**Bitcoin** (BTC) has experienced a **6.7% drop** despite **$2 billion** in **spot ETF inflows**. This stagnation is attributed to several factors:

- **Mt. Gox coin movements:** The movement of over 140,000 BTC by Mt. Gox may indicate an asset distribution to creditors, potentially increasing **selling pressure**.

- **Regulatory uncertainty:** Legal actions against crypto exchanges and intermediaries by the **SEC, CFTC, and DOJ** have created **uncertainty** and made the industry **less appealing** to institutional investors.

- **Anti-crypto lobby in the US Senate:** Senators Warren and Cassidy have raised concerns about the role of cryptocurrencies in the **fentanyl trade**, further **dampening sentiment**.

- **Withdrawal of BTC from exchanges:** Inflows into spot Bitcoin ETFs have prompted the withdrawal of BTC from exchanges, reaching its **lowest level since 2018**, suggesting **reduced market liquidity**. 

Despite these headwinds, experts believe this stagnation is not necessarily a sign of a **bearish trend** and that **institutional investors** are still acquiring Bitcoin through ETFs.

<p style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 15px; width:240px;"><img src="https://images.cointelegraph.com/images/840_aHR0cHM6Ly9zMy5jb2ludGVsZWdyYXBoLmNvbS91cGxvYWRzLzIwMjQtMDUvNDViODkyNzktZjBhYy00YjBhLTk0MjUtMzA3NDMzMjYxODAwLmpwZw==.jpg"></p><p>Reasons for BTC's weakness include Mt. Gox coin movements, regulatory actions, and the U.S. Senate's anti-crypto lobby.</p>

Marcel Pechman 29 minutes ago Why is Bitcoin stagnated despite $2B in spot ETF inflows? Reasons for BTC's weakness include Mt. Gox coin movements, regulatory actions, and the U.S. Senate's anti-crypto lobby. 334 Total views 11 Total shares Listen to article 0:00 Market Analysis Own this piece of crypto history Collect this article as NFT Join us on social networks Bitcoin (BTC) has experienced a 6.7% drop after almost reaching $72,000 on May 21, settling at $67,100. This decline does not necessarily signal a bearish trend, as Bitcoin is still only 8.7% below its all-time high. However, investors are puzzled why the recent inflows into Bitcoin spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) haven't sparked more bullish sentiment.Distribution of assets by the failed Mt. Gox exchange estateData from Farside Investors reveals $1.96 billion in net inflows into U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs since May 15, equivalent to 64 days of BTC issuance from miners. Notably, the U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF market has now exceeded $50 billion in assets under management. In comparison, U.S. gold ETFs hold about $118.5 billion, according to the World Gold Council.Moreover, inflows into spot Bitcoin ETFs typically prompt the withdrawal of Bitcoins from exchanges, which has dropped to its lowest level since March 2018—2.3 million BTC, as per Glassnode data.Aggregate Bitcoin balances on exchanges, BTC. Source: GlassnodeAlthough there's no certainty these coins will be sold in the near term, their transfer to cold storage and custodians outside of exchanges usually reduces market liquidity. This issue becomes more pronounced in bull markets, where thinner order books at higher price levels can amplify price movements due to aggressive buying.Consequently, if institutional investors continue to acquire Bitcoin through ETFs yet the price keeps falling, it's likely that selling pressure originates from the regular spot markets. It's suggested that the movement of 141,686 BTC by the bankrupt Japanese exchange Mt. Gox on May 28 indicates an imminent asset distribution to its creditors, ahead of the scheduled deadline on October 31.Over $9.4 billion worth of Bitcoin is owed to about 127,000 creditors of Mt. Gox, who have been waiting for over a decade since the exchange's collapse in 2014 due to multiple hacks. Despite the short-term negative impact on Bitcoin's price, Anndy Lian, an intergovernmental blockchain expert, believes that repaying this debt will resolve a longstanding issue and permanently remove the associated uncertainty.Regulatory uncertainty and the anti-crypto lobbyAmong the reasons prompting Bitcoin holders to cash out above $67,000 is the regulatory uncertainty in the United States. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission have taken legal actions against leading exchanges and intermediaries, including Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, KuCoin, and Robinhood.Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice has levied charges against the co-founders of Tornado Cash and the developers of Samourai Wallet for money laundering, as well as against Roger “Bitcoin Jesus” Ver for allegations of tax evasion and fraud dating back seven years. Although these events do not directly affect Bitcoin, they tarnish the industry’s image, making it less appealing to institutional investors.Related: 3 solid Bitcoin indicators predicting BTC price rise to $75K in JuneThis issue extends beyond the U.S. For instance, Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission has issued an ultimatum to cryptocurrency exchanges that have not yet registered to operate in the area. As of May 31, only 18 exchanges have applied for a license, with major players such as OKX, Huobi, and Gate opting out due to the stringent regulatory requirements imposed by Hong Kong. In addition to ongoing legal challenges and Wells notices, there's a persistent political backlash against cryptocurrencies. On May 29, U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren and William Cassidy addressed a letter to the Drug Enforcement Administration, claiming that cryptocurrencies have "played an increasingly prominent role" in the fentanyl trade. Senator Warren has previously faced criticism for using unreliable data in discussions about terrorism.These factors, together with the potential impact on cryptocurrency intermediaries and the possible selling pressure from the distribution of Mt. Gox coins do not set a definitive upper limit for Bitcoin at $70,000 or similar levels. It remains to be seen whether spot ETF investors will maintain their positions as the U.S. debt continues to escalate. For now, the market appears to be under bearish control in the short term.This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph. #Bitcoin #Hong Kong #Senate #SEC #Markets #Drugs #Binance #OKX #Bitcoin ETF Add reaction

Factors Contributing to Bitcoin's Stagnation Despite $2 Billion ETF Inflows

Twice rejected by American voters in favor of Donald Trump, the **Democratic party** now faces its most severe **crisis of identity** in four decades. Nowhere is the party’s search for relevance in Trump’s America more desperate than in its embrace of **cryptocurrency**, a sector whose existence depends upon its ability to circumvent the financial regulatory state the Democrats spent a century constructing. 

How else to explain the Democratic representative **Ritchie Torres** – whose **South Bronx** district is the poorest in the United States – joining forces with the Republican **Tom Emmer** to champion cryptocurrency through their **newly formed congressional Crypto caucus**?

Congressional Republicans have always been uniform in their support for cryptocurrency: in May 2024, just three Republican House members voted against a bill to significantly relax regulations on digital tokens. But since 2016, the cryptocurrency industry has made **steady inroads** into the Democratic party. That convergence, if it continues, will represent a return to the **pre-New Deal financial politics** that the party spent a century rejecting.

Throughout American history, the politics of money and financial risk have been central to party coalitions. Not since the election of 1896, however, have the Democrats been the party of **deflationary, restrictive “hard money”**. As the historians **Anton Jäger** and **Noam Maggor** explain, the de-facto fusion of the **Populist party** with the Democratic party transformed it into a vehicle for those who saw money not as a neutral store of value, but as a political instrument that could serve developmental ends – in this case, directing investment to credit-starved regions of the country.

William Jennings Bryan’s defeat drove the party to moderate its more radical monetary positions. But notwithstanding the occasional inconsistencies, Democrats generally maintained the **anti-deflationary stance** established in 1896. Thirty years later, the **Great Depression** provided Franklin D. Roosevelt with the mandate and the crisis necessary to complete this transformation: the United States abandoned the **gold standard** in 1933.

“Consumer protection” in its contemporary form only truly entered the American political lexicon in the 1960s, but this period established the contours of America’s politics of financial risk. The **Banking Act of 1933** (often referred to as **Glass-Steagall**) separated commercial and investment banking to protect ordinary depositors from speculative excesses. The **Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934** imposed disclosure requirements on financial markets and established the **Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)**. Most critically, the creation of the **Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)** ended the era of devastating bank runs by insuring deposits.

Collectively, these measures represented a fundamentally new relationship between citizens, banks, and financial risk: the state would actively shape financial markets rather than simply enforcing contracts within them.

The post-war era saw the Democratic party further articulate that approach to **“market-making”**. The **Employment Act of 1946** declared it the government’s responsibility to maintain “maximum employment”, while the Federal Reserve, treasury, SEC, and FDIC enforced financial stability through interest rate caps, capital controls, and heavy regulation of financial institutions. While occasionally inefficient, these policies contributed to remarkable stability. As the economists **Carmen Reinhart** and **Kenneth Rogoff** have documented, the period from 1945 to 1971 saw virtually no banking crises in advanced economies.

The **Clinton administration’s financial deregulation** – culminating in the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 and the deregulation of derivatives in 2000 – represented a significant retreat from these principles and ended in the catastrophe of 2008. But, if only to offset the mounting risk they allowed the private sector to assume, the Clinton administration frequently sought to expand the FDIC’s responsibilities.

Pro-crypto Democrats, from Torres to the disgraced New York City mayor **Eric Adams**, argue that cryptocurrency aligns with progressive principles. “**Blockchain technology** can liberate the lowest income communities from the high fees of the traditional financial system,” Torres said at an industry-organized summit last year. **Kamala Harris** herself appealed to cryptocurrency as an opportunity for Black men. But cryptocurrency, at its core, subverts the tools for economic management Democrats have championed for decades.

The FDIC was created precisely because uninsured deposits catalyzed routine bank runs; cryptocurrency exchanges offer no comparable protection. The Federal Reserve’s sovereignty over the American monetary base enables it to expand the money supply during downturns to maintain employment; Bitcoin’s fixed supply explicitly rejects this responsibility. The SEC was established because unregulated securities markets harmed ordinary investors; cryptocurrency’s decentralization enables exchanges to operate outside its protective frameworks.

The industry’s **“political investments”** – to borrow the political scientist **Thomas Ferguson’s** terminology – are an undeniably defining force in American politics. By some counts, nearly half of all corporate campaign contributions in 2024 came from the crypto sector. But despite Kamala Harris’s substantial concessions to the industry, the top three crypto PACs leaned red by a margin of nearly 2:1. Harris’s promises to the industry were never enough to outweigh the Trump campaign’s proposal, running since late July, to enshrine crypto as a **“permanent national asset”** through a national bitcoin “stockpile”.

Modest deregulation is simply not what crypto is in the political game for. It requires nothing less than the **seizure of the American state**. And until Democrats can outmatch Trump’s handouts to the sector, crypto will stay with the **Republican party**.

Volatility is the basic roadblock to crypto’s further adoption. It is simply too risky for most people. No amount of regulatory tweaks will change that fundamental affliction: as long as cryptocurrencies are predominantly held as investments rather than used for transactions, their prices will remain highly sensitive to investor demand fluctuations. And the absence of traditional stabilization mechanisms, like central banks or reserve assets, contributes to the high volatility of crypto tokens. Put simply: if crypto is to grow, it’ll need both state backstopping and displacement of the traditional banking system altogether.

Trump has set about doing exactly this. His administration’s recently established **“strategic bitcoin reserve”** is, in effect, a state backstop for cryptocurrency. But the Trump administration’s designs extend far beyond “de-risking” crypto: their goal, as the political economist **Martijn Konings** observes, appears to be the destabilization of the traditional banking system itself.

At the behest of **Elon Musk’s** so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) – itself named after Dogecoin, Musk’s cryptocurrency of choice – the Trump administration’s “deferred resignation” packages and layoffs have already reduced the FDIC’s workforce by 10%. And Trump issued an executive order in mid-February requiring that the formerly independent agency submit to **White House oversight**.

The Trump team has floated replacing the already enervated FDIC with a gutted insurance scheme housed in the treasury, merging it with the office of the comptroller of the currency, or simply defanging it through mass layoffs and employee transfers. In either case, tighter executive control over banks’ balance sheets will render the financial system’s solvency contingent upon whether a particular bank is favored or disfavored by the president. It’s easy to imagine a resulting loss of confidence in the traditional banking system – an outcome that crypto advocates believe would work to their advantage.

If the Democrats wish to outcompete the Republican party for crypto dollars, then, they’ll need to offer the “industry” much more than deregulation. They’ll have to become active participants in engineering a return to the **pre-New Deal politics of money and financial risk** – the very positions against which the modern Democratic party defined itself. That would be a capitulation unprecedented even in the Democratic party’s long history of betraying the American working class.

The Democratic representative Ritchie Torres joined forces with a Republican to form the Congressional Crypto caucus. That’s a dangerous move

Why the Democratic Party's Embrace of Cryptocurrency Could Backfire

Bitcoin price **stabilizes around $87,000** on Friday, with its RSI indicating **indecisiveness** among traders. Meanwhile, Ethereum (ETH) and Ripple (XRP) are showing signs of weakness as they confront resistance at critical levels this week.

## Bitcoin’s RSI Indicator Signals Indecision
Bitcoin has broken above its **200-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA)** at approximately $85,580 and rose by **4.45%** until Monday. However, it has since stabilized around **$87,000**, finding support at the 200-day EMA. If Bitcoin breaks above the descending trendline, it could reach the psychological level of **$90,000**, with a successful close above potentially leading to a rally towards **$95,000**.

![BTC/USDT daily chart](https://editorial.fxsstatic.com/miscelaneous/BTCUSDT_2025-03-28_08-13-35-638787317835671071.png)
*BTC/USDT daily chart*

Conversely, a rejection from the trendline or a close below the **200-day EMA** may push Bitcoin down to its next support level at **$78,258**.

## Ethereum Displays Weakness
Ethereum has found support near **$1,861** for two weeks, recovering nearly **7%** last week. However, it has faced a **4% correction** over the last three days, trading below **$2,000** at the moment. If this downward trend continues, it might retest its support at **$1,861**.

![ETH/USDT daily chart](https://editorial.fxsstatic.com/miscelaneous/ETHUSDT_2025-03-28_08-50-25-638787318495582156.png)
*ETH/USDT daily chart*

## Ripple Faces Potential Downtrend
Ripple's price broke above its **100-day EMA** at **$2.32** last week but has since declined **5.74%**. Currently, it is nearing its **100-day EMA** of approximately **$2.31**. If Ripple closes below this level, it could drop to its next support at **$1.96**.

![XRP/USDT daily chart](https://editorial.fxsstatic.com/miscelaneous/XRPUSDT_2025-03-28_08-16-48-638787319171658488.png)
*XRP/USDT daily chart*

If the **100-day EMA** holds, Ripple may recover to test its resistance level at **$2.72**.

## FAQs
- **Bitcoin** is the leading cryptocurrency by market cap, designed to function as money without centralized control.
- **Altcoins** are all cryptocurrencies except Bitcoin, with Ethereum sometimes excluded from this definition.
- **Stablecoins** are cryptocurrencies pegged to a reserve asset to maintain price stability.
- **Bitcoin dominance** reflects Bitcoin's market cap relative to all cryptocurrencies, often signaling investor sentiment.

**Disclaimer:** This article contains forward-looking statements and should not be construed as investment advice. Always conduct thorough research before making investment decisions.

Bitcoin (BTC) price stabilizes at around $87,000 on Friday, as its RSI indicates indecisiveness among traders. 

Bitcoin Holds Steady at $87K: What’s Next for ETH and XRP?

## **Market Update on Cryptocurrencies**

**President Donald Trump** has recently threatened to impose **larger tariffs** on the **European Union** and **Canada** if they attempt to harm the U.S. economy, a move that could unsettle the **crypto market**. This warning has already started affecting cryptocurrencies, notably **Dogecoin** and **XRP**.

![Crypto Market](https://cdn.sanity.io/images/s3y3vcno/production/733635d96cead78876417c1724bd14329ab3d428-1280x441.jpg?auto=format)

### **Key Developments:**
- Trump stated, "If the European Union works with Canada in order to do economic harm to the USA, large scale Tariffs, far larger than currently planned, will be placed on them."
- This announcement has caused a **brief sell-off** in major cryptocurrencies during Asian trading hours. **XRP** and **Solana (SOL)** fell by around **2%**, while **Dogecoin (DOGE)** had retracted some of its **3.5% gains** from the previous day.
- Despite these challenges, some analysts believe that developments in Asia and favorable regulations might provide a **catalyst for Bitcoin prices** in the near future.

### **Market Sentiment:**
- Traders are closely monitoring the upcoming **Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE)** data release on **March 28**, which is crucial for **Federal Reserve** interest rate decisions.
- **Bitcoin (BTC)** is currently facing headwinds due to trade uncertainties, and a stronger **U.S. dollar** might further depress crypto prices as investors seek safe havens like gold or cash.

### **Emerging Opportunities:**
- The **Sui Network's SUI** token has surged **7%** ahead of the launch of the **Walrus Network**, indicating some positive sentiment within the market.
- Analysts remain **bullish** on the potential for recovery in the crypto space as inflation fears dissipate and interest rates are expected to decline.

**Traders are advised to stay alert for further developments** related to tariffs and economic policies that could impact the crypto market significantly.

President Donald Trump has threatened to impose larger tariffs on the European Union and Canada if they attempt to harm the U.S. economy, potentially causing instability in the crypto market.

Factors Contributing to Bitcoin's Stagnation Despite $2 Billion ETF Inflows

Summary:

$1.96 billion in net inflows into U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs since May 15, equivalent to 64 days of BTC issuance from miners.

U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF market has now exceeded $50 billion in assets under management.

Movement of 141,686 BTC by Mt. Gox for an asset distribution to creditors ahead of the October 31 deadline.

Regulatory uncertainty in the United States, with legal actions against leading exchanges and intermediaries by the SEC, CFTC, and DOJ.

Concerns raised by Senators Warren and Cassidy about the role of cryptocurrencies in the fentanyl trade.

Comments

Join Our Community

BitcoinToday.app

Other Latest News

Why the Democratic Party's Embrace of Cryptocurrency Could Backfire

Bitcoin Holds Steady at $87K: What’s Next for ETH and XRP?

Trump's Tariff Threats Impact Crypto: Dogecoin Rises, XRP Falls

Other Latest News

Why the Democratic Party's Embrace of Cryptocurrency Could Backfire

Bitcoin Holds Steady at $87K: What’s Next for ETH and XRP?

Trump's Tariff Threats Impact Crypto: Dogecoin Rises, XRP Falls