Daily Commentary

MarketMinder’s View: Please note, MarketMinder isn’t for or against any specific policy—rather, we highlight this development to discuss a broader theme. (This article also mentions a publicly traded crypto exchange, and as a reminder, MarketMinder doesn’t make individual security recommendations.) As reported here, the Senate Banking Committee put its discussion of an anticipated crypto market-structure bill on ice for now, as some industry players don’t support the latest version. “The market-structure bill, designed to improve the legitimacy of digital assets, was supposed to go through markup — a process involving discussion and amendments — on Thursday. On Wednesday, Brian Armstrong, chief executive officer of Coinbase, said on social network X that he was pulling support for the latest text of the bill due to ‘too many issues.’ … The delay could potentially derail the legislation, which may be harder to pass this year ahead of midterm elections.” The issue appears to be payment of interest-like “rewards” by crypto-exchanges to holders of chiefly stablecoins (those pegged to a currency and designed to act as purely a payment mechanism). Banks cite the high yields paid as a risk to Main Street financial institutions, but crypto firms insist on their inclusion, with the lobbying generating a standoff. But above the specifics, take this delay as yet another reminder not to overstate the supposed positives (or negatives) any new administration may bring. Talk is cheap, and what one promises on the campaign trail can fall flat once reality comes into play. If your bullishness on crypto (or any asset class) depends on the hope of potentially “friendly” legislation, you must also be aware those changes (even of the bipartisan variety) aren’t a given. Besides, the whole thesis that “legitimizing” crypto via legislation would be bullish for coins is a little odd, considering much of the point was decentralization and creating a payment system outside the government’s reach. For more on crypto in 2025, please see our November commentary, “Bitcoin’s Wild Ride to Nowhere.”

MarketMinder’s View: Please note, MarketMinder is nonpartisan, preferring no politician or party over another. Our discussion of politics centers on the economic and market implications only. With Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi reportedly set to dissolve the lower house of parliament and call a snap election (likely in early February), the opposition is mobilizing. The Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ) and Komeito (which has historically had strong ties with Takaichi’s Liberal Democratic Party) plan to cooperate in the election by forming a new, currently unnamed party. “CDPJ and Komeito members in the lower house will leave their parties and join the new party. Such procedures will be conducted next week, [CDPJ President Yoshihiko] Noda said. [Komeito leader Tetsuo] Saito said Komeito agreed to withdraw from races in the single-seat constituency segment of the lower house election, including the four constituencies currently held by Saito and other Komeito lawmakers, once a new party is formed.” This development is noteworthy since voters choose their local candidate (not the party leader), making party affiliation a critical consideration. Consolidating the number of choices could make it easier for the opposition to win votes—important to note, as part of the reason Takaichi seems set on a vote so soon is to avoid giving the opposition time to organize and campaign. But as the conclusion also notes, establishing a new party in a short campaign season is a tall order. Logistically, some voters may not know which candidate their vote supports! So Japan does face some short-term political uncertainty here, but because the election will likely occur in weeks rather than months, those unknowns should dissipate quickly. For more, see yesterday’s commentary, “Sanae’s Snap: Elections Incoming in Japan.” 

MarketMinder’s View: UK monthly GDP grew 0.3% m/m in November—better than experts’ projection of 0.1%—despite all the uncertainty surrounding Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s widely anticipated Budget. Look, as the article notes, one major automaker’s resumption of vehicle production following a late-summer cyber attack boosted vehicle manufacturing (and the production sector grew 1.1% m/m)—which is likely a fleeting boost, but also one that reverses earlier drags. Setting that skew aside, services, which make up the majority of UK economic activity, grew 0.3%, continuing a string of growthy reads. So both the relief here and earlier pessimism seemed a little overdone to us. Interestingly, “In a hint that the unusual level of speculation in the run-up to Reeves [sic] budget may have been good business for some, the ONS said the largest contribution to service sector growth came from ‘professional, scientific and technical activities’ – noting in particular strong growth in accounting, bookkeeping, auditing and tax consultancy.” That is a curious twist, although it is far harder to tally the growth or investment that sat on the sidelines, awaiting clarity on the Budget. But for all the warnings we read about Budget-related uncertainty hurting the economy, it does appear UK services firms have kept chugging along even at the height of uncertainty. For more, see our November commentary, “Few Surprises: Leaks and Trial Balloons Mute the Market Effects of Britain’s Tax Shifts.”