivotal figure in determining the policy path. Inflation concerns are flaring again, giving hawks fresh ammunition. The rebound in energy prices has become a key input for the Fed's assessment. As Middle East tensions intensified, rising oil prices pushed traders to raise the odds of a July hike. CME Group data showed that as of last Wednesday, markets were pricing roughly a one-third chance of a rate increase at the July meeting, up from about one in ten over the weekend. William English, a Yale University economist and former senior Fed economist, said the case can be made both for hiking and for holding steady, with the decision hinging on whether the situation in Iran cools and where oil prices head next. He warned that if conflict drives energy costs higher, the Fed could end up reacting after the fact if it fails to act preemptively. Officials leaning toward another hike argue that the 3.50% to 3.75% range may not be restrictive enough to bring inflation fully under control. While inflation has eased from its peak, they contend underlying pressures remain. Fed Governor Christopher Waller said policymakers cannot simply wait for inflation to drift down on its own, adding that stable expectations do not justify ignoring emerging risks. Dallas Fed President Lorie Logan also said a "moderately restrictive" stance now may be preferable to being forced into more aggressive tightening later. Recent work from JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs has reinforced the concern, voiced by Waller and others, that inflation pressures are no longer limited to energy or tariffs and appear to be broadening. Goldman Sachs economist Jessica Rindels estimated that as of June, nearly 60% of categories in the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index were posting annual price increases above 3%. That share is below the nearly 80% seen during the COVID-19 pandemic but well above the 37% average from 1990 to 2019, a period when inflation tended to stay near the Fed's target. "People are increasingly frustrated with inflation," said Dario Perkins, Managing Director of Global Macro at TS Lombard. "After six consecutive years of overshooting the target, confidence is being seriously questioned. The Fed's reasonable excuses no longer hold—any further mistakes will no longer be tolerated." Some officials are also watching demand growth linked to AI investment. Building AI infrastructure is lifting capital spending and raising costs across connected sectors. Investors argue that if demand continues to outstrip supply, inflation pressures could intensify, though improving data has supported a wait-and-see approach and some policymakers believe the impact may fade. Those favoring a pause say recent data do not warrant immediate tightening. June inflation readings were relatively mild, with energy prices falling and core pressures easing, while the labor market showed no clear signs of overheating. Point72 Asset Management Chief Economist Dean Maki said the information the Fed received after its June meeting looked better than what it had beforehand, making it hard to justify an immediate hike after opting to hold steady in the face of improved data. Advocates of patience argue that this year's inflation rebound largely reflects temporary shocks such as tariffs and energy, and that monetary policy typically requires waiting to see whether such pressures persist before adjusting rates. New York Fed President John Williams previously said there are signs inflation may have peaked and could ease over coming quarters. Oil's latest rise and U.S. President Trump's preparations for additional tariffs have reintroduced uncertainty around that disinflation path. Still, several observers, including Rindels, have suggested the breadth of price pressures could narrow by year-end, making upcoming inflation reports especially consequential as Warsh's no-guidance approach collides with fresh data and colleagues' reactions. Warsh's reluctance to signal his preference has left markets searching for clues elsewhere. Since taking office, he has repeatedly stressed the need to restore price stability and avoid suggesting the Fed is willing to tolerate inflation above target. He has not said clearly whether current rates are sufficient to achieve that goal, nor whether he supports further hikes. Waller's earlier hawkish comments initially lifted market expectations for a July increase, but subsequent remarks from Williams and Fed Vice Chair Philip Jefferson helped reinforce the view that rates will remain unchanged. Warsh, Williams, and Jefferson are viewed as the core policy-coordination group. Under Jerome Powell, that group typically arrived at a consensus before meetings, while Warsh has sought to preserve more room for internal debate. Investors remain split on Warsh's policy leanings. Some believe that despite pressure from Trump to cut rates, he will prioritize credibility on inflation control. Others think he may prefer to wait for AI-driven productivity gains to cool prices without rushing to tighten. Fed Board member Lisa Cook said AI development is still advancing. While markets previously feared AI could disrupt employment, the most severe effects have not materialized, she said, while also noting that persistently high inflation continues to squeeze U.S. households. As the July meeting nears, the Fed must weigh renewed inflation risks, incoming data, and internal divisions. How Warsh ultimately chooses will shape whether the meeting is simply another pause or an early marker of a shift in the Fed's policy direction. Morgan Stanley Chief U.S. Economist Michael Gapen said, "I don't believe he can remain untouched forever."

Washington has a new draft of a sweeping US crypto bill ready for release, but the path to passage remains uncertain. Sen. Cynthia Lummis, one of the central authors of the proposed "Clarity Act," told CoinDesk she was glad the updated text was prepared—then emphasized that ethics provisions and other items still need more work. Her comments underscore how difficult it remains for lawmakers to settle on a lasting regulatory framework for digital assets, even after months of talks. Banking lobbyists have been pressing to weaken or derail the legislation, and the unresolved ethics section now gives opponents another pressure point. The Clarity Act is designed to draw clearer lines between which tokens fall under securities rules and which are treated as commodities, create registration routes for exchanges, and add consumer protections. Yet lawmakers and staffers argue those goals are harder to lock in without agreement on the rules governing policymakers' own crypto exposure and the lobbying ecosystem around the industry. A Three-Year Push Still Facing Stop-and-Start Momentum Negotiations have dragged on for more than three years, with progress repeatedly interrupted by new demands. Ethics provisions—often ignored in day-to-day market discussion—have surfaced as a real obstacle. Lummis did not identify the specific clauses still in dispute. Congressional aides, though, have pointed to potential disclosure requirements for officials who hold digital assets and restrictions tied to token holdings by lawmakers serving on committees that oversee the sector. The stakes are high: strict trading bans or mandatory public reporting of crypto exposures could quickly reshape how industry groups engage with policymakers. For exchanges and protocol teams that have expanded their Washington presence, the lack of clarity makes hiring decisions and compliance planning more difficult. Text Ready, Votes Not Secured On Capitol Hill, saying a bill is "ready for release" is not the same as having the votes locked down. Observers expect the ethics debate to become a focal point for critics who contend the legislation would legitimize an industry they view as insufficiently regulated. Crypto-native advocacy groups largely argue the opposite: stronger ethics rules could help normalize the sector and counter the narrative that crypto is a haven for insider dealing. It is still unclear whether the additional debate Lummis referenced will play out in committee, via floor amendments, or in closed-door leadership negotiations. Each route carries different timing risks. If committee markups slip, a Senate vote could be pushed into a period dominated by midterm politics, when bipartisan deals become harder to hold together. Market Implications For markets, a clear US regulatory regime remains a key factor limiting deeper institutional allocation to digital assets. Tokenization of real-world assets has climbed past $20 billion, yet compliance teams continue to prepare for a landscape where the US still lacks a primary regulator for spot crypto markets. If the bill stalls over ethics, the broader framework could be delayed, leaving the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to continue what the industry calls regulation-by-enforcement. That approach has already pushed trading activity and developer talent toward jurisdictions with clearer rules. Onchain innovation continues regardless of legislation. Developer activity across layer-1 ecosystems is still rising, with Ethereum and Solana leading. Even so, the best outcome for US competitiveness would be a law that provides a workable path to registration and compliance. The ethics fight may look secondary, but it reflects a larger dispute over whether crypto will be treated like a conventional asset class or remain a regulatory outlier. Until lawmakers settle that question, platforms and investors are likely to keep pricing in the risk of a fragmented US market. For now, the industry is parsing Lummis' choice of words. By highlighting unfinished ethics work instead of celebrating the bill's release, she appears to be setting expectations for another tough negotiating stretch. Markets will look to the next committee calendar to gauge whether the Clarity Act can advance from draft to vote—or whether ethics becomes the issue that breaks an already fragile compromise.

Polymarket said it will challenge France's decision to block access to its website, arguing the measure is overly broad given that trading from France has been disabled since November 2024. France's National Gambling Authority (ANJ) last week instructed internet service providers to block the platform, citing risks of user losses and markets it said could be subject to manipulation. Polymarket said it will pursue remedies through the French legal system and said the order improperly affects people who use the site only to view market odds rather than place trades. "We were surprised at the ANJ decision to block access to our entire website because their measure targets people going to Polymarket purely for information," the company said in a press release. Polymarket added that many visitors come to "learn the probability of future events" and said "Prediction markets help source truth." At the center of the dispute is how Polymarket's contracts should be classified. The company describes them as blockchain-based financial instruments traded directly between users, with prices determined by market activity. It also said it does not take the other side of trades or profit from outcomes, positioning its model as distinct from gambling operators that set odds and trade against customers. The ANJ said the platform remained accessible even after trading restrictions were introduced and continued to promote an unauthorized gambling service. The regulator also pointed to concerns around identity checks and alleged manipulation in weather-related markets. France is the latest jurisdiction to order an ISP-level block of Polymarket. Ukraine imposed a similar block in January, Argentina followed in March, and Spain blocked Polymarket and Kalshi in May. France's move extends beyond the trading restriction already in place: Polymarket has blocked transactions from France since November 2024, but the ANJ ordered the full site blocked because users could still view markets and live probabilities. Other countries, including Brazil, India, Indonesia and Romania, have also restricted access or categorized Polymarket as an unauthorized gambling platform. A Ukrainian government policy official said the country currently lacks a legal framework under which the platform could operate. CoinDesk said it asked Polymarket whether it is contesting enforcement actions outside France, but had not received a response at the time of publication.

Senator Tim Scott said he will work to move the Clarity Act over the finish line, publicly committing to advance legislation that would create a comprehensive federal framework for digital assets. Scott argued the bill would help protect retail investors' capital and support domestic job creation as the U.S. competes for leadership in the 2026 digital economy. He is partnering with Sen. Cynthia Lummis and Sen. John Boozman in a bipartisan push that also frames the effort as a national security measure, aiming to close regulatory gaps that foreign adversaries could exploit.

Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon said the firm supports advancing the Clarity Act and wants it enacted into law, arguing it would help establish clearer market structure. "I’m very supportive of moving the Clarity Act forward, so we can get some market structure in place," Solomon said. Goldman Sachs has about $3.6 trillion in assets.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong is urging the U.S. Senate to move the CLARITY Act to a full floor vote, arguing that negotiations have concluded and lawmakers should "finish the job." He said the current U.S. regulatory status quo "isn't working."

The Federal Trade Commission has secured permanent bans against three founders of bankrupt crypto lender Celsius, barring them from key crypto activities such as taking deposits, facilitating withdrawals, and enabling trading. The restrictions attach to the individuals and follow them across companies, making them far more consequential than the monetary penalties. Under the orders, former CEO Alexander Mashinsky and co-founder Shlomi Daniel Leon are prohibited from advertising, marketing, promoting, offering, distributing, or otherwise supporting products or services used to deposit, exchange, invest, or withdraw assets. Mashinsky's ban applies broadly to assets, while Leon's explicitly covers cryptocurrencies as well as banking and financial assets. The prohibitions extend to actions carried out directly or through intermediaries. A separate injunction targets co-founder Hanoch "Hank" Goldstein, focused on retail cryptocurrency businesses. He is barred from promoting or selling retail products or services related to buying, selling, depositing, withdrawing, distributing, or trading cryptocurrencies, and from assisting others in sales or marketing of such offerings. All three orders also prohibit material misrepresentations about products and services. They further bar the use of false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements to obtain or attempt to obtain customer information from financial institutions, including bank account details, login credentials, private keys, and wallet information. Mashinsky and Leon must obtain explicit, informed consent before disclosing consumers' nonpublic personal information. The measures align with allegations in the FTC's 2023 complaint, which said Celsius was promoted as safer than banks, promised instant withdrawals, and advertised yields as high as 18.63%. The FTC also alleged that Celsius claimed it had sufficient reserves on June 7, 2022, then froze withdrawals and transfers five days later. Celsius filed for bankruptcy on July 13, 2022. To support enforcement, the founders must submit reports and maintain records over the coming years to provide the FTC with monitoring information and to give courts a basis to police compliance. The FTC set a combined monetary obligation of $16.5 million. Court documents indicate Goldstein's assessed amount is $2.014 million, with the remaining amounts attributed to Mashinsky and Leon. Mashinsky's $10 million obligation may be satisfied through eligible U.S. Department of Justice forfeitures. Leon's $4.1 million obligation and Goldstein's $2.014 million obligation may be offset by payments or releases tied to the Celsius bankruptcy proceedings. As a result, the penalties may be fully covered by assets previously seized by the Department of Justice and by funds flowing through the bankruptcy process, meaning the founders could potentially pay nothing out of pocket. The FTC said any funds it ultimately receives may be used for consumer restitution or related relief; amounts not used for relief would be deposited into the U.S. Treasury. The actions do not, on their own, guarantee additional recoveries for Celsius creditors.

Japan is moving closer to launching its first $BTC ETF.