I doubt that 50 days have any meaning here. It was 2 weeks before as well. These second tariffs dont work with economies with 40% of world GDP. I hope case A holds.
whohoo! now we are rotating back to tech. enjoy the roller coaster!
Last jobs report was attributed to the current governmentâs hard work.
I would assume the inflation is still considered to be related to previous government until I goes down again.
1 Like
⊠or market bets on a new bout of TACOism prior to August 1.
EU clearly signaled that a 30% tariff would have a huge trade impact (and if itâs 30% they donât really care if it gets above as trade will mostly stop so theyâll match the tariff and this will escalate).
So yeah I guess market is betting things will change until Aug 1st.
1 Like
Oops I did it again.
Guess who bought healthcare yesterday?
US CLARITY act has interesting provision. This is about reclassification mechanism. It seems US administration is paving path for companies to Tokenize their stock and trade on crypto market rather than stock market. They can also get out of purview of SEC. Not sure whatâs the purpose of this and how does this help anyone
âUnder the House bill, a publicly traded company like Meta or Tesla could simply decide to put its stock on the blockchain and - poof! - it would escape all SEC regulation,â said Warren
ââââ-
Summary from Perplexity
The provision of the CLARITY Act that allows what Senator Warren is describing relates to how the Act classifies and regulates tokenized assets. Specifically, under the billâs current language, assets that are moved onto a blockchain and tokenized could potentially be reclassified from traditional securities (regulated by the SEC) to digital commodities, which fall under the purview of the CFTC or receive much lighter regulation if they meet certain criteria1246.
Key points from the relevant provisions:
- The Act creates a category called âinvestment contract assetsâ: Tokens or assets that start as securities can later be reclassified as commodities if the underlying blockchain network is deemed âsufficiently decentralized.â This process could allow companies to argue that once their assets are on a mature, decentralized blockchain, they are no longer securities and fall outside full SEC oversight1.
- Regulatory split: The Act splits oversight based on how the digital asset is used: if itâs primarily a commodity or utility, the CFTC regulates it; if itâs still functioning as a security, the SEC does135. Critics, including Senator Warren, argue this opens a regulatory loophole.
- Loophole concern: Warrenâs concern is that a publicly traded company could issue tokenized versions of its stock on a blockchain and, by meeting the Actâs decentralization criteria, those tokens would escape SEC regulationâremoving key investor protections and disclosure requirements246.
The Actâs language about allowing tokens or other assets to migrate out of SEC oversight when theyâre placed on blockchain networks and treated as âdecentralized commoditiesâ is the legal hook Warren highlights as enabling this potential bypass of traditional securities laws126.
This concern is specifically about the reclassification mechanismânot one section of the Act, but rather the combined definitions and regulatory splits for when assets are considered âdigital commoditiesâ versus âsecurities,â and the criteria for a blockchain to be deemed âmatureâ or âdecentralizedâ13.
- CLARITY Act explained: What it means for Crypto Week and beyond
- Sen. Elizabeth Warren: CLARITY Bill Could Allow Tesla And Meta To Evade SEC Rules
- Congress Set to Bring CLARITY to Digital Asset Market Structure
- Warren Warns CLARITY Act May Let Tesla, Meta Dodge SEC Oversight - CoinCentral
- House Announces âCrypto Weekâ as SEC Issues ETP Guidance and Weighs in on Tokenization | Paul Hastings LLP
- Sen. Warren warns that the CLARITY bill could allow Meta, Tesla, and other major firms to bypass SEC rules
- https://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/2025-07-10_-_SBS_-_Clarity_Act_of_2025_FINAL.pdf
- https://www.inc.com/brian-contreras/crypto-week-mike-johnson-clarity-act-genius-act-ctfc-sec-regulation/91213748
- Understanding the CLARITY Act: Implications for the Cryptocurrency Sector and Future Regulations
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HZVOJFh9XQ
1 Like
Hadnât looked at my positions or balance for a while (sayâŠ2 weeks which felt like 2 centuries), I was pleasantly surprised when I looked this morning.
Time for weekend , time for another tariff drama
Seems EU is going to be left with no choice but to have a China style showdown but without a real leverage like ârare earthâ
So, if the EU stops buying from the US, who do you think the US will sell its products to (Hint: The purchasing power of the EU canât really be replaced)? The EU has the second-highest GDP, after the US and before China. Also, have you heard of ASML, a chip machine manufacturer in the Netherlands? I heard that they have a monopoly, but I donât know the specifics⊠/s off
1 Like
Well. I am not saying EU doesnât have a leverage. US & EU both will suffer in trade war but US is willing to burn down the village & its tough to fight with suicide bombers.
I meant EU doesnât have choke point. ASML is unique but it mainly ships to Taiwan and Asia. Donât know how much chips production US have
And letâs not forget EU is not digitally independent. One stroke of pen and EU is shutdown
1 Like
With possibly the closest ally on earth? I mean I think itâs great that EU politicians actually have to come up with strategic and economic plans now and not rely on US economic and military protection anymoreâŠ
Guess where their chips are going to? Datacenters of mainly US companies.
1 Like
I think the big problem with ASML is that it doesnât lead directly to empty shelves, just to lack of expansion. Furthermore, AFAIU ASML is in a bit of a slump right now, and for a lot of US fab capacity not sure how much it really is needed vs. is just US reshoring industrial policy. (of course it being industrial policy with priority does help, but not sure how TSMC stands and Intel doesnât exactly look like they have money to buy a bunch of machines right now 
)
Also the US closing down services to the EU is powerful and short term very damaging, but also the strongest impulse to local industry you could give. And people are already increasingly looking in e.g. governments âŠ
In the short term, I agree, but the EU probably has the most diverse industry possible. As long as raw materials that donât exist in Europe are flowing in, I wouldnât worry.
Donât think I disagree, but if the short term is painful enough I donât think there is political support for a trade war.
Services, thereâs a surplus in favor of US and thatâs where US makes a ton of money. And thereâs no way US would restrict access to US services (thatâs suicide for US tech companies the EU market is the only other market where they make large amount of money).
5 Likes
There will never be political support for a trade war. But this are negotiations and Trump does negotiate quiet rational while the EU has apparently not the slightest idea how to negotiate.
Negotiations are always conflicts. There are no ethic barriers, you just try to get as much as you can. For Europeans this seems to be impossibleâŠ
1 Like
Donât forget Zeiss optics in Germany
3 Likes
Oh boy, I donât know whether Iâll ever not shiver from Trump-normalizing phrases.* 
If you think this further than âX wants Y so he bullies Z until he gets Yâ (which sounds rational to some), the rational thing would be to be reliable and predictable. And current administration is IMO neither of that.
And to close the loop to forum-related topics: Neither do most in the market think they are. Basically their actions are just ignored at this point, as everything will change anyway the next day.
*Even though I agree with most of the interview answers otherwise.
6 Likes
âBullyingâ as you call it is a negotiation tactic. You build up pressure and just wait what happens⊠It did not work with China letâs see what happens with Europe.