Stablecoins issue a foundational promise: Any holder should be able to redeem one stablecoin for one U.S. dollar, at any moment, without a haircut and minimal friction. Fulfilling this promise of parity rests on the pillars of sound asset management, reserve transparency, operational excellence, liquidity, custodial integrations, developer accessibility, and hard-won regulatory licenses.
- Professional reserve management:
“Unless you are willing to staff up a professional trading desk,” says Austin Campbell (former Chief Risk Officer at Paxos), “do not manage the underlying reserves yourself.” Maintaining the peg depends on solvency and professional management is the bare minimum for large-scale fiat-backed stablecoins. Smaller issuers may prefer to start with existing tokenized money market funds (MMFs), and eventually scale out of the relatively high fee-load into cheaper solutions.
- Professional reserve management:
While consumers may custody stablecoins in a browser wallet like Metamask, institutions custody digital assets with providers like Coinbase, BitGo, Fireblocks, Copper, and Anchorage. Some may charge asset issuers for a listing, which requires a technical and operational audit, compliance review, and risk committee sign-off. Listing fees can sometimes reach 6-or-7figures (usually for crypto-tokens, not stablecoins) and are often necessary to receive maximum institutional support from service providers like market makers.
- Canonical cross-chain deployment:
In the early 2020s a stablecoin could live predominantly on one chain and rely on trust-minimised bridges or wrapped copies elsewhere. The subsequent era of bridge exploits – Ronin, Wormhole, Nomad – led to a new generation of cross-chain deployments like Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP) and Tether’s newer USDT0 standard, built on top of LayerZero’s omnichain messaging protocol. As blockchains proliferate and interoperability improves, native deployments on multiple chains will become table stakes for a smooth UX, and prospective issuers must take heed of this direction of travel.
The Stablecoin Utility Function
Dollar stablecoins were created as a savings tool, enabling users to store value and shield themselves from the volatility of crypto-assets or their native currency. Fiat, however, enables a user to do far more than just save. Everything a user can do with your stablecoin – trade, earn, or pay – increases its utility as a product. The greater the utility, the greater the retention, and the greater the float income.
- Trade: Conquering Centralized Exchanges (CEX)
- Earn: Decentralized Finance (DeFi) Integrations
- Pay: Bootstrapping Distribution
The Shifting Regulatory Context
KYC/AML: The goal of know your customer (“KYC”) and anti-money laundering (“AML”) regulations, such as the Banking Secrecy Act (“BSA”) in the U.S., is to reduce the ability of bad actors to inflict harm. The idea is simple: requiring customers to self-identify when they enter the financial system makes criminals easier to catch and increases the difficulty of perpetrating crimes at scale.
Best Practice: Control, or tightly monitor partners who control, the nexus points where fiat currency enters or exits a stablecoin. For example, minting USDC requires either onboarding with Circle or, for most retail users, minting or purchasing USDC through a regulated centralized exchange like Coinbase.
Monitoring & Sanctions Screening: Once an actor enters an ecosystem, issuers must implement effective monitoring of those participants to catch good actors that become bad or identify bad actors that entered through DeFi. In some cases, bad is explicit – for example, a particular entity or address being included on the OFAC sanctions list – and failure to catch this in real-time may lead to significant fines or other regulatory consequences.
Best Practice: Document policies and implement automation. The typical guidance that we see is:
- Baseline screening of all identifiable holders every six months (or when sanctions lists are updated)
- Adjust the screening cadence based on risk profile with more frequent screening for higher-risk segments (e.g.geography)
- Implement automated compliance tools like Chainalysis and TRM Labs to monitor suspicious blockchain activit3
- Participate in financial intelligence networks such as FinCEN’s 314(b) information sharing progra”
- Impose formal protocols for freezing or seizing assets when legally required, particularly in support of law enforcement investigations into money laundering and terrorist financing
The Global Convergence
In Asia, three distinct regulatory approaches have emerged. Japan, for example, limits stablecoin issuance to licensed banks and trust companies. Singapore and Hong Kong permit issuance through strict regulatory gateways emphasizing financial soundness. China and India ban or severely restrict private stablecoins in favor of state-controlled digital currencies.
The situation, both in the U.S. and globally, remains dynamic and will continue to evolve. With emerging clarity, however, comes the opportunity for issuers to play a potentially new game on the field. Regulatory arbitrage has historically defined both the crypto industry and the financial services industry broadly; mainstream adoption, however, depends on certainty. As payment stablecoins begin a new era in the U.S. and beyond, the first movers have already begun to shift the battlefield from stablecoin issuance to stablecoin infrastructure.
Leave a Reply