Why the U.S. Must Lead the Stablecoin Revolution

Stablecoins—digital dollars that move instantly across borders without banks—are quickly becoming a serious part of the financial system. Global movement of stablecoins (primarily among capital markets) amounted to $10.9 trillion worldwide in 2025. And consumers around the world are exhibiting growing interest in using stablecoins for purchases, cross-border transactions, and peer-to-peer payments. Stablecoins are here to stay and are poised to occupy an increasingly large role in the economy. The real question is whether the United States will lead this shift or let it move overseas.

Read the full piece here.

Last week, the Spanish Supreme Court held a hearing on several appeals against four Provincial Court rulings regarding Scania’s liability for damages caused by the truck cartel. Although each appeal is distinct, the hearing focused on the common issues raised by these newer claims.

This post does not aim to summarize the hearing or to speculate about the outcome of the appeals (a matter on which the Supreme Court will surely rule before the end of April). Instead, it focuses on the final point raised by Scania’s counsel in oral argument: could Scania become the “sweeper” in Spanish truck cartel damages litigation? Put differently, can it end up being the defendant against whom claims are still viable even when actions against the manufacturer of the truck actually purchased are no longer available, or are procedurally more difficult.

Read the full piece here.

As the country enters the home stretch toward the 2026 midterm elections, two political trends are clear. First, affordability ranks as the most urgent economic concern of American families. Second, Washington politicians have record-low ratings in response to the question about whether they care about the needs of ordinary people.

As if to prove the latter point, Washington Democrats have queued up new legislation that would drive up retail prices of groceries, gasoline and other household necessities — the Fair Prices for Local Businesses Act.

Read the full piece here.

Voluntary in form, coercive in tone

The recent non-jurisdictional agreement of the Spanish Supreme Court on pending truck cartel appeals should not be mistaken for a genuine turn to mediation. Formally, the Court merely proposes referral to mediation. In substance, however, it is doing something rather different: it is trying to convert the predictability generated by its own case law into settlement pressure. The message to the parties is clear enough. After years of rulings on these appeals, they already know -more or less- how most of them will end; insisting on a judgment rather than a consensual solution may therefore have consequences in legal costs. Voluntary in form, coercive in tone, the agreement is less an endorsement of mediation as a suitable form of dispute resolution than a managerial response to a mass of repetitive appeals the Court no longer wishes to decide one by one.  It is an extraordinary institutional response trying to manage an impossible docket.

Read the full piece here.

Retail electricity prices are rising faster than inflation—and the fixes being discussed in Washington and state capitals could make things worse, not better. President Trump has pointed to AI data centers as a contributor, calling rising utility prices an issue that “needs some PR help.” But the real drivers are structural, and popular-sounding policies like rate freezes and blocking new energy permits would only deepen the problem.

Read the full piece here.

I started researching self-employment and independent work over a decade ago because I’d been exposed to it my whole life — my parents were self-employed — and I could see it growing steadily since at least the 1990s. What intrigued me was a persistent puzzle: Most people in this workforce wanted to stay independent, yet they also wanted access to benefits like health insurance and retirement savings. Why couldn’t these two coexist? The demand was clearly there — but the supply was not.

Over time, the answer became clearer. The problem wasn’t a lack of interest from workers or even businesses. It was the law.

Read the full piece here.

America’s financial system has always thrived when innovation, competition, and consumer empowerment work hand in hand. And when America’s financial system thrives, so too do Americans—from business owners to factory workers and families of all stripes. The long-anticipated, and soon to be released Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB’s) “Personal Financial Data Rights” rule—also known as the Section 1033 of Dodd-Frank—is an opportunity for the Trump administration to unleash a new wave of innovation that will empower consumers and make life more affordable for all Americans.

Read the full piece here.

Top executives from Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery answered antitrust concerns before the Senate on Tuesday. The hearing’s chair, Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah), said Netflix’s proposed $82.7 billion all-cash purchase of WBD posed a “classic risk” of market consolidation.

Not so fast. If the antitrust inspectors are objective, they should wave the deal home.

Read the full piece here.

This is the politics of scarcity, not of affordability.

On January 9, President Donald Trump called for a 10% cap on credit card interest rates—a drop from the 2025 average of 19.7%. This reflects growing political support within the fringes of both the Republican and Democratic Parties for such anti-market policies. In February 2025, Senators Bernie Sanders and Josh Hawley also introduced legislation mirroring Trump’s proposal.

Supporters of price controls like to blame “greedy” corporations. Trump told reporters that credit card companies “really abused the public.” Unfortunately, his proposal treats symptoms while ignoring the disease, and that will ultimately harm the very consumers it claims to protect.

Read the full piece here.