In the previous parts of this series, we’ve been looking at the regulation needed in order to encourage the adoption of stablecoins for retail payments (read Part 1 and Part 2 here).  

Notwithstanding the similarities between bank deposits and stablecoins, there are some notable differences. For instance, a stablecoin issuer can allow the stablecoin to be listed on (crypto) exchanges and trading venues. In contrast to stablecoins, bank deposits are not tradable, i.e. there is no secondary market for bank deposits. In practice, issuers of the stablecoins are also operating the exchanges where their stablecoins are traded alongside other cryptoassets. But stablecoins can also be listed on...

Since the first discussions over a global stablecoin started in 2019, international standard-setting bodies have been developing and refining recommendations for the regulation, supervision and oversight of global stablecoin arrangements (FSB 2020 and FSB 2022). In the first blog of this series, we looked at the issuance and redemption of stablecoins, but now we want to focus on the risks and benefits from the opportunity to make payments with stablecoins, and how this should be regulated. 

In 2019, when a Facebook-led consortium announced its plans to launch the global stablecoin ‘Libra’, many – including politicians and high-level representatives of the G7 - thought that a new international financial system, arguably outside of the realm of regulators was about to emerge. This conclusion was mainly rooted in a mindset that the blockchain technology underpinning stablecoins would compromise the reach and effectiveness of regulators. In hindsight, such fears have turned out to be unfounded. Even though the Libra project has been wound down, the international standard-setting bodies under the auspices of the Financial Stability Board (FSB) have been developing and refining...