Global markets weigh disinflation, cuts and crypto rules

Global markets are entering 2026 with a familiar but evolving playbook: inflation is easing, investors are leaning into rate-cut expectations, and risk assets are trying to price a softer landing without ignoring lingering policy uncertainty.

At the same time, crypto regulation is moving from broad principles to detailed market-structure rules. That shift matters because stablecoins, exchange listings, and cross-border compliance are increasingly intertwined with funding conditions and financial stability concerns.

1) Disinflation becomes the base case, again

Across major economies, the dominant narrative is “disinflation plus cuts.” The nuance is that markets are no longer just debating when central banks will cut, but why inflation is falling and whether the drop is durable enough to justify a faster easing cycle.

On Jan 14, 2026, a key U.S. angle came from Federal Reserve Governor Stephen Miran, who argued that supply-side changes, particularly deregulation, could lower inflation and therefore “justify” further rate cuts. In his framing, if policy makers ignore supply-driven easing in prices, monetary policy could end up “unnecessarily tight.”

This is an important shift in emphasis. If inflation relief is increasingly attributed to supply-side dynamics rather than demand destruction, the market implication is that cuts could arrive with less fear of reigniting inflation, and with a different sectoral impact, especially for cyclicals and rate-sensitive assets.

2) The Fed debate tilts toward supply-side easing

Miran’s comments highlight a subtle but consequential pivot: the Fed conversation can move from “how restrictive are we?” to “what has changed in the economy’s productive capacity?” Supply-side easing, through deregulation, improved logistics, or productivity, can reduce inflation pressure without requiring as much slowdown.

For investors, that changes the probability distribution around the soft landing. If disinflation is supply-led, the economy may tolerate lower rates without overheating as quickly. This can support equity multiples and compress term premiums, even as it complicates the read-through for wages and services inflation.

However, the supply-side argument also raises execution risk. Deregulation may take time to filter into measured inflation, and its effects can be uneven. Markets may price the promise quickly, while macro data confirm it slowly, creating room for volatility around each inflation print and policy speech.

3) Bank of England: inflation back to 2% by mid‑2026

In the UK, policy expectations have sharpened. On Jan 14, 2026, Bank of England MPC member Alan Taylor indicated rates are “set to fall further” as inflation drops faster than previously forecast, signaling inflation is on track to return to the 2% target by mid‑2026.

Reuters reporting noted that markets anticipate additional quarter-point cuts in 2026. This reinforces a broader theme: disinflation is no longer merely a hope pinned to base effects; it is increasingly being incorporated into official projections and market pricing.

For sterling assets, that mix can be supportive and challenging at once. Easier policy can lift domestic demand expectations and reduce refinancing stress, but it may also pressure the currency if the UK eases more quickly than peers, especially if U.S. supply-side optimism delays the Fed’s cutting pace.

4) Financial stability returns via stablecoins

Disinflation and cuts reduce stress in credit markets, yet financial stability concerns do not disappear, they morph. In the UK context, the Jan 14, 2026 reporting also highlighted a parallel conversation: stablecoin protections as a financial-stability issue.

BoE deputy governor Dave Ramsden underscored the need for safeguards around sterling stablecoins, including insolvency or insurance-style protections. The message is that as stablecoins become more embedded in payments and financial plumbing, the policy perimeter must expand to prevent runs, operational failures, or unclear recovery paths in a crisis.

For markets, this matters because regulatory design can change stablecoin business models, liquidity characteristics, and the perceived “moneyness” of tokens. If stablecoins are treated more like payment instruments with robust protections, adoption may broaden, while compliance costs rise and weaker issuers face consolidation pressure.

5) U.S. crypto market-structure bill: defining who regulates what

In the United States, lawmakers are attempting to resolve a long-running ambiguity: whether many tokens are securities or commodities, and which agency has primary oversight. On Jan 13, 2026, the U.S. Senate introduced a “long‑awaited” crypto market-structure bill aimed at clarifying token status and regulator roles.

According to the draft described in reporting, the bill would define when a token is treated as a security versus a commodity and would give the CFTC oversight of spot crypto markets, a major industry objective. If enacted, that could reduce enforcement-by-surprise dynamics and encourage more consistent exchange listing standards.

Yet clarity does not automatically mean leniency. A more explicit rulebook can raise the compliance bar, increase reporting obligations, and standardize disclosures. The near-term effect could be a two-speed market: larger, well-capitalized platforms adapt and gain share, while smaller venues or projects struggle with legal and operational demands.

6) Stablecoin yield restrictions and the “cash-like” debate

One of the most market-sensitive provisions reported in connection with the U.S. draft is a stablecoin yield restriction. Reuters noted the proposal would prohibit paying interest “solely for holding” stablecoins, while allowing certain rewards such as payments or loyalty programs, coupled with SEC and CFTC disclosure requirements.

This is not just a product tweak; it is a statement about what stablecoins should be. Restricting passive yield pushes stablecoins toward a cash-like role rather than an on-chain savings instrument, potentially reducing competitive pressure on bank deposits and money-market products.

For crypto markets, the impact could include a reshuffling of liquidity incentives, with more emphasis on trading fees, payment integrations, or transparent reward structures. It may also reduce the risk that stablecoin issuers resemble unregulated shadow banks, one of the recurring financial stability concerns regulators cite.

7) EU MiCA: the cross-border rulebook already in force

While the U.S. is still legislating, the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) is already shaping behavior globally. The European Commission confirmed the MiCA timeline: stablecoin rules have applied since 30 June 2024, and the full MiCA framework has applied from 30 December 2024.

MiCA’s importance is not limited to Europe. Many global exchanges and token issuers choose to align products and disclosures with EU requirements because the European Economic Area is a major market, and because compliance frameworks can be reused across jurisdictions to reduce operational fragmentation.

The Commission’s official framing is that MiCA is meant to support innovation while protecting users and investors. For markets, that balance can translate into more standardized disclosures and governance expectations, potentially reducing extreme tail risks, while also raising barriers to entry and accelerating industry consolidation.

8) ESMA enforcement signals: transparency via the interim register

MiCA is not only a rulebook; it is becoming an enforcement system with public visibility. ESMA has outlined MiCA’s scope, authorisation, disclosure, and market integrity, and has published an interim register through mid‑2026.

Notably, ESMA indicates the interim register includes authorised crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) as well as “non‑compliant entities.” That kind of transparency can influence liquidity flows and counterparties’ risk decisions, since institutional participants often need to demonstrate vendor and venue due diligence.

Over time, a visible compliance map can change how exchanges compete. Listings, market-making relationships, and cross-border offerings may increasingly depend on whether a firm appears in good standing, shifting crypto market structure toward regulated hubs and away from opaque, lightly supervised venues.

Putting these threads together, “disinflation plus rate cuts” is not a standalone story. It is interacting with regulatory reform, especially in crypto, where stablecoins are edging closer to the financial system’s core functions: payments, liquidity, and short-duration stores of value.

As 2026 progresses, investors will likely treat macro easing and crypto rules as linked variables rather than separate narratives. Lower rates can boost risk appetite, but rule clarity can determine where that risk flows, into compliant platforms and products, or into fragmented markets that struggle under tightening supervision.