Stablecoin bill regulation thread

[bbc.reporter]

The community is waiting for uncle Jerome in the Federal Reserve to print money to begin the cryptospace pumping process, what much of the people in the community do not know is the authority of printing of money is being given to private companies through this stablecoin regulations. This is very much bullish for our cryptocoins hehehehe.

In any case, it appears that the senators of the Democrats are blocking this to protect their backers in Wall Street. However, this is not the end of these hearings. They will discuss this again and we should be here to follow the latest news updates.



In a major setback for crypto, the US Senate voted on Thursday to not advance a landmark stablecoin bill to potential passage after a number of Democrats balked at endorsing legislation they said would endanger consumers, the financial system, and national security.

By a vote of 48 yeas to 49 nays, the Senate rejected the Genius Act after Republicans had sought to fast-track a statutory framework for the $246 billion stablecoin industry.

Read in full https://www.dlnews.com/articles/regulation/senate-overcomes-resistance-to-advance-stablecoin-bill/

[obtainhigh]

The failed vote delays stablecoin regulation, but the push to let private firms issue money shows where the real monetary power is shifting.

[btc-freedom-money]

I don't like that your make it about being bullish for crypto. I think it's better to talk about usefulness not about profits. I don't care about regulations if they don't help with decentralization and censorship resistance and privacy.

The biggest problem with stablecoins is that the are centralized. They can freeze all your stablecoins at any time they want.

And I'm worried about the possibility that EU will do that during 2026 or 2027. Maybe during the bear season when everyone has sold their bitcoin and waiting for bottom, all the stablecoins will be frozen and to get it unlocked we need to do bad things like KYC and proof of source of funds for our non-custodial wallets.

[bbc.reporter]

The failed vote delays stablecoin regulation, but the push to let private firms issue money shows where the real monetary power is shifting.

This will be delayed by the Democrats and Republicans who are being backed by the people behind traditional finance because this bill if approved into law will take some of their control on finance away from them.

Presently the Democrats which might be backed by the big banks of Wall Street are using tactics to stop the legislators that support the bill by creating fud on the Donald. This is desperation for the big whales in traditional finance.



Top Democrats Demand Treasury Info on Trump’s Crypto Deals, Citing ‘Bribery’ Risks

The request marks an escalation in Congressional scrutiny on whether the President and his entourage are abusing their positions to benefit their crypto businesses.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2025/05/14/top-democrats-demand-treasury-info-on-trumps-crypto-deals-citing-bribery-risks

[Solosanz]

Sooner or later they would ban stable coin, or they accept but they join, so the government have a control over the coins.

Yeah cash or debit/credit card are better use for the citizen because they don't have to pay fees per transactions, but if the US citizen want to send money to people across nations, stablecoins would be a good choice.

[yhiaali3]

Senators backed by traditional finance leaders will attempt to obstruct everything related to cryptocurrencies. Major traditional financial companies are not happy with the US's shift toward cryptocurrencies under Trump's leadership.

Despite Trump's great efforts to open the country to cryptocurrencies, he unfortunately gives them an opportunity through some minor mistakes related to the Trump meme and his wife, Melania. For example, he not only made the mistake of creating his own meme, but also invited major investors in the Trump meme to the White House. This will certainly be exploited to create a buzz around him and thwart his plans.

[FinneysTrueVision]

Senators backed by traditional finance leaders will attempt to obstruct everything related to cryptocurrencies. Major traditional financial companies are not happy with the US's shift toward cryptocurrencies under Trump's leadership.

Despite Trump's great efforts to open the country to cryptocurrencies, he unfortunately gives them an opportunity through some minor mistakes related to the Trump meme and his wife, Melania. For example, he not only made the mistake of creating his own meme, but also invited major investors in the Trump meme to the White House. This will certainly be exploited to create a buzz around him and thwart his plans.

Traditional finance favors Republicans over Democrats.
https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/biggest-donors

With Wall Street becoming more involved in cryptocurrency, this theory that they are obstructing favorable regulation doesn’t make any sense. Eventually, we are likely to get some form of this bill passed, but Trump is incredibly unpopular right now. His corruption couldn’t be more obvious. As an opposition party, you can’t expect Democrats to just give in so easily without at least appearing to put up a fight. They will probably get some concessions, but they will ultimately go along because the purpose of the bill is less about financial freedom and more about strengthening US dollar hegemony.

[bbc.reporter]

It appears that we will witness what will be the future of the cryptospace and the world this week. If this bill will he signed into law by the Donald, we can certainly be sure that much inflows of dollars to the cryptospace will certainly occur not through exchanges anymore, it will be through these traditional banks and payment processors who have embraced stablecoins.

However, does everyone agree that this will be a victory for the cryptospace? There might be some people who are skeptical, I reckon.



Landmark stablecoin legislation cleared a key hurdle in the US Senate Monday evening.

In a 66-32 vote, Senators advanced the Genius Act, legislation that would regulate the issuance of dollar-pegged stablecoins, a kind of crypto asset that has been embraced by fintech titans such as PayPal and Stripe.

Now, the Genius Act will need only a simple majority when it comes up for a final vote, something that could happen as soon as this week.

Monday’s vote was a major win for crypto legislation.

Read in full https://www.dlnews.com/articles/regulation/landmark-stablecoin-bill-genius-act-clears-key-senate-hurdle/

[FinneysTrueVision]

However, does everyone agree that this will be a victory for the cryptospace? There might be some people who are skeptical, I reckon.

Banning yield-bearing stablecoins is a huge mistake. One of the main reasons why there is so much stablecoin demand is precisely because people want to earn yield with them. Almost two-thirds of Pendle markets are for yield-bearing stablecoins, so they might have to start blocking the US again just weeks after they removed the restriction. Even World Liberty Financial’s Aave instance would technically be breaking the law, because when you supply collateral you are issued a yield bearing wrapper for the coin you deposit.

With this provision, I suppose their intent is to only allow users to earn interest on their savings if it is done through traditional banks and government approved institutions with mandatory KYC.

Stablecoins already worked well prior to this. Government permission and increased surveillance aren’t necessary to “protect consumers”.

[bbc.reporter]

However, does everyone agree that this will be a victory for the cryptospace? There might be some people who are skeptical, I reckon.

Banning yield-bearing stablecoins is a huge mistake. One of the main reasons why there is so much stablecoin demand is precisely because people want to earn yield with them. Almost two-thirds of Pendle markets are for yield-bearing stablecoins, so they might have to start blocking the US again just weeks after they removed the restriction. Even World Liberty Financial’s Aave instance would technically be breaking the law, because when you supply collateral you are issued a yield bearing wrapper for the coin you deposit.

With this provision, I suppose their intent is to only allow users to earn interest on their savings if it is done through traditional banks and government approved institutions with mandatory KYC.

Stablecoins already worked well prior to this. Government permission and increased surveillance aren’t necessary to “protect consumers”.

I might need to read the details more intently on this because there were 2 proposed stablecoin bills. There is the Genius stablecoin bill and there was the other one called only as the stablecoin bill. I am very much aware that one of these allows only the creators to earn yield for the stablecoin that have been launched after the passing of the bill into law. The new stablecoins that will be created after this will only have the creators to earn yield.

In any case, on the speculation that more inflows of fiat will enter the cryptospace and pump our cryptocoins appear to be very bullish hehehe.

[bbc.reporter]

Has the government tricked us again? There was a very unfavorable response on the proposals for CBDC and everyone cheered when the Donald declared that there will be no CBDC under his administration. What was in favor for him was the cryptospace and stablecoins. However, what if these stablecoins behave very much similar to CBDCs?

Did the Donald only favor different type of people with corporate and political interests by favoring stablecoin instead of CBDCs?



Stablecoin issuer Circle has frozen two wallet accounts linked to the Libra memecoin scandal, containing around $57.6 million in USDC, Arkham reported Wednesday.

According to screenshots provided by Arkham, one frozen Libra wallet contains $44.59 million in USDC, while another, the deployer wallet for Libra, holds around $13 million worth of USDC.

Key stablecoin issuers, such as Circle and Tether, can restrict token transfers in urgent scenarios or during legal investigations, such as major security breaches.

Read in full https://www.theblock.co/post/356131/circle-freezes-58-million-usdc-libra-memecoin-scandal-arkham

[zasad@]

However, does everyone agree that this will be a victory for the cryptospace? There might be some people who are skeptical, I reckon.

Banning yield-bearing stablecoins is a huge mistake. One of the main reasons why there is so much stablecoin demand is precisely because people want to earn yield with them. Almost two-thirds of Pendle markets are for yield-bearing stablecoins, so they might have to start blocking the US again just weeks after they removed the restriction. Even World Liberty Financial’s Aave instance would technically be breaking the law, because when you supply collateral you are issued a yield bearing wrapper for the coin you deposit.

With this provision, I suppose their intent is to only allow users to earn interest on their savings if it is done through traditional banks and government approved institutions with mandatory KYC.

Stablecoins already worked well prior to this. Government permission and increased surveillance aren’t necessary to “protect consumers”.

I might need to read the details more intently on this because there were 2 proposed stablecoin bills. There is the Genius stablecoin bill and there was the other one called only as the stablecoin bill. I am very much aware that one of these allows only the creators to earn yield for the stablecoin that have been launched after the passing of the bill into law. The new stablecoins that will be created after this will only have the creators to earn yield.

In any case, on the speculation that more inflows of fiat will enter the cryptospace and pump our cryptocoins appear to be very bullish hehehe.

I see a very big problem in these laws, that the US government will not be legally responsible for companies that issue stablecoins. Companies will receive real money, buy treasuries with them, which will be collateral.
And the companies will send their clients tokens in the blockchain, which can be devalued at any time. The government will find violations, seize the collateral (treasuries) and the hamsters will lose all their savings.
The only winner will be the US government.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. What did you imply about send tokens to their clients in the blockchain? I am assuming these tokens are the stablecoins which will be 1 stablecoin equals to $1 dollar. However, why did you say that this will devalue? Are you implying that they will for certain depeg against the dollar?

Also, on these stablecoin companies to buy treasuries, this is what Tether has been doing. Are you implying this will become the standard roadmap for other stablecoin companies?

[zasad@]

@zasad@. What did you imply about send tokens to their clients in the blockchain? I am assuming these tokens are the stablecoins which will be 1 stablecoin equals to $1 dollar. However, why did you say that this will devalue? Are you implying that they will for certain depeg against the dollar?

Also, on these stablecoin companies to buy treasuries, this is what Tether has been doing. Are you implying this will become the standard roadmap for other stablecoin companies?

Firstly, for all companies that will issue stablecoins tied to the dollar, the purchase of treasuries will be a mandatory condition.
Tether is a private company and not even American. Their website even says that the company is not responsible for the fact that the price of their stablecoin may not be equal to $1.
What if this company falls out with the US government and the government blocks their treasuries?

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. That would certainly be a very bad occurrence, however, this would certainly be a similar argument on China as a treasury holder. I reckon if America blocks the sales of US treasuries, we can quite be certain that this will very much decrease the rating of these treasuries and this would also cause panic on other treasury holders and dump what they are holding. Is this what you are implying?

You appear to be creating fud.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. That would certainly be a very bad occurrence, however, this would certainly be a similar argument on China as a treasury holder. I reckon if America blocks the sales of US treasuries, we can quite be certain that this will very much decrease the rating of these treasuries and this would also cause panic on other treasury holders and dump what they are holding. Is this what you are implying?

You appear to be creating fud.

The US and Europe have frozen over 300 billion Russian assets and has this lowered the rating of the European or American banking system? I can give you enough examples when business accounts of Russian citizens were frozen in the US, Europe, although these people have not lived in Russia for more than 10 years.
At any moment, Tether or another company can be accused of financing any enemies of the US and their assets in treasuries can be frozen.
I don’t really understand how the rating of treasuries is related to the fight against terrorism?

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Yes and it appears that you are not mentioning a very important information on why they did this to Russia. Russia started a war and they trying to invade Ukraine. Do you reckon freezing assets is a normal order imposed by the American and European governments on the financial system? You should consider all important information before you create an argument.

Also, much of those Russian citizens that accounts were frozen are Russian oligarchs who support Putin. I am not quite certain if you support Putin and the war in Ukraine, however, consider this very important information.

[yhiaali3]

@zasad@. Yes and it appears that you are not mentioning a very important information on why they did this to Russia. Russia started a war and they trying to invade Ukraine. Do you reckon freezing assets is a normal order imposed by the American and European governments on the financial system? You should consider all important information before you create an argument.

Also, much of those Russian citizens that accounts were frozen are Russian oligarchs who support Putin. I am not quite certain if you support Putin and the war in Ukraine, however, consider this very important information.

I guess @zasad's main point isn't to criticize the US freezing of the assets of wealthy Russians due to the Ukraine war, but rather to criticize the idea itself. I mean, regardless of the reason, the US government can freeze the assets of any citizen in the world, using any pretext it devises, whether true or false.

Here, there's a clear pretext: these people support Putin. But elsewhere, the US government can simply accuse any citizen in any country in the world of supporting terrorism and freeze their assets. That's the real problem.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Yes and it appears that you are not mentioning a very important information on why they did this to Russia. Russia started a war and they trying to invade Ukraine. Do you reckon freezing assets is a normal order imposed by the American and European governments on the financial system? You should consider all important information before you create an argument.

Also, much of those Russian citizens that accounts were frozen are Russian oligarchs who support Putin. I am not quite certain if you support Putin and the war in Ukraine, however, consider this very important information.

Since we are not on the battlefield and we are "all Satoshi" here, let's not blame each other.

In Russia, many people hate oligarchs, and oligarchs have no problems with sanctions and blocking. They fly and vacation in Europe and the USA without any problems, and their children and relatives study there.

Rhetorical question: "Why are there no sanctions against America?"
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5441385

yhiaali3 understood my thought correctly

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I am only giving an argument for everyone to understand why sanctions against Russia and Russian oligarchs have occurred because I also argue that this is not a type of sanction that the American government can impose anytime. This is a sanction because Putin declared war.

In any case, on the stablecoin bill, there is a news update. After some changes, this bill might be voted and delivered to the Donald's table for approval. I am very much afraid that if this grandma Warren and her colleagues are mentioning consumer protection and national security, this stablecoin bill might force their issuers to make their stablecoins function very much similar to a CBDC.



At that time it drew fire from Senator Elizabeth Warren and other colleagues for failing to protect consumers, the financial system, and even national security from potential risks.

Read in full https://www.dlnews.com/articles/regulation/stablecoin-act-is-poised-for-speedy-passage-after-democrats-win-changes/