Bitcoin price has been on a tear, but analysts warn that resolving the U.S debt limit issue could trigger sharp downside for risk assets like BTC.

Bitcoin price has been on a tear, but analysts warn that resolving the U.S debt limit issue could trigger sharp downside for risk assets like BTC.
For much of 2022, the crypto market focused on the United States Federal Reserve’s actions. The central bank created a bearish environment for risk-on assets like stocks and cryptocurrencies by increasing the interest rates on borrowing.
Toward the end of 2022, positive economic data, healthy employment numbers and a decreasing inflation rate provided hope that a much-awaited slowdown in the rate of interest rate hikes would occur. Currently, the market expects that rate hikes will reduce from 50 basis points (bps) to 25 bps before the complete end of the hiking regime by mid-2023.
From the perspective of the Fed’s goal of constraining liquidity and providing headwinds to an overheated economy and stock market, things are starting to improve. It appears that the Fed’s plan of a soft-landing by quantitative tightening to curb inflation without throwing the economy into a deep recession might be working. The recent rally in stock markets and Bitcoin can be attributed to the market's trust in the above narrative.
However, another essential American agency, the U.S. Treasury, poses significant risks to the global economy. While the Fed has been draining liquidity from the markets, the Treasury provided a countermeasure by draining its cash balance and negating some of the Fed's efforts. This situation may be coming to an end.
It invokes risks of constrained liquidity conditions with the possibility of an adverse economic shock. For this reason, analysts warn that the second half of 2023 may see excess volatility.
The senators coauthored a letter to the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board chair asking how FTX and other crypto firms were audited and why the audits failed so badly.
The Web3 Foundation has reminded the world that, in its eyes, it has conformed to SEC requirements and DOT should no longer be considered a security.
Stablecoins in the cryptocurrency market help provide USD pegged tokens within the volatile industry. In bull markets, the market capitalization of stablecoins tends to decrease as investors flock to more volatile assets and in bear markets, investors seek shelter in low volatility stablecoins thus increasing their market caps.
On Jan. 26, the total market capitalization for stablecoins like Tether (USDT), USD Coin (USDC), Binance USD (BUSD) and Dai (DAI) is over $131 billion.
Stablecoin supply dominance. Source: GlassnodeStablecoins are so crucial to the future of crypto, that Moody’s, a well-respected analytics agency, is planning to develop a scoring system. The scoring system may help reduce the speculation and fear that some investors have with stablecoins.
Such fear amid a lack of stablecoin transparency has led one of the top stablecoins, BUSD, to see a major usage decline in recent weeks.
Let’s examine the factors affecting the BUSD stablecoin.

Persistent worries about Binance’s solvency, increased regulation of the crypto sector and questionable use cases are chipping away at BUSD’s market capitalization.
Stablecoins in the cryptocurrency market help provide U.S. dollar-pegged tokens within the volatile industry. In bull markets, the market capitalization of stablecoins tends to decrease as investors flock to more volatile assets; and in bear markets, investors seek shelter in low-volatility stablecoins, thus increasing their market caps.
On Jan. 26, the total market capitalization for stablecoins like Tether (USDT), USD Coin (USDC), Binance USD (BUSD) and Dai (DAI) is over $131 billion.
Stablecoin supply dominance. Source: GlassnodeStablecoins are so crucial to the future of crypto that Moody’s, a well-respected analytics agency, is planning to develop a scoring system, which may help reduce the speculation and fear that some investors have with stablecoins.
Such fear amid a lack of stablecoin transparency has led one of the top stablecoins, BUSD, to see a major usage decline in recent weeks.
Let’s examine the factors affecting the BUSD stablecoin.

Developers of the nonfungible tokens had halted minting on Jan. 25 in response to user complaints.
Joseph Bankman, Barbara Fried and Gabriel Bankman-Fried could reportedly face questions in bankruptcy court about any financial benefits they may have received from FTX.
Following a failed short attack, DeFi exploiter Avraham Eisenberg was liquidated from Aave at a loss of $10 million.
The group is known to have targeted critical infrastructure and healthcare providers, extorting $100 million from victims worldwide.
BTC price performance may encounter a new magnet above the $50,000 mark if gold continues to be a trendsetter.
Bitcoin (BTC) could get sucked toward $50,000 like a magnet if it continues to follow gold, fresh analysis predicts.
In a Twitter update on Jan. 26, popular trader and market commentator TechDev presented a lofty new BTC price target tied to XAU/USD.
As the debate over how much Bitcoin will compete with gold remains, bullish-price takes are surfacing.
For TechDev, the outlook is more optimistic than for many — Bitcoin might even crack the $50,000 mark.
“What if Bitcoin continues to follow Gold / DXY ?” he queried.

“It’s about taking inspiration from what we’ve done.” Lugano’s Plan B hopes to drive Bitcoin adoption dialogue at future World Economic Forum conferences.
Buying DAO tokens? That’s no longer risk-free: Courts might consider you a partner in the business and judge you liable for millions in hacked funds. Another legal trap may be found simply working for a DAO — and implementing community decisions that turn out to be illegal in some far-flung jurisdiction. With many DAO communities […]
Buying DAO tokens? That’s no longer risk-free: Courts might consider you a partner in the business and judge you liable for millions in hacked funds. Another legal trap may be found simply working for a DAO — and implementing community decisions that turn out to be illegal in some far-flung jurisdiction.
With many DAO communities waking up to the reality that they need some sort of legal structure or “legal personality” in order to act in the real world, solutions from mimicking corporate structures to anonymously run foundations are being floated by lawyers around the world.
Nothing in this article should be construed as legal advice — and not just because the law isn’t clear about any of it.
In 2021, Magazine interviewed Griff Green, whose heroic actions to thwart The DAO hack on the morning of June 17, 2016, helped save a good proportion of the 14% of Ether in existence at the time. By identifying how the exploit worked, his team of hackers worked to “steal” faster than the malicious actor, thus limiting the amount taken by the individual who discovered the error in The DAO’s code. But who did this ETH belong to?
Did it belong to the 11,000 investors who had contributed Ether toward the project in the previous month? If so, what claim did they have, considering that these “investors” had handed their money to an organization without leaders or jurisdiction, governed entirely by smart contracts that operated according to the votes of investors?

Buying DAO tokens? That’s no longer risk-free: Courts might consider you a partner in the business and judge you liable for millions in hacked funds. Another legal trap may be found simply working for a DAO — and implementing community decisions that turn out to be illegal in some far-flung jurisdiction.
With many DAO communities waking up to the reality that they need some sort of legal structure or “legal personality” in order to act in the real world, solutions from mimicking corporate structures to anonymously run foundations are being floated by lawyers around the world.
Nothing in this article should be construed as legal advice — and not just because the law isn’t clear about any of it.
In 2021, Magazine interviewed Griff Green, whose heroic actions to thwart The DAO hack on the morning of June 17, 2016, helped save a good proportion of the 14% of Ether in existence at the time. By identifying how the exploit worked, his team of hackers worked to “steal” faster than the malicious actor, thus limiting the amount taken by the individual who discovered the error in The DAO’s code. But who did this ETH belong to?
Did it belong to the 11,000 investors who had contributed Ether toward the project in the previous month? If so, what claim did they have, considering that these “investors” had handed their money to an organization without leaders or jurisdiction, governed entirely by smart contracts that operated according to the votes of investors?

Buying DAO tokens? That’s no longer risk-free: Courts might consider you a partner in the business and judge you liable for millions in hacked funds. Another legal trap may be found simply working for a DAO — and implementing community decisions that turn out to be illegal in some far-flung jurisdiction. With many DAO communities […]
Buying DAO tokens? That’s no longer risk-free: Courts might consider you a partner in the business and judge you liable for millions in hacked funds. Another legal trap may be found simply working for a DAO — and implementing community decisions that turn out to be illegal in some far-flung jurisdiction. With many DAO communities […]
Buying DAO tokens? That’s no longer risk-free: Courts might consider you a partner in the business and judge you liable for millions in hacked funds. Another legal trap may be found simply working for a DAO — and implementing community decisions that turn out to be illegal in some far-flung jurisdiction. With many DAO communities […]
