1. Home
  2. nic carter

nic carter

FDIC chair, ‘architect of Operation Chokepoint 2.0’ Martin Gruenberg to resign Jan. 19

Martin Gruenberg is set to exit as FDIC Chair, with Representative Tom Emmer blasting him as “an architect of Operation Chokepoint 2.0.”

Martin Gruenberg, the chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and alleged “architect of Operation Chokepoint 2.0,” has reportedly announced he’ll retire on Jan. 19 — a day before Donald Trump is inaugurated as president.

Reuters reported on Nov. 20 that Gruenberg, a Democrat, confirmed his departure in a message to FDIC employees, saying that he had informed the outgoing President Joe Biden of his decision.

Republican House Representative Tom Emmer blasted Gruenberg on X in response to the news, claiming he was “an architect of Operation Chokepoint 2.0 and drove the FDIC into the ground, failing to protect his own employees from the toxic work environment that he cultivated.”

Read more

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

Biden admin deliberately killed off Silvergate to ‘decapitate’ crypto — Nic Carter

The now-bankrupt Silvergate Bank was forced to cap its crypto deposits at 15% under threat of being shut down by US regulators, claims Castle Island Ventures partner Nic Carter.

Former crypto-friendly bank Silvergate likely would have survived had it not been forced into voluntary liquidation by United States regulators trying to “decapitate” the cryptocurrency industry, an industry executive claimed.

“I believe Silvergate could have survived its drawdown — and was on a path to do so,” Nic Carter, a partner at blockchain-focused Castle Island Ventures, wrote in a Sept. 25 Pirate Wires article.

He cited Silvergate Bank’s recent bankruptcy filings, and conversations with sources revealed that President Joe Biden’s administration told the bank that it must cap crypto deposits at 15% or face consequences.

Read more

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

Nic Carter doubles down on theory Bitcoin was invented by NSA

The decades old ‘NSA created Bitcoin’ theory has again made the rounds on social media, with one Bitcoin advocate adding more weight to his ongoing theory.

Bitcoin advocate Nic Carter has come out to reiterate his support for the theory that the United States National Security Agency (NSA) had something to do with the creation of Bitcoin (BTC).

On Sept. 15, Iris Energy co-founder Daniel Roberts seemingly revived the decade-old theory on X after posting screenshots of a 1996 paper titled: “How to make a mint: The cryptography of anonymous electronic cash.”

The paper is one of the first known discussions of a Bitcoin-like system, which proposes using public-key cryptography to allow users to make anonymous payments without revealing their identity.

The footer notes show the research paper was “prepared by NSA employees.” Sources included cryptography expert Tatsuaki Okamoto who co-invented the Okamoto–Uchiyama public key cryptosystem in 1998.

On Sept. 21, Carter — a partner of Castle Island Ventures partner doubled down his support for the notion stating “I actually do believe this,” before adding:

“I call it the Bitcoin lab leak hypothesis. I think it was a shuttered internal R&D project which one researcher thought was too good to lay fallow on the shelf and chose to secretly release.”

Carter has actually held the theory for several years, proposing back in 2020: “If Bitcoin was written by NSA cryptographers as a monetary bioweapon, if you will, and the code escaped those sensitive confines... does that make it a virus... that escaped from a lab?”

In 2021, he stated: “The only decent thing the NSA ever did from the world was let Bitcoin leak from the lab."

However, he went on to say that this doesn’t imply the U.S. government secretly controls all the Satoshi coins, another theory that often piggybacks on the Bitcoin / NSA conspiracy theory which suggests the NSA created a backdoor to the Bitcoin code.

“In my version of this made-up idea, the researcher did it without permission of the NSA, and chose to leave the coins behind so as to preserve his anonymity.”

“There’s a ton of other circumstantial evidence which supports this [theory],” he added.

Meanwhile, some users drew attention to one of the cryptography academics Tatsuaki Okamoto listed in the 1996 paper, suggesting the name sounds very similar to Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin.

“The name could have been used as inspiration for satoshi. That’s not really a critical part of the theory though,” Carter said.

Related: This is how Satoshi Nakamoto envisioned crypto working

Meanwhile, director of Intelligence at cyber security firm Krebs Stamos, Matthew Pines, believes it was most likely a “cross-fertilization of NSA crypto nerds and cipher punk nerds,” adding:

“I suspect Satoshi (or at least his/their close intellectual collaborators) has close NSA work associations—but I don’t think Bitcoin itself or the white paper were officially sanctioned.”

Former Goldman Sachs executive Raoul Pal has previously shared his own theory. In an interview with Impact Theory earlier this year he said:

“I think the US government and the UK government invented it ... which is the NSA and the GCHQ in the UK, who are the two world centers of cryptography,”

Cointelegraph’s deep dive into the conspiracy theory in August interviewed former NSA cryptanalyst Jeff Man, who said that while it was “feasible” that the NSA could have created Bitcoin as a means to gather intelligence about its enemies, it is highly doubtful.

However, Man concluded that even if they did, it is likely we’ll never find out the real story behind the world’s most popular digital asset until it doesn't matter anymore.

Magazine: Big Questions: Did the NSA create Bitcoin?

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

Is Biden’s controversial Bitcoin mining tax dead or set to rise from the ashes?

References to the tax were removed from the U.S. debt bill, but that doesn’t mean it’s gone for good.

Bitcoin (BTC) miners in the United States can breathe a sigh of relief after a proposed tax on crypto mining did not make it into a bill to raise the U.S. debt ceiling that appears set to pass.

The Digital Assets Mining Energy (DAME) excise tax proposal sought to charge crypto miners a tax equal to 10% of the cost of the electricity they used for mining in 2024, before scaling up to 30% in 2026.

The tax was highly controversial, with critics arguing that it had the potential to increase global emissions as a result of miners being forced to go overseas where countries may produce more emissions during energy production.

Additionally, Bitcoin miners seek out cheap energy, and as one of the cheapest sources of energy is excess renewable energy, Bitcoin miners can actually incentivize its production by providing utilities with a buyer for energy that would otherwise be wasted.

The news broke after Bitcoin miner Riot Platforms vice president of research Pierre Rochard noted on May 28 that the proposed bill did not include any mention of the DAME tax, which Representative Warren Davidson replied was “one of the victories” of the bill.

Dead and buried or set to return?

While much of the online discussion around the news suggested the proposal was “dead,” others, such as Coin Metrics co-founder Nic Carter, highlighted that it was only temporarily defeated, alluding to the possibility of it being included in future bills.

Carter suggested later in a May 29 Twitter thread that the administration would likely attempt to sneak it into some omnibus bill and would already have done so if it had the political currency to do so.

But bills are required to pass both through Congress and the House, and considering the Republican party is generally opposed to increases in taxes and currently controls the House, it seems unlikely such an omnibus bill would be able to make it to the president’s desk.

While speaking to Chamber of Digital Commerce founder and CEO Perianne Boring during a May 20 fireside chat at the Bitcoin 2023 conference in Miami, Senator Cynthia Lummis assured viewers that the DAME tax “isn’t going to happen.”

Lummis added that ensuring Bitcoin mining firms remain in the U.S. was important for both national security and energy security, highlighting how Bitcoin mining can both reduce gas flaring emissions and help stabilize the energy grid.

Cointelegraph contacted the White House asking whether it planned to continue pursuing the DAME tax but did not receive a response.

Is the damage already done?

In response to questions from Cointelegraph, Bitcoin miner Marathon Digital Holdings CEO Fred Thiel suggested that, regardless of whether President Joe Biden’s administration decides to keep pursuing the DAME tax, it will continue its anti-crypto agenda, saying:

“I think it is clear that this administration will continue to broadly oppose the crypto sector, and even if this specific tax is no longer on the table, it is likely not the last of misguided, targeted efforts to bring this industry down.”

Many from within the crypto industry and even some U.S. lawmakers agree with this take, arguing that, among other measures, the U.S. government is making a coordinated effort to discourage banks from working with crypto firms — aka Choke Point 2.0 — under the guise of ensuring the financial system remains stable and safe.

When businesses make long-term decisions, they generally seek to reduce risk. So, given the choice of operating in a region with clear, crypto-friendly policies compared to one where regulations are unclear, and there is a greater potential for policies that hurt the competitiveness of U.S.-based activity, firms will generally choose the former.

Thiel highlighted how the actions of the U.S. government and regulators weigh in on business decisions while speaking to Cointelegraph, saying, “Regardless of the DAME tax’s likelihood of passing, Marathon has already begun diversifying the locations of our operations.”

Asia Express: Yuan stablecoin team arrested, WeChat’s new Bitcoin prices, HK crypto rules

Thiel added that “with regulation around mining being so nebulous,” his firm has made the strategic decision not to concentrate its footprint in the U.S. but rather diversify its operations.

He pointed to a May 9 announcement from his firm, which said it would be building two new mining facilities in Abu Dhabi. 

Abu Dhabi is a region that has made a concerted effort to attract crypto-related investment via its clear regulatory regime, which has been hailed as pro-market.

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

Will Biden’s plan to tax crypto mining reduce emissions? Critics say no

The tax is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, electricity costs and local environmental pollution, but has not been kindly received by the crypto community.

Cryptocurrency miners based in the United States could soon face a tax equal to 30% of the cost of electricity they use if President Joe Biden’s proposed budget for the fiscal year 2024 is approved by Congress, but the proposal has sparked debate about whether it would actually decrease global emissions and energy prices.

Cryptocurrency mining is a resource-intensive process that attempts to solve increasingly complex equations in order to create new blocks which can then be validated and added to the blockchain.

This process consumes a significant amount of energy, with some estimates placing the global energy consumption of Bitcoin (BTC) mining alone at around 0.59% of the world's energy usage, which is roughly equivalent to the energy usage of Malaysia, according to Worldometer.

Biden’s  Council of Economic Advisors (CEA), argues that the tax — dubbed the Digital Asset Mining Energy (DAME) excise tax — “encourages firms to start taking better account of the harms they impose on society,” adding:

“Estimated to raise $3.5 billion in revenue over 10 years, the primary goal of the DAME tax is to start having cryptominers pay their fair share of the costs imposed on local communities and the environment.”

By imposing a tax on electricity usage crypto miners will have a financial incentive to reduce their energy consumption, and with electricity generation making up such a large proportion of carbon emissions, this should theoretically reduce emissions in the U.S.

This idea is similar to the thinking behind carbon taxes, which are intended to disincentivize emitters by forcing them to pay the full social cost of their emissions after attempting to factor in costs associated with polluting.

Leakage

However, opponents of the tax argue that it will simply drive miners offshore to countries with lower tax rates and less stringent environmental regulations, where they will continue to emit large amounts of carbon dioxide. This situation is known as “carbon leakage,” whereby emissions are simply shifted from one location to another, rather than reduced overall.

As Coin Metrics co-founder Nic Carter points out, these countries may also have a much lower proportion of energy supplied by renewable sources, so emissions may even increase as crypto miners move offshore.

Carter was scathing in his critique of the policy, arguing that it would decrease tax revenue contrary to what the Biden administration suggests, increase carbon emissions, and empower “geopolitical enemies.”

In its blog post, the CEA noted that “the potential for cryptomining to relocate abroad — such as to areas with dirtier energy production — is a concern” but suggested that other countries are also moving to restrict crypto mining, and cited nine countries that already had banned the activity.

Speaking to Cointelegraph, environmental group Greenpeace USA's Bitcoin project lead Joshua Archer warned that regulations or taxes deterring crypto mining will likely be created wherever crypto miners move to, and argued that Bitcoin should eliminate its proof-of-work consensus mechanism.

The climate activism group has been calling for Bitcoin to transition to a proof-of-stake mechanism as part of its ongoing “change the code, not the climate” campaign which began early last year. 

One of the countries referred to by the CEA, China, banned crypto mining in 2021 after citing concerns about its electricity consumption and environmental impact. However, studies on the effect of the ban suggest that activity had simply moved to countries that use far less renewable energy, and actually increased global emissions.

The CEA also argued that crypto miner's electricity usage drives up costs for other consumers, and increases overall reliance on “dirtier sources of electricity.”

While this makes sense according to economic theory, as an increase in demand within a market leads to higher prices, it may overlook some important nuances of the crypto-mining industry and its effect on the electricity market in the U.S.

‘Beauty of Bitcoin’

Bitcoin miner Marathon Digital Holdings’s CEO Fred Thiel told Cointelegraph that “The beauty of Bitcoin mining is that it naturally incentivizes renewable energy generation.”

Thiel elaborated that “In many cases, green energy sources — such as solar and wind farms — are only feasible if there is consistent demand for that energy when it is produced,” adding:

“While most consumers’ energy needs fluctuate, miners act as consistent base load energy consumers. They help stabilize the grid, making new green energy projects financially feasible.”

According to Thiel, while Bitcoin mining incentivizes the production of renewable energy generation, Bitcoin miners in the U.S. are also drawn to renewable energy sources, as the excess energy they produce which is unable to be returned to the grid is some of the cheapest energy available in the U.S.

Thiel added that if this excess energy was not used by Bitcoin mining firms, it would not be able to be used by consumers and would otherwise be wasted.

Thiel noted that this mutually beneficial relationship between renewable energy producers and Bitcoin miners is contributing to an already ongoing shift towards more sustainable sources of electricity, pointing to the most recent survey by the Bitcoin Mining Council (BMC).

Based on the results of the survey, the BMC estimated that 58.9% of the electricity used in Bitcoin mining throughout the last quarter of 2022 was generated by renewable energy sources, a number that is increasing over time.

AI Eye: ‘Biggest ever’ leap in AI, cool new tools, AIs are the real DAOs

Thiel was also very scathing of the DAME tax, arguing that “it is a shot at a specific industry, not at a specific practice or fuel source,” adding:

“If the Biden Administration really wanted to reduce global emissions, it would target the ways electricity is generated – not arbitrarily target select industries that use it.”

He said that the proposal “is intended to run Bitcoin miners out of business” and “will both raise energy prices for consumers and reduce the feasibility of renewable energy development in the U.S.,” concluding:

"Either the administration is utterly misguided, or this proposed tax is nothing more than a move to hamper this industry for political reasons, because it is not in the interest of the people, the energy grid, or the environment."

The proposal comes amid calls that a lack of regulatory clarity and access to banking services in the U.S. is killing its crypto industry, and if the DAME tax is approved by Congress it may just be one more nail in the coffin.

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

US Presidential Candidate RFK Jr. Says Bitcoin Provides An ‘Escape Route’ From Financial Turmoil

US Presidential Candidate RFK Jr. Says Bitcoin Provides An ‘Escape Route’ From Financial TurmoilOn Monday, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. once again cautioned the public to be wary of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and he insisted that the Biden administration has launched a “steady barrage of hostile broadsides against cryptocurrencies.” Kennedy, who recently filed to run for president of the United States in the 2024 election as a […]

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

Operation Chokepoint: Bitcoin Advocates Discuss US Government’s Alleged Mission to Eliminate Crypto Access

Operation Chokepoint: Bitcoin Advocates Discuss US Government’s Alleged Mission to Eliminate Crypto AccessSince the collapse of three American banks friendly to cryptocurrency businesses and the U.S. government’s insistence that crypto assets are “risky investments,” many speculators believe bureaucrats are purposely closing access to cryptocurrencies. Some refer to the U.S. government’s recent enforcement as “Operation Chokepoint,” a mission aimed at eliminating access to the crypto ecosystem in the […]

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

‘Operation Choke Point 2.0’ may have contributed to SVB collapse: Mulvaney

While the existence of "Operation Choke Point 2.0" has not been confirmed, Mick Mulvaney spoke of “rumors” of its existence and the potential side effects of such a policy.

If the United States government really is implementing "Operation Choke Point 2.0" it will hurt financial stability and may have contributed to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) according to Donald Trump’s former Acting White House Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney.

“I don’t want to think that the government would actually do that,” Mulvaney said in a March 22 Bloomberg interview in reference to the rumored operation. He did however recall attending hearings on the original Operation Choke Point — a government initiative that aimed to limit certain industries’ access to U.S. banking services.

“You have to wonder if there’s not certain policies that the administration is putting in place that have — perhaps the intended, perhaps the unintended — consequences of raising the risk, and of increasing instability, and did we just see that at SVB?” he added.

“Were people at SVB because they were really good at it, or was there some factor in there that said we’re at SVB because no one else will take us.”

Mulvaney elaborated that he believes crypto played no role in the downfall of SVB and suggested poor risk management was to blame. He implied, however, the pressure being put on U.S. banks to avoid crypto may have contributed to SVB’s collapse.

"Operation Choke Point 2.0" is a term coined by Coin Metrics co-founder Nic Carter and refers to apparently coordinated efforts to discourage banks from holding crypto deposits or providing banking services to crypto firms on the basis of “safety and soundness” for the banking system.

While is it unclear whether "Operation Choke Point 2.0" is an official strategy, Carter has claimed there is evidence supporting its existence.

Related: Yellen defends government intervention to avoid another SVB

In a Feb. 9 blog post, Carter outlined some supposed evidence, highlighting a Jan. 3 joint statement on crypto assets from the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), which warned that decentralized blockchain networks are “highly likely to be inconsistent with safe and sound banking practices.”

More recently, critics pointed to the FDIC’s different treatment of crypto assets during the takeover of Signature Bank as further proof of the existence of "Operation Choke Point 2.0."

Magazine: Best and worst countries for crypto taxes — plus crypto tax tips

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

Signature Bank deposits, branches sold to Flagstar, crypto not included

The 40 branches of Signature Bank will officially reopen and operate as Flagstar Bank on March 20.

Only a week after its collapse, Signature Bank’s deposits and loans are set to be sold to Flagstar Bank, a subsidiary of New York Community Bancorp — crypto-related deposits however, will not be part of the deal.

The United States Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) announced the agreement on March 19, which will see $38.4 billion worth of non-cryptocurrency-related deposits and $12.9 billion in loans taken over by the Michigan-based bank under a “purchase and assumption agreement."

From March 20, Signature’s Bank 40 branches will begin operating as Flagstar Bank, where all deposits assumed by Flagstar Bank will continue to be insured up until the $250,000 insurance limit.

The takeover deal from Flagstar Bank did not include approximately $4 billion of deposits held by Signature Bank's digital assets business. Instead, the FDIC confirmed that it would transfer these deposits directly to customers who opened a digital banking account, stating:

“The FDIC will provide these deposits directly to customers whose accounts are associated with the digital banking business.”

The $4 billion figure amounts to 4.5% of the total $88.6 billion deposits that Signature Bank had as of Dec. 31.

Coinbase, Celsius and Paxos are three crypto firms that recently confirmed having some exposure to Signature Bank.

Related: US lawmaker accuses FDIC of using banking instability to attack crypto

Last week, a March 17 report from Reuters cited two sources who suggested that any buyer of Signature would be required to divest crypto activities as part of a potential rescue plan.

At the time, an FDIC spokesperson denied this, noting that the agency did not require crypto divestment as part of any sale.

However, Castle Island Ventures partner Nic Carter believes the latest announcement shows that the FDIC “lied” in its response to Reuters.

The takeover comes after Signature Bridge Bank was created by the FDIC on March 12 after the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) closed the bank and appointed the FDIC as its receiver.

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum

Silvergate downfall sparks debate over whose fault it actually was

The demise of the crypto-friendly bank has prompted discussion about who tipped the first domino, and where crypto firms can turn for their banking needs.

The voluntary liquidation of Silvergate Bank has sparked many to share their thoughts about the source of its troubles and the broader impact of the crypto-friendly bank’s collapse on crypto. 

From lawmakers to crypto analysts, crypto firm executives to commentators — nearly everyone’s had something to say regarding the recent announcement from Silvergate.

Some United States lawmakers have used the moment to make a comment about the state of the crypto industry, labeling it a “risky, volatile sector,” which “spreads risk across the financial system.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren called Silvergate’s failure “disappointing, but predictable,” calling for regulators to “step up against crypto risk.”

Senator Sherrod Brown also chimed in, sharing his concern that banks that get involved with crypto are putting the financial system at risk and reaffirming his desire to “establish strong safeguards for our financial system from the risks of crypto.”

The senators’ remarks have sparked criticism from the community, some of whom argue it was not a crypto problem and that fractional-reserve banking was to blame — as Silvergate held far more in-demand deposits compared to cash on hand.

Several companies have instead used the recent announcement from Silvergate to reiterate their lack of or now-severed ties with the firm.

Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao assured customers on Twitter that the crypto exchange does not have assets stored with Silvergate, while peer exchange Coinbase has also assured its followers that no customer funds were held by the bank.

Meanwhile, Nic Carter, co-founder of venture firm Castle Island and crypto intelligence firm Coin Metrics, suggested that it was the government that “hastened the collapse” of Silvergate by launching investigations and legal attacks on it.

“They’re the arsonist and the firefighter in one,” he wrote.

The CEO of financial services firm Lumida — Ram Ahluwalia — had a similar take, arguing in a tweet that Silvergate faced a bank run after a senator’s letter had undermined public trust in the firm. He saidthat “Silvergate was denied due process.”

Related: Marathon Digital terminates credit facilities with Silvergate Bank

In an earlier blog post, Carter referred to “Operation Choke Point 2.0” as being underway, claiming that the U.S. government is using the banking sector to organize “a sophisticated, widespread crackdown against the crypto industry.”

Others believe the collapse of Silvergate won’t necessarily hurt the crypto industry, but along with proposed changes to tax laws, would exacerbate the exodus of crypto firms from the U.S.

With Silvergate winding down, some have also asked where crypto firms will turn to now.

Coinbase, which previously accepted payments via Silvergate, announced on March 3 that it would facilitate institutional client cash transactions for its prime customers with its other banking partner, Signature Bank.

Signature Bank, however, announced in December that it intended to reduce its exposure to the crypto sector by reducing deposits from clients holding digital assets.

To further reduce its crypto exposure, on Jan. 21 Signature imposed a minimum transaction limit of $100,000 on transactions it would process through the SWIFT payment system on behalf of crypto exchange Binance.

Crypto Trader Says One Top-50 Altcoin Could Go Up by Over 100%, Updates Outlook on Bitcoin and Ethereum