etc.
Original meta description: "Russia has limited crypto to 25% of exchanges' capital calculations, a move that tightens oversight and could push firms to rebalance their holdings."
Translation: "Rusland har begrænset krypto til 25% af børseres kapitalberegninger, et skridt der strammer tilsynet og kan få virksomheder til at rebalancere deres beholdninger."
Now let's translate the content paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraph 1: "Russian authorities have set a new limit on how much cryptocurrency exchanges can count toward their capital calculations — 25%, down from whatever they were using before. The rule, confirmed this week, applies to how exchanges assess their own financial health for regulatory purposes."
Danish: "Russiske myndigheder har fastsat en ny grænse for, hvor meget kryptovalutabørser kan tælle med i deres kapitalberegninger — 25%, ned fra hvad de tidligere brugte. Reglen, bekræftet i denne uge, gælder for, hvordan børser vurderer deres egen finansielle sundhed i forbindelse med regulering."
Note: "down from whatever they were using before" -> "ned fra hvad de tidligere brugte" but "whatever" is vague. Could say "ned fra tidligere niveauer" or "ned fra det de tidligere brugte". I'll use "ned fra hvad de tidligere brugte" for clarity.
Paragraph 2: "Under the measure, crypto assets can make up no more than a quarter of an exchange's capital. That's a hard ceiling, not a guideline. Anything above 25% gets discounted or excluded entirely when the exchange reports its capital position to regulators."
Translation: "Under foranstaltningen kan kryptoaktiver udgøre højst en fjerdedel af en børses kapital. Det er en hård loft, ikke en retningslinje. Alt over 25% bliver diskonteret eller udelukket helt, når børsen rapporterer sin kapitalposition til myndighederne."
Paragraph 3: "The exact wording of the rule hasn't been published in full, but the number is clear. Exchanges that hold a large chunk of their reserves in bitcoin or other digital assets will need to either raise more fiat capital or trim their crypto holdings to stay compliant."
Translation: "Den præcise ordlyd af reglen er ikke offentliggjort i fuld, men tallet er klart. Børser, der holder en stor del af deres reserver i bitcoin eller andre digitale aktiver, bliver nødt til enten at rejse mere fiat-kapital eller skære ned på deres kryptobeholdninger for at forblive kompatible."
"fiat capital" -> "fiat-kapital" or "fiat-valuta kapital"? I'll use "fiat-kapital" as common.
Paragraph 4: "Capital calculations aren't just paperwork. They determine how much of a buffer an exchange has against losses, and they're a key part of how regulators judge whether a firm can survive a market downturn. By capping crypto at 25%, Russian authorities are signaling they don't want exchanges leaning too heavily on volatile digital assets as a safety net."
Translation: "Kapitalberegninger er ikke bare papirarbejde. De afgør, hvor stor en buffer en børs har mod tab, og de er en vigtig del af, hvordan regulatører vurderer, om en virksomhed kan overleve en markedstilbagegang. Ved at begrænse krypto til 25% signalerer russiske myndigheder, at de ikke ønsker, at børser støtter sig for meget til volatile digitale aktiver som sikkerhedsnet."
Paragraph 5: "The move is a departure from the hands-off approach some regulators have taken toward crypto. It also lands at an awkward time for the industry, which has spent the past year trying to position digital assets as legitimate financial infrastructure. A cap like this suggests the opposite: that crypto is risky enough to be discounted in the most basic financial metric."
Translation: "Skridtet er en afvigelse fra den tilgang, som nogle regulatører har haft til krypto. Det kommer også på et ubehageligt tidspunkt for branchen, som har brugt det seneste år på at forsøge at positionere digitale aktiver som legitim finansiel infrastruktur. En sådan loft antyder det modsatte: at krypto er risikabelt nok til at blive diskonteret i den mest grundlæggende finansielle måling."
"the hands-off approach" -> "den tilgang, hvor man ikke griber ind" or "den passive tilgang". I'll use "den passive tilgang" but "hands-off" is common as "hands-off-tilgang". I'll use "en tilgang uden indblanding" but simpler: "en afstandtagen tilgang" might not be correct. Actually "hands-off" means not interfering. I'll use "en ikke-indgribende tilgang" but that's awkward. Better: "en tilgang, hvor man ikke blander sig" or "en tilgang med minimal indgriben". Since it's about regulators, I'll say "en tilgang, hvor man ikke blander sig" but that's long. Let's use "en passiv tilgang" which is common. Or "en tilgang, der ikke griber ind". I'll go with "en tilgang, der ikke griber ind" but for conciseness, "en passiv tilgang" is fine.
I'll write: "Skridtet er en afvigelse fra den passive tilgang, som nogle regulatører har haft til krypto." But "the hands-off approach" is specific. I'll use "en tilgang, hvor man ikke griber ind" but that's a bit clunky. Alternatively, "en tilgang, der ikke blander sig" - I'll use "en tilgang, der ikke blander sig" but it's okay.
Better: "Skridtet er en afvigelse fra den tilgang, som nogle regulatører har haft til krypto, hvor de ikke har grebet ind." But that's too long. I'll just say "en ikke-indgribende tilgang" which is a direct translation.
Let's use "en ikke-indgribende tilgang" - that's a common term.
Paragraph 6: "It's still unclear when the rule takes effect or how strictly it will be enforced. Exchanges operating in Russia will likely need to adjust their balance sheets ahead of the next reporting cycle. The regulator hasn't announced a grace period, so firms may have to move quickly."
Translation: "Det er stadig uklart, hvornår regelen træder i kraft, eller hvor strengt den vil blive håndhævet. Børser, der opererer i Rusland, vil sandsynligvis skulle justere deres balancer før den næste rapporteringscyklus. Regulatoren har ikke annonceret en frist, så virksomheder kan blive nødt til at handle hurtigt."
"grace period" -> "frist" or "nådeperiode". I'll use "nådeperiode" or "frist" but "frist" is deadline, not grace period. I'll use "nådeperiode" which is common.
Paragraph 7: "The cap applies to capital calculations only — it doesn't ban exchanges from holding crypto, nor does it restrict how much they can trade. But it's a clear signal that Russian authorities see crypto as a liability, not an asset, when it comes to financial stability."
Translation: "Loftet gælder kun kapitalberegninger — det forbyder ikke børser at holde krypto, og det
