Category: Uncategorized

Ripple CEO Criticizes JPMorgan’s Dimon Over CLARITY Act Remarks

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse has publicly criticized JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon for his recent statements attacking the CLARITY Act, a proposed piece of legislation concerning cryptocurrency regulation. Garlinghouse accused Dimon of consistently dismissing the crypto industry for years while misrepresenting the bill’s actual purpose.

During an interview with Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo, Garlinghouse directly addressed comments Dimon made earlier this month. In those remarks, the banking executive alleged that Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong was lobbying for the bill in Washington and claimed the proposed legislation would weaken protections against money laundering and violations of the Bank Secrecy Act.

Garlinghouse suggested that Dimon was either intentionally attempting to undermine support for the CLARITY Act or fundamentally misunderstanding its provisions.

“As much as we can talk about whether or not Brian Armstrong is representing the industry, he is not; he is representing Coinbase, and in certain ways he is going to look out for Coinbase’s best interest,” Garlinghouse stated. “But at the end of the day, I think what Jamie Dimon did was a disservice. He’s representing that this reduces compliance concerns, that it makes it easier to do bad things. That’s just not true. It’s either intentional misrepresentation or even negligent to try to make support for the Clarity Act go away.”

Dimon’s criticism of the bill and Armstrong was also evident at the Reagan National Economic Forum last month. At the event, Dimon stated that banks would not accept the bill in its current form and made disparaging remarks about Armstrong, reportedly saying, “He’s the only one, and he’s spending hundreds of millions of dollars in Washington on this thing. He’s full of shit.”

Economist Peter Schiff has also weighed in, criticizing Dimon’s comments and arguing that stablecoin issuers should not be subjected to the same banking regulations as traditional lenders. Schiff, a known critic of the crypto industry, differentiated stablecoins, which he noted are typically fully backed and invested in U.S. Treasuries, from banks that operate with FDIC insurance and engage in riskier lending practices. He asserted that stablecoins serve a legitimate purpose.

The CLARITY Act is currently progressing through Congress but is encountering increasing opposition from major financial institutions. The bill’s primary objective is to delineate regulatory oversight for different types of cryptocurrencies, assigning responsibilities between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in an effort to reduce regulatory ambiguity in the United States.

After passing the House in 2025, the legislation moved through the Senate Banking Committee last month. However, it still requires further debate in the full Senate. A significant point of contention involves provisions related to stablecoin yields, which banks contend could permit crypto firms to offer interest-like returns without adhering to the same regulatory requirements imposed on traditional financial institutions.

Americans may have contributed as much as $34 billion to offshore prediction market trading volumes in the 12 months leading up to April 2026, according to a new study commissioned by the Coalition for Prediction Markets. This industry group includes regulated operators such as Kalshi, Crypto.com, and Coinbase.

The research, conducted by Rutgers professor Harry Crane, a member of the CFTC Innovation Advisory Committee, compared data from offshore platforms—those that do not permit U.S. users and are not regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)—with platforms exclusively serving U.S. users or non-U.S. users.

“As a share of all U.S. prediction market activity (including regulated and offshore platforms), we estimate 12.5–31.5% of U.S. prediction market volume occurs on offshore platforms,” the study stated.

“Based on current third-party estimates of industry growth, U.S.-based activity on offshore prediction markets could grow to an estimated $133 billion in annual volume by 2030, assuming constant relative market shares of regulated and offshore markets,” the study added.

Offshore Market Activity

Harry Crane analyzed the largest offshore prediction market exchanges, which are prohibited from serving U.S. users. His findings indicate that between $11 billion and $34 billion in offshore prediction market activity originates from U.S. users, a figure described as a conservative estimate.

Polymarket’s Role

The study highlighted Polymarket, the largest offshore platform, estimating that approximately $10.6 billion to $26.7 billion of its $55.6 billion in trailing 12-month trading volume was attributable to U.S. users, despite their technical prohibition on the platform. Polymarket, which was compelled to move offshore by the CFTC in 2022, announced last fall that it had received regulatory approval to operate in the U.S. Since then, it has gradually launched its regulated Polymarket U.S. platform, though the study’s data did not separate volumes from this new entity due to reliability concerns. Data from a Dune dashboard indicates that the regulated U.S. version of Polymarket has posted approximately $5 billion in notional volumes to date.

A representative for Polymarket did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Broader Concerns

While Polymarket was the largest offshore market examined, the study also analyzed data from other unregulated markets, including Opinion, Predict, Limitless, and Myriad. (Myriad is a product of Decrypt’s parent company, Dastan).

The Coalition for Prediction Markets, comprised of regulated operators, views this trend as a significant concern, arguing that offshore markets do not adhere to the same standards as those operating under U.S. regulations.

“Americans are using VPNs to access unregulated, offshore prediction market platforms that offer contracts on death and war,” the Coalition posted on X. “Now, we finally know how big this market is.”

The Coalition further stated, “These platforms are not subject to the same customer verification requirements, anti-money laundering controls, or market integrity oversight that protect American traders.”

Regulatory Scrutiny

The findings emerge as the CFTC faces increasing pressure and scrutiny. On Wednesday, the agency proposed new rules that would ban market outcomes dependent on war or assassination. However, states and lawmakers have been pushing back against the CFTC’s regulatory approach and the expanding scope of prediction markets under its purview.

CFTC Chairman Mike Selig has maintained a firm stance on the agency’s jurisdiction over these platforms, stating in February, “see you in court,” as states began challenging the regulator’s authority. Earlier this week, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren sought clarification on the regulator’s oversight capabilities, questioning its effectiveness in regulating prediction markets, particularly in light of significant workforce reductions.