On May 6, 2026, the U.S. cryptocurrency industry received three simultaneous signals: the legislative clock in Washington was suddenly sped up, market volatility was suppressed to a rarely low level, and several iconic institutions’ strategies collectively turned around in the same quarter. Senator Bernie Moreno announced that legislative review for Bitcoin and crypto market structure would begin next week, aiming to send the bill to the president's desk by the end of June and striving for it to be signed into law before July 4. This is seen as a critical milestone closely aligned with the previously discussed "21st Century Financial Innovation and Technology Act," indicating that the U.S. is finally set to delineate a "national" blueprint for the crypto market structure and regulatory boundaries.

At the same time, the second signal from the market is quiet yet dangerous: independent analyst Markus Thielen pointed out that implied volatility for Bitcoin has significantly contracted since early 2026, recently compressing into a range that loosens risk management constraints—historically, this is often accompanied by position expansions and an acceleration of capital投入. The third signal comes from institutions: on one hand, Multicoin Capital has been significantly building its ZEC position since February, with Tushar Jain publicly framing it as a medium to long-term bet on privacy assets amid rising political risks of "confiscation of private wealth"; on the other, Strategy CEO Michael Saylor has shifted from "never selling" to active management, buying Bitcoin at low prices and selling at high prices to increase the number of BTC held per share, with these transactions subject to disclosure and auditing frameworks applicable to U.S. listed companies. The acceleration of regulatory implementation is seen as a long-term positive, but the simultaneous tightening of global scrutiny on privacy-related assets and the potential active selling pressure from giants like Strategy suggests that the coming months could be both a window for capital inflows once rules become clearer and a start point for a reshaping of overall market risk pricing under compliance constraints and institutional turnarounds.

Moreno Bets on Fast-Tracking Crypto Legislation

Just as Strategy announced it would actively "long and short" Bitcoin within the existing regulatory framework, Senator Bernie Moreno focused directly on the rules themselves. He publicly provided a timeline that is nearly compressed to the maximum: legislation for Bitcoin and the broader crypto market structure will enter the review process "next week," with the goal of sending the bill to the president's desk by the end of June and aiming for completion of the signing before Independence Day on July 4. This is not a simple optimistic expectation, but a bet that binds crypto legislation with symbols of American politics—if this timeline comes to fruition, the U.S. will finally fill in a long-missing piece of the market structure puzzle for crypto assets around Independence Day.

Directionally, the bill promoted by Moreno is positioned as legislation for Bitcoin and crypto market structure, logically similar to the previous discussions around the "21st Century Financial Innovation and Technology Act": the core points focus on how tokens should delineate boundaries between commodities and securities, how trading platforms should be regulated, what obligations custodial institutions need to meet, and where the baseline for investor protection should be drawn. For exchanges, this means that "what coins can be listed and what business activities should not be engaged in" won't just be a gray-area judgment for compliance officers but could be written into law; custodial institutions will have to anticipate more detailed custody responsibilities, audit disclosure requirements, and asset segregation standards, as the era of passively "helping clients release coins" will be replaced by standards closer to traditional financial custody obligations. For token issuers, once market structure legislation is implemented, the pathways for issuance, information disclosure, and thresholds for sales targeted at U.S. investors will be rewritten, with some product designs that once skirted boundaries potentially excluded from compliant channels.

This legislative timeline, intentionally aligned with the Independence Day node, essentially aims to reshape the U.S. position in the global regulatory competition. In recent years, regulatory agencies in several countries have strengthened scrutiny of sensitive areas like privacy assets, and the long-standing indecision regarding comprehensive U.S. crypto rules has made some institutions more inclined to first test the waters in other jurisdictions and then consider "repatriation" to the U.S. If Moreno's market structure bill can really come into effect around early July, the U.S. will shift from a state of "absence of rules, relying on enforcement to catch up" to "setting game rules with a codified framework," where institutions evaluating whether to enter and how to design products will no longer look solely at prices and volatility, but rather whether the regulatory red lines and compliance costs outlined in this bill can support a sustainable business model.

Linking Volatility Drop with Compliance Expectations

From the beginning of this year to April, Bitcoin's implied volatility declined steadily, and by early May, Markus Thielen explicitly noted this "obvious contraction" and interpreted it within the familiar risk control context: as implied volatility falls, the "red lines" given by risk models will shift upward, allowing capital to amplify positions and leverage naturally without breaching internal constraints like VaR and margin. For traders, this means under the same risk budget, they can take larger nominal exposures and pursue more directional or arbitrage strategies; for institutions using quantitative risk control, volatility is one of the input parameters, and when this parameter continues to decline, it itself constitutes a technical signal that "allows you to do a bit more."

This round of cooling volatility coincides closely with the timeline for the upcoming legislative review of the U.S. market structure, blending technical signals with policy expectations. On May 6, after Bernie Moreno laid out the target timeline for review and signing, long-term observing institutions no longer face just a smoothly priced Bitcoin market, but a policy environment where the regulatory path is relatively visible and the timeline for implementation is roughly estimable. In this combination, asset allocation teams, when rerunning scenario analyses, not only see the modeling space brought by the receding implied volatility but also recognize that “if a market structure bill arrives at the president's desk by the end of June, the current uncertain compliance landscape may be partially hedged in a few months.” The result is that, with risk control models and compliance departments nodding in agreement, the internal resistance to increasing Bitcoin exposure diminishes.

In the coming months, the resonance of technological and regulatory signals may rewrite short- and medium-term risk preferences on two levels: on one hand, the combination of contracting volatility and strengthened legislative expectations supports prices entering a “low-noise, slow-pricing” state driven by slowly rising institutional funds, with the market more willing to pay a premium for clear regulatory delineations; on the other hand, the same risk control and compliance frameworks will treat different assets differently, and against the backdrop of tightening global scrutiny of privacy-related assets, even if overall risk preferences recover, funds are more likely to prioritize increasing allocations to clearly regulated varieties with mature disclosure mechanisms, leaving paths with blurred regulatory red lines to fewer, risk-tolerant participants.

Strategy Rewrites "Never Sell" Commitment

At a moment when regulatory boundaries are rapidly clarifying, Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) chose to rewrite its position in market narrative. Once viewed as the benchmark for long-term holding with a “never sell” philosophy, it has now turned into a “Bitcoin development company” in Michael Saylor's updated rhetoric: no longer content to have assets quietly rest on the balance sheet, but seeking to buy in at lower prices and sell at higher prices to actively manage and improve the number of BTC corresponding to each share. For investors who have long considered it a high-leverage Bitcoin beta, this amounts to a switch from a “treasury” model to a “trading asset manager” model, necessitating a rewrite of narrative and expectations.

Once moving from passive holding to active buying and selling, this U.S.-listed company must provide more detailed decision-making logic and risk explanations during information disclosures and audit inquiries. Previously, the focus of regulatory and audit scrutiny was more on the scale of holdings, valuation methods, and impairment tests; now, it must include the timing, purpose, and impact of buying and selling: is it merely to increase the number of Bitcoins held per share, or is it engaging in market operations akin to trading; whether these actions align with existing risk disclosures, its self-definition, and communication with shareholders. As the focus of communication with the SEC and auditors shifts, Strategy's every directional operation is now more susceptible to be scrutinized under the microscope of “listed company governance” and “market integrity,” rather than just being seen as a simple asset allocation adjustment.

For the market, the real game lies in how this active management strategy will alter the supply and demand curve. Active selling means at high price stages, Strategy is no longer a one-sided “never sell” long anchor, but may become a source of periodic selling pressure, altering perceptions regarding Bitcoin's circulation supply elasticity; but at the same time, the acceleration of U.S. crypto market structure legislation, combined with the risk control space offered by prior declining volatility, is clearing barriers for more traditional institutions to "enter compliantly", with the potential scale and pace of new buying yet to be fully priced in by the market. Over the next few months, the market will simultaneously factor in Strategy's potential selling at high levels while betting on the new capital's absorption capability after regulatory implementation, ultimately answering a question with price: in a landscape where clear regulation coexists with active management, is Strategy still simply equated to a Bitcoin amplifier that “never sells”?

Multicoin Heavily Invests in ZEC

Just months before the U.S. crypto market structure legislation was placed on the agenda, Multicoin Capital chose to double down on its bet on the other end of the regulatory narrative. Since February 2026, this established institution has begun significantly building its ZEC positions, publicly disclosing position changes to signal to the market: beyond Bitcoin, which is focused on compliance, it views privacy attributes as the next structural chip. Unlike Strategy’s shift from "never selling" to active management regarding Bitcoin, Multicoin's actions regarding ZEC seem more like taking a proactive stance in a high-risk, highly contested asset protection narrative before regulations are fully defined.

Tushar Jain explained this heavy position as a response to the "rising political trend of confiscating private wealth." In his logic, whether individuals or institutions, whenever they start to worry that nominal ownership could be rewritten in a political or legal event, they will naturally seek assets with stronger privacy attributes as a "last line of defense." Jain describes ZEC as an asset that returns to the core cyberpunk principle at the birth of cryptocurrencies—not for on-chain yield, but to allow assets to escape traditional financial infrastructures' oversight in extreme situations. This narrative sharply contrasts with the emerging U.S. crypto market structure legislation: on one side lies a transparent, regulator-friendly market structure, while on the other side, there is a pursuit of value carriers that are difficult to monitor.

The issue is that the "privacy dividends" pursued by Multicoin perfectly tread on the cracks caused by tightening global regulatory agencies in recent years. Regulatory bodies around the world have imposed stricter requirements on privacy-related assets, trading platforms face pressure to list or delist such assets, KYC/AML and traceability are being incorporated into more compliance review processes, and sensitivity toward hard-to-trace assets has significantly increased. The result is that ZEC has been simultaneously shaped into both an "asset protection tool" and a "compliance risk asset": opening positions means facing additional accountability in anti-money laundering reviews, custody, and audit processes; complete avoidance, however, forfeits potential hedging factors against risks. Multicoin can heavily invest in ZEC while bearing its own compliance and reputational risks, but for public funds, licensed trading platforms, and large financial institutions under strict regulatory constraints, such positions appear incompatible, unexplainable, and indecisive within the current framework. ZEC is likely to continue hovering between its dual identities as a “compliance edge asset” and a “hedging tool”, causing radical institutions like Multicoin and larger regulated funds to follow completely different allocation paths.

New Boundaries of Legislation, Institutions, and Privacy Narrative

Standing on May 6, 2026, Moreno's timeline implies: if the review and signing points are not interrupted by any significant unforeseen events, the U.S. is poised to piece together a relatively complete regulatory framework for the crypto market by mid-year. Meanwhile, Bitcoin's implied volatility has continued to decline in the first quarter, resonating with legislative expectations and providing conditions for a portion of compliant funds to layout crypto assets through ETFs, regulated platforms, and other channels. Beneath this downward tightening of rules from above, Strategy has shifted from "never selling" to active management, attempting to turn Bitcoin positions into a revenue engine that can be interpreted as “developing business” within securities regulation and audit frameworks; on the other side, Multicoin, since February, has heavily invested in ZEC, using the privacy narrative as a long-term chip against wealth confiscation risk. The acceleration of regulation, the shrinking volatility, and the differentiation among institutions have intertwined to push the industry landscape of this cycle into a phase that must confront boundaries.

For trading platforms, the final terms and execution methods of U.S. legislation will directly delineate the asset pool for permissible operations: which classes can become compliant spot and derivative products, and what KYC/AML disclosures and restrictions are needed for privacy attribute assets will determine whether platforms scale on a "compliant but singular category" track or continue to operate in a regulatory gray area, trading higher reputational and enforcement risks for greater liquidity premiums. Publicly traded companies holding cryptocurrencies, like Strategy, are compelled to find a narrow door between active management and compliance constraints—how to explain the "business development logic" behind each buy and sell while disclosing holdings and transaction details timely must make sense to shareholders while also enhancing the number of Bitcoins held per share within a range acceptable to regulators. As for the privacy asset frontline unfolded around ZEC, the trend of globally tightening scrutiny is unlikely to reverse in the short term, and both project teams and holders will inevitably face compliance labels and liquidity discounts: whether they seek to secure more lawful use scenarios through technological and product narratives, or revert to more niche and marginal hedging roles, will determine whether they can maintain a stable living space under the new framework. In the coming months, whether legislation can truly land according to Moreno's timeline, if institutions will genuinely scale up positions under low volatility, and whether privacy assets can find new compromises amid regulatory and demand pulls will collectively determine the stakes of this cycle and genuinely sketch out new boundaries for the global crypto industry under U.S. dominance.

Join our community, let's discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。