• English
  • 简体中文
  • 繁體中文
  • Tiếng Việt
  • ไทย
  • Indonesia
Subscribe
Real-time News
On May 8th, San Francisco Federal Reserve President Mary Daly downplayed the disagreements surrounding the Feds statement, hinting that she wouldnt vote against it like some of her colleagues. She stated that the wording of the statement was less important than the actions taken, and that the real signal from the meeting was unanimous agreement on the decision. Last month, three officials objected to wording that hinted at future rate cuts, arguing that the uncertainty surrounding the energy shock and the Iran war made a "rates could rise or fall" signal more appropriate. Daly, who has no voting rights this year, said the public understands the Feds responsibility for price stability. Daly stated that there are no signs that energy prices are pushing up medium- or long-term inflation expectations. "Its too early to judge. If the conflict ends and oil prices fall without escalating to the broader economy, the pre-conflict dynamics are expected to return to normal." She is committed to achieving the 2% inflation target but shouldnt overreact to the expected duration of the energy shock. She described policy as "slightly tightening," adding that a resolution to the war would put downward pressure on inflation; the labor market is stable and has not generated inflationary pressure.Federal Reserves Kashkari: Optimistic about artificial intelligence.Both WTI and Brent crude oil prices rose by about $2 in the short term, currently trading at $98.08 per barrel and $100.58 per barrel respectively.Federal Reserves Daly: There are currently no signs that soaring energy prices are pushing up medium- to long-term inflation expectations.Federal Reserves Daly: Current monetary policy is "slightly tight," and if the conflict between the United States and Iran is resolved, it will put downward pressure on inflation.

Owning Government Officials From Working on Regulation

Cory Russell

Jul 07, 2022 16:31

微信截图_20220707162601.png


Government personnel who actively engage in cryptocurrencies or are discovered to be in possession of any are prohibited from taking part in the creation of legislation and policies pertaining to cryptocurrencies, according to a recent directive from the US Office of Government Ethics.

With Some Exceptions

Additionally, the advisory notice made clear that even if the restriction is in effect, it only does so with a de minimis exception.


Owners are still able to invest in cryptocurrencies via publicly listed shares and mutual funds of businesses offering cryptocurrency and blockchain services because to this exception. Stablecoins and all other forms of cryptocurrency are included.


Government personnel are still permitted to acquire cryptocurrencies; but, doing so will prevent them from contributing to the development of crypto-related regulations.


They may still work on such initiatives, however, provided they divert their cryptocurrency holdings into other financial opportunities.


The notification went on to further describe the situation, saying "An employee may not engage in a specific topic if the employee understands that particular item might have a direct and predictable influence on the value of their cryptocurrency or stablecoins."


However, even for those who are permitted to invest in cryptocurrency-related stock index listings, a $50k threshold has been imposed over which the de minimis exemption is no longer applicable.

Crypto investors suffer a loss

The cryptocurrency market isn't in the greatest of health right now, even if the Biden administration is concentrating on creating laws for cryptocurrencies after the POTUS issued an executive order for the same.


The continued bearishness is having an impact on cryptocurrency firms as the overall market value of all cryptocurrencies is struggling to reach $1 trillion.


Voyager Digital has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy a week after stopping the platform's withdrawal, trading, and deposit services after Harmony almost went bankrupt a while back.


Thus, even without the US GOE's decision, it would only have taken these investors a little longer to leave the market, similar to how many other investors are already doing.