Stablecoins bring financial inclusion, but their fate is still undecided | Opinion

As Sarah Austin, a tech entrepreneur and seasoned crypto investor with a background in entertainment and artificial intelligence, I find myself closely watching the evolving landscape of stablecoins. With over $160 billion in market capitalization, they have become a cornerstone of the digital asset industry, yet their future remains uncertain due to regulatory uncertainties worldwide.


Stablecoins have grown to become an over $160 billion market. Yet, regulatory uncertainty across the globe threatens their future. We have seen the digital asset industry invest in effective lobbying campaigns. More of that is needed.

Many potential risks persist in the market for stablecoins. For example, regulators might restrict the market by requiring changes in the business models of issuers. As Tether (USDT) states on its transparency page, stablecoins aren’t exactly backed one-to-one with dollars. Instead, a collection of assets that generate returns slightly above 5% are used to back these popular digital tokens representing real-world assets. Typically, issuers do not distribute any of the profits they earn to holders.

Tightening the regulatory belts 

Supporters of stablecoins claim they’re not considered securities due to a less stringent regulatory environment compared to many other tokens backed by centralized teams, primarily because they function as both currency and lightly regulated financial instruments. However, this favorable status may soon change. While Donald J. Trump has expressed support for growing the use of stablecoins in the U.S., countries like the European Union and Switzerland are considering laws that might jeopardize the future of these digital currencies.

There is uncertainty about the future of stablecoins, as they are distinct from most other digital assets because significant stablecoins rely on central authorities for their issuance.

Even though stablecoins don’t produce profit for holders, they could still be considered a security. In fact, a February 2024 New York federal court ruling determined a stablecoin may become a security when combined with a yield. 

1. The entities responsible for creating stablecoins, such as Tether, Circle, and Coinbase, earn profits from these digital currencies. For instance, Circle works with BlackRock to manage the cash reserves of USDC, their specific stablecoin. Furthermore, it’s worth noting that there are securitized bonds in existence today which have a negative interest rate, even though investors do not anticipate earning any profit.

Circle argued in a September 2023 amicus curiae brief in a legal battle between Binance and the SEC that stablecoins are not securities simply because users don’t expect to profit. The SEC, however, argued in a case against Binance that BUSD, Binance’s stablecoin, has represented security “since its inception,” mostly leaning on the fact that it offers yield.  

Certainly, Binance’s stablecoin enables users to invest their funds into profitable ventures. Moreover, Binance guarantees regular returns, similar to interest, for American citizens who merely purchase BUSD and utilize it in yield programs.

The SEC approach

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) doesn’t solely depend on the Howey analysis for its decisions. It’s possible that stablecoins might be considered as shares in a company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, particularly if they resemble money market funds, which have share Net Asset Values tied to the US dollar at a ratio of 1:1.

Given this scenario, it’s not illogical to consider that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) may classify a stablecoin tied to a collection of assets as a security backed by assets.

In the Binance scenario, the New York Department of Financial Services directed Paxos to halt managing BUSD. A representative from Paxos stated in 2023 that their stablecoins are not considered securities according to Howey or Reves. Those issuing stablecoins argue that they do not fulfill the three criteria of an investment contract as defined by the Howey test, and profits generated remain with the issuers. They contend that stablecoins maintain value and prevent losses but do not produce income.

In a legal setting, a lawyer from the Securities and Exchange Commission could contend that merely because issuers retain all profits doesn’t automatically classify stablecoins as non-securities. If a judge concurs with this reasoning and rules accordingly, it would mean that stablecoins are, in essence, proof of ownership for off-exchange assets. Additionally, there exist secondary markets for stablecoins, as well as an investor-issuer relationship. Given that other financial instruments tied to underlying digital assets (like the Bitcoin ETF) are deemed securities, it could be argued logically that stablecoins should also fall under this category.

Advocates for stablecoins might find themselves mistaken, as the classification of a stablecoin as a security doesn’t necessarily rely on the expectation of profit or loss from buying and selling. If this were to happen, the entire crypto market could experience significant changes since it has been built upon the premise that stablecoins function as currencies rather than securities.

Centralization, one more time 

In addition, it’s worth noting that the prevailing model of stablecoins is highly centralized, fueling worries that they could be classified as securities and increasing the likelihood of government intervention in the stablecoin and overall cryptocurrency market.

1. Authorities in the U.S., or those of any other country, possess the ability to withdraw the banking and financial system privileges from stablecoin issuers. If a USD stablecoin issuer is based abroad, the U.S. government could petition foreign governments to exclude these entities from their respective banking networks. Additionally, U.S. authorities could mandate that stablecoin issuers adhere to anti-money laundering and know your customer protocols, similar to the approach taken by Swiss authorities in a recent advisory document.

Should the digital asset sector maintain its current impact, it’s likely that stablecoins will persistently grow in number, enabling millions to enjoy the advantages of increased financial accessibility.

Stablecoins bring financial inclusion, but their fate is still undecided | Opinion

Sarah Austin

As a crypto enthusiast with a knack for entertainment and technology, I’m proud to be associated with Tilted.xyz, a groundbreaking game-streaming app that also offers game asset e-commerce. Being an American author and tech pioneer, I’ve made my mark in various sectors. Previously, I served as the CMO and co-founder of QGlobe, a forward-thinking metaverse funding platform. Before that, I held the position of CEO at Broad Listening, where we developed artificial emotional intelligence agents.

Read More

Sorry. No data so far.

2024-08-14 14:28