Mobile Payment Network News: On April 3, the U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee passed a federal regulatory bill for stablecoins with 32 votes in favor and 17 votes against.
The bill was proposed by Congressmen Bryan Steil (Republican of Wisconsin) and French Hill (Republican of Arkansas) in March 2025, namely the Stablecoin Transparency and Accountability for a Better Ledger Economy Act (STABLE Act).
What kind of stablecoin regulation does the STABLE Act establish?
According to the information, the STABLE Act attempts to establish a clear and exclusive compliance framework for "Payment Stablecoins". There are several key points:
1. Focus on "payment stablecoins" and clarify the regulatory objects
The STABLE Act clarifies the core regulatory objects: US dollar-anchored stablecoins issued to the public and directly used for payment and settlement.
As for payment stablecoins, it refers to digital dollars authorized to be issued by banks or non-bank institutions based on their balance sheets. It is defined as a digital asset used for payment or settlement, whose value is linked to a fixed currency value (usually 1:1 with the US dollar) and is backed by short-term government bonds or cash.
Currently, the bill only applies to stablecoins pegged to fiat currencies. As for algorithmic stablecoins, which rely only on digital assets or algorithms to maintain their pegged value, the GENIUS Act takes a cautious but relaxed attitude, requiring regulators to closely study and monitor such stablecoins rather than immediately banning them. On the contrary, the STABLE Act adopts a clear and direct two-year moratorium policy on the issuance of new algorithmic stablecoins, which is intended to wait for further regulatory analysis and protection measures to be introduced.
2. Establish issuance thresholds and reserve requirements
The STABLE Act clarifies the issuance threshold: only federal or state-approved institutions are allowed to issue stablecoins, including bank subsidiaries, non-bank financial institutions and compliant non-bank entities, completely ending the era of "everyone can issue coins".
In detail, the STABLE Act does not adopt "license classification management" in the design of the regulatory path, but establishes a unified registration system access mechanism, that is, all institutions that intend to issue payment stablecoins, whether they are banks or not, must register with the Federal Reserve and accept federal regulatory review.
The bill sets out two legal issuer paths: one is depository institutions (Insured Depository Institutions) regulated by the federal or state governments, which can directly apply to issue payment stablecoins; the other is non-depository trust institutions (Nondepository Trust Institutions), which can also register as stablecoin issuers as long as they meet the prudential requirements set by the Federal Reserve.
In terms of fund and reserve supervision, issuers must hold high-quality, readily liquid U.S. dollar assets (such as Treasury bonds, cash, central bank deposits, etc.) in a 1:1 ratio and be subject to continuous review by the Federal Reserve. Implement strong transparency requirements, including regular public disclosure and independent audits.
This institutional arrangement strengthens the "institutional endorsement" of the dollar anchor, ensuring that the "anchor" is real, auditable, and fully redeemable, avoiding credit crises caused by false reserves, misappropriation of funds, or lack of information disclosure.
3. Prohibition of interest payments, emphasizing the attributes of payment tools
The STABLE Act explicitly prohibits the issuer of stablecoins from providing interest or income to holders, ensuring that stablecoins are strictly used as cash-equivalent payment tools rather than investment products.
In addition, the bill clearly classifies stablecoins as non-securities or commodities, providing regulatory clarity, thereby simplifying jurisdiction and regulatory processes.
The bill emphasizes the "redemption right" of stablecoins to holders, that is, the public has the right to redeem the stablecoins in their hands for US dollar legal tender at a ratio of 1:1, and the issuer must fulfill this obligation at any time. In addition, it establishes clear consumer protection measures, such as asset isolation and priority claims when the issuer goes bankrupt.
It can be said that the establishment of the above three points has raised the issuance of stablecoins to a very high level, not only putting forward higher requirements for the underlying credit mechanism, but also constraining the US dollar stablecoin in terms of system and regulations. It can even be said that this is just like a "substitute for the digital dollar".
The battle between the two bills will eventually come to an end, which will promote the development of the digital asset industry
On April 1, according to foreign media reports, Bryan Steil, chairman of the US House of Representatives Digital Assets Subcommittee, revealed that after Wednesday's deliberations, the "STABLE Act" will be "well aligned with the Senate's GENIUS Act". This was achieved after several rounds of "draft revisions" and technical assistance from the SEC and CFTC. There are 20% differences between the two bills, but these differences are only in text, not significant or substantial. At present, the biggest difference between the two is the requirements for international stablecoin issuers, state supervision of issuers, and some minor technical differences.
Bryan Steil said: "Ultimately, we hope to work with our colleagues in the Senate to push this bill through."
In addition to the STABLE Act, the other refers to the U.S. Senate's Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (GENIUS Act) of 2025.
Despite some differences, the GENIUS Act and the STABLE Act reflect a broad bipartisan consensus on the basic principles of stablecoin regulation, including regulation of issuers, 1:1 full anchoring of the U.S. dollar, strong transparency requirements, consumer protection measures, and so on. However, as mentioned above, there are also some key points of disagreement. For example, the GENIUS Act allows stablecoins to pay interest or income to holders, while the STABLE Act strictly prohibits interest payments and explicitly excludes its function as an investment or income asset. For example, the GENIUS Act clearly stipulates that when the total amount of stablecoins issued by the issuer reaches $10 billion, it must transition from state regulation to federal regulation, thus clearly defining when a stablecoin issuer is systemically important. The STABLE Act implicitly supports similar thresholds, but does not specify specific values, giving regulators more freedom to make continuous adjustments based on market developments.
At present, the two major bills have been repeatedly discussed for a long time in the legislative process. The battle between the two bills will definitely come to an end, and one of them will be passed this year. Regardless of who passes the legislation, it will herald the beginning of the regulation of the US cryptocurrency market, or it will also mark the beginning of a new era for global stablecoin regulation.
Stablecoin payments not only constitute the infrastructure of the Web3 digital asset industry, but also, as the central link in its policy, play a role in the development of the entire industry. From capital inflows, industry compliance, RWA on-chain to innovation, the compliance of stablecoins has far-reaching impacts and will promote the development of the digital asset industry.
What is more noteworthy is that the promotion of the stablecoin bill is not only a product of the demand of the US market, but it will also affect the global financial system and the digital asset market. At present, the European Union is promoting the MiCA Act, which is expected to reach an agreement with the US policy on stablecoin regulation and promote the formation of a global stablecoin payment compliance framework. In Asia, regulators in regions such as Singapore, Hong Kong and Japan have begun to gradually advance the legalization of stablecoins. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has formulated a relatively comprehensive policy framework in this area, and Hong Kong and Japan are also conducting corresponding legislation and policy explorations.
The United States' accelerated promotion of stablecoin legislation may imply strategic intentions in the field of digital currency. With the continued exploration of stablecoins in other regions and the expansion of China's pilot projects on digital RMB, the United States must seize the initiative in stablecoin rules to stabilize its hegemony over the US dollar. After the bill is passed, the US dollar stablecoin may evolve into the "global digital dollar". As a legal mapping of legal currency in the Web3 world, the compliance of stablecoins will promote cross-border payments and global capital flows, subvert traditional legal currency payment methods, and profoundly change the global financial landscape, further consolidating the dominant position of the US dollar in the global financial system.
As the mainland market has always been relatively conservative about the legalization of stablecoins, should we prepare for a rainy day and be prepared for danger in times of peace?
Kikyo
Anais
Catherine
Weatherly