Our Founder & CEO @e_woodford with @mikulaja on the future of money: Work today, get paid in two weeks, and you have effectively lent your employer money interest-free. Lower the cost and speed of settlement and pay follows the work. One rail that does it: onchain money.

With the OCC awarding World Liberty Financial a trust bank charter, can we blame voters (including Republicans btw) who think crypto is a scam & policymakers are rigging the game to benefit themselves? A majority of American voters of *both* parties think crypto has too much influence in DC, don't trust laws shaped by policymakers who stand to benefit personally: Crypto has undeniably become a powerful force in Washington DC and on Capitol Hill, thanks to the money bazooka industry lobbyists have deployed in recent election cycles against crypto skeptics and in favor of those supportive of the industry. But most everyday Americans -- both Democrats and Republicans -- remain highly skeptical of crypto, as a category, and particularly the industry's influence in DC, according to the results of a recent bipartisan poll by Lake Research Partners and Chesapeake Beach Consulting. The online survey of 1,000 likely midterm voters was conducted from May 15-21. It found that: -overall, 66% of respondents said the crypto industry has "too much" influence in Washington, including 60% of self-identified Republican respondents. -80% of respondents said they were "very" or "somewhat" concerned about cryptocurrency donations influencing legislation (89% of Democrats, 75% of independents/weak partisans, 75% of Republicans) -74% of respondents said they "somewhat" or "strongly" distrust crypto laws that are shaped by government officials that are benefitting from crypto (81% of Democrats, 68% of Republicans) -62% of respondents said they'd be less likely to vote for a candidate that takes significant money from the crypto industry -58% (including 51% of Republican respondents) agreed with the statement that "Cryptocurrency is an unregulated unstable market filled with fraud and scams"

Coastal Community Bank took a $68.8m charge in Q2, due to troubles at an unnamed lending program. I've confirmed LendingPoint is that partner: LendingPoint serves primarily near-prime borrowers, offering unsecured personal loans from $1,000 to $36,500, with terms from 24 to 72 months and APRs from 7.99% to 35.99%. In addition to partnering with Coastal, LendingPoint also works with FinWise, another popular partner bank, as well as originating loans under its own licenses in certain states. LendingPoint previously partnered with Midland States Bank, though Midland wound down that relationship, ultimately selling $87.1 million of LendingPoint-originated loans in December 2024, realizing net charge offs and provisions for credit losses of $17.3 million on the sale, equating to nearly ~20% of the face value of the outstanding receivables. Coastal’s $42.1 million loss in Q2 “is primarily attributable to a $68.8 million credit expense related to a single, isolated CCBX partner relationship,” according to the company’s earnings release. The expense is comprised of a $46 million valuation adjustment to a credit enhancement asset and a $22.8 million provision for credit losses, which, the release said, are “not expected to be fully collected under its indemnification arrangement.” With a total of $1.68 billion of consumer loans outstanding in its CCBX business unit, that $530 million book represents approximately 31.5% of CCBX’s consumer loan book, or 23.8% of its overall CCBX book of about $2.23 billion. It appears that, as of the end of the second quarter, Coastal assessed that LendingPoint wouldn’t be able to fulfill its indemnification obligations, suggesting the financial condition of that unnamed partner — LendingPoint — has materially deteriorated. But LendingPoint's problems shouldn't have been a surprise. Signs of trouble at LendingPoint have included: -a botched "system conversion," which, Midland States Bank said publicly, was to blame for servicing problems and deteriorating credit quality; -significant executive churn, with LendingPoint cycling through multiple CEOs, as well as turn over in CFO, CTO, CRO, CTO, and general counsel roles; -Multiple ratings downgrades from KBRA on the lender's rated asset-backed securitizations; -and a publicly traded business development company treating loans it made to LendingPoint as significantly impaired, indicating it is unlikely to be repaid in full. LendingPoint is hardly the first fintech program to cause headaches or financial losses for its bank partner. With the recently reported news that the FDIC is working with banking and fintech trade associations on a potential independent standard-setting organization, the Coastal-LendingPoint situation provides an interesting opportunity for a thought experiment: is this a scenario that standards should attempt to address? And if so, how? Full story on this in Fintech Business Weekly.