From the renaming of Libra to Diem and its subsequent forced demise, divergences have emerged between the United States and Europe on how to catch this wave of cryptocurrency: on one side, Washington attempts to redefine the boundaries of digital assets through legislation, with the Senate Banking Committee scheduling the review and voting for the "2025 Digital Asset Market Clarification Act" (CLARITY Act) for May 14, 2026; on the other side, reports from Frankfurt indicate that European Central Bank President Lagarde prefers to prioritize the establishment of a tokenized settlement system centered on central bank currency, rather than adopting the American model of tokens issued by private entities pegged to fiat currency. Regarding dollar-pegged tokens, the United States is not entirely united: Galaxy Research's research director Alex Thorn estimates that under the GENIUS Act framework, these tokens could leverage about $1.2 trillion of U.S. credit expansion, of which 60%-70% is expected to come from overseas; this prospect of "dollar credit export" has sparked overt backlash from the banking sector, concerned about deposits and business being diverted by new players; Senator Elizabeth Warren has also set her sights on the tech giants, sending a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg inquiring about the transparency and privacy arrangements related to integrations in its payment products. Regulators see tokens pegged to fiat currency as a core bargaining chip in a new round of financial order competition, but the on-chain realities do not align with the narrative of "institutional dividends" – according to a CertiK report, incidents known as "rug pulls" related to offline violence have increased by 41% year-on-year in 2026, with 34 incidents and losses of about $101 million; according to alternative.me data, the current Fear and Greed Index is only 38, indicating that the market is in a "fearful" zone, even as Telegram founder Pavel Durov publicly boasts about the TON staking returns, there are still bets of about $370,000 on sports events at Polymarket, intertwining high on-chain yields with real-world security shadows, and the battle between the U.S. and Europe over regulatory paths and fiat-pegged tokens is bound to be far from a one-sided emotional regulatory feast.

CLARITY Act on the Table, Washington Draws Clear Red Lines

In a market that is still leaning towards "fear," Washington has chosen to draw clear red lines first. The U.S. Senate Banking Committee announced that it will review and vote on the "2025 Digital Asset Market Clarification Act" (CLARITY Act) on May 14, 2026; this bill is positioned to provide a clearer regulatory framework for the U.S. digital asset market, and once it enters the formal voting stage in the committee, it signifies that Congress is no longer satisfied with case-by-case enforcement but is attempting to delineate the boundaries of “which businesses qualify as compliant finance and which are speculative” on a legal level. For practitioners, this is an attempt to codify the fragmented regulatory practices of the past few years into written law, also signaling to the market that digital assets will be integrated into the existing financial order rather than being completely excluded.

Parallel to the "boundary drawing" of the CLARITY Act, another focal point of debate is how to address fiat-pegged tokens under the GENIUS Act. Galaxy Research director Alex Thorn calculated in a report that under this framework, fiat-pegged tokens valued in USD could lead to a maximum of approximately $1.2 trillion in U.S. credit expansion, of which 60%-70% of the incremental funds are believed to come from overseas investors. In other words, Washington sees not just a single technological risk but a new tool to channel overseas savings into the U.S. credit system through rule design. This imaginative space naturally touches the nerves of the traditional banking sector, with some institutions openly opposing the GENIUS Act, fearing that deposits and business will be diverted by new dollar tokens. From the regulators' perspective, how to lock in the global demand for digitalization of dollar assets without destroying the banking system is the deeper motivation and game behind the CLARITY Act and the GENIUS Act.

European Central Bank Bets on Central Bank Currency Tokenization

Unlike the Atlantic's attempt to incorporate privately issued dollar tokens into the credit expansion and payment system through the GENIUS and other acts, European Central Bank President Lagarde reportedly prefers another path: prioritizing the establishment of a tokenized settlement system centered on central bank currency rather than simply copying the U.S. stablecoin model, with specific remarks awaiting further verification. In recent years, the European Central Bank has consistently promoted central bank digital currency and regulated tokenized settlement schemes, placing "central bank money" rather than tokens issued by commercial banks or tech companies at the center of future financial infrastructure.

This approach is driven by long-standing anxieties over the financial sovereignty of the Eurozone. Since Meta's Libra/Diem project faced strong regulatory opposition from multiple countries between 2019 and 2022, the Eurozone has employed stricter scrutiny and restrictions on global tech giants' stablecoin projects, worrying that if large private dollar tokens dominate payment processes in the Eurozone, the euro's influence in cross-border transactions and asset pricing would be eroded. In this framework, on-chain assets denominated in euros are more likely to be required to be anchored at the central bank or a strictly regulated settlement layer, with cross-border settlements needing to navigate between two sets of parallel rules: one around U.S. regulation designed for private dollar tokens and the other insisting on public currency-led tokenized infrastructure in the euro system, this divergence will directly reshape how developers and institutions bridge the gap between dollar stablecoins and compliant euro tokens.

Warren Presses Meta on Crypto Experimentation Blocked

As the European Central Bank attempts to close off the upward space for private dollar tokens with “central bank currency + tokenized settlement,” the U.S. political sphere has directed its focus straight at tech giants attempting to return to the crypto payment battlefield. Senator Elizabeth Warren sent an open letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, demanding an explanation regarding the so-called "stablecoin integration plan": how user data is utilized within it, the design of privacy protection mechanisms, whether the current publicly disclosed experimental information is sufficiently transparent, and explicitly setting a deadline – a formal response must be made by May 20, 2026. This is not a polite communication letter but more like a public "exam," forcing Meta to lay out its crypto experimentation that may have been concealed in its product iteration roadmap.

For Meta, this letter awakens the unfinished nightmare of the Libra/Diem era. After 2019, the original plan to issue a globally universal digital token, Libra, was forced to be renamed Diem under the encirclement of global regulators, ultimately choosing to terminate and sell related assets; the impression left by this failure makes "big companies doing finance" and "big companies doing currency" particularly sensitive in the eyes of regulators. Now, Warren calling out Zuckerberg again is not just targeting Meta alone, but demonstrating to all U.S. tech giants: even if it's just payment integration on the stablecoin level, it must accept higher standards of scrutiny regarding transparency, data boundaries, and privacy protection, or risk being politically and regulatorily surrounded before even entering the market, exhausting patience.

Surge in Rug Pulls Exposes Security Black Swans

While Washington argues over rule boundaries, the frontline of asset security has quietly shifted offline. CertiK reports that in 2026, incidents of "rug pulls" in the crypto field have increased by 41% year-on-year, with 34 confirmed incidents and cumulative losses of about $101 million. The commonality among these cases is that criminals bypass traditional protective measures like private key management and contract audits, directly utilizing violence, threats, hostage-taking, and controlling personal freedom to coerce victims into completing on-chain transactions. Cold wallets and multi-signature schemes, originally perceived as "foolproof as long as phishing links are not clicked," appear fragile against the reality of a wrench.

Emotional sentiment is also becoming brittle. According to public indicators, the current Fear and Greed Index stands at 38, within the "fear" range; amid regulatory battles, high yield narratives, and frequent offline crimes, investors are, on one hand, worried about compliance red lines, while on the other, fear that their addresses might be targeted offline one day. Stricter legislation can constrain exchanges, custodians, and issuers, but it is difficult to cover the risks of physical threats arriving at midnight, forcing the industry to rethink: besides the protocol layer and compliance layer, physical security guidelines for ordinary users, education on privacy habits, and contingency plans for extreme scenarios are also needed; otherwise, no matter how comprehensive the rules are written, individuals will still be exposed to long-term risks in unseen offline cracks.

The Tug-of-War Between Panic Sentiment and On-Chain Yields

As the U.S. attempts through the CLARITY Act and the GENIUS Act to delineate clearer compliance boundaries for digital tokens pegged to the dollar, with research institutions estimating that this could leverage about $1.2 trillion of U.S. credit expansion (60%-70% of which comes from overseas), the European Central Bank emphasizes a tokenized settlement path centered on central bank currency, trying to maintain the euro's sovereign status in payment and settlement systems at the digital level. The divergence in paths between the U.S. and Europe is quietly rewriting the distribution of power between the dollar and euro in the future global digital asset order. In the real world, reports indicate that "rug pulls" have caused over $100 million in losses this year, the Fear and Greed Index remains stagnant at a "fearful" 38, while at the other end of the blockchain, Telegram founder Pavel Durov boldly claims that TON staking yields are the highest among the top 50 crypto assets, yet users continue to make choices between exposure risks and high yield narratives, voting for "risk premiums" with their real money. In this tug-of-war, several coordinates need close attention: first, the review results of the CLARITY Act on May 14, 2026, and how the GENIUS Act will navigate battles between Congress and bank lobbying thereafter; second, whether Europe can find concrete pilot paths and landing strategies for central bank currency-led tokenized settlement; third, under Warren's pressure, whether Meta will provide a different answer regarding the new payment token integration before May 20, distinct from the Diem era; and fourth, the evolution of security events such as offline violent attacks and on-chain vulnerabilities in the coming year, these variables will collectively determine whether the global digital asset landscape comes closer to Wall Street's version of the "U.S. dollar digital credit system" or to Frankfurt's version of the "central bank-led tokenization order."

Join our community, let's discuss together and grow stronger!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
AiCoin On-Chain: https://aicoin.com/hyperliquid
AiCoin Exclusive Hyperliquid Benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin Exclusive Aster Benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2

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。