The GENIUS Act can drain $6.6T from U.S. banks – THIS is how

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-01-08Actualizado a 2026-01-08

Resumen

The GENIUS Act of 2025 has drawn sharp criticism from major U.S. banks, warning it could drain $6.6 trillion from the banking system due to a regulatory loophole. Banking groups, including the Bank Policy Institute, argue that the act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest but allows crypto affiliate companies to offer high yields, effectively acting as shadow banks. This could trigger massive migration of deposits away from traditional banks, potentially restricting credit access for mortgages and business loans. Critics like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene also opposed the act, fearing it enables a central bank digital currency (CBDC). As the stablecoin market grows—now valued at $317.8 billion—the yield loophole drives adoption. Closing it may reduce stablecoins’ appeal as high-return investments and revert them to payment tools, posing a critical question: whether Congress will act to eliminate this risk or allow crypto shadow banking to persist.

The ink is barely dry on the GENIUS Act of 2025, but a massive crack has already appeared, with the nation’s largest lenders claiming that the act could drain $6.6 trillion from the U.S. banking system.

In a letter to Congress on the 6th of January, the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) and a coalition of powerful banking groups issued a warning.

The letter highlighted a major loophole in the new stablecoin rules, one that lets crypto exchanges operate like high-yield shadow banks.

The chaos around the GENIUS Act

The GENIUS Act bans stablecoin issuers from paying interest, but banks say their affiliate companies are dodging the rule by offering yields that regular savings accounts could never match.

This has sparked fears of a major shift in how Americans store their money.

If stablecoins turn from a payment tool into a high-interest investment, the BPI warns it could trigger a deposit migration.

Such a shift wouldn’t just hurt bank balance sheets.

It could cut off credit to Main Street, making mortgages, business loans, and farm financing harder to get.

The tension isn’t new

During the floor debates leading up to the act’s passage in July 2025, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene emerged as a vocal critic, though for vastly different reasons.

She said,

“Back in July, I voted NO on the GENIUS Act because it contained a back door to a central bank digital currency (CBDC).”

Greene added,

“I support crypto but I will never support giving the government the ability to turn off your ability to have full control of your money and to buy and sell.”

And, to date, the loopholes seem not to have been addressed.

Recently, providing clarity on the GENIUS Act, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, noted,

“The problem with a GENIUS Act-like approach is that it is focused only on stablecoins, providing no way to balance competition between stablecoins and other payment mechanisms.”

However, as a solution, he further added,

“A better approach would have a comprehensive approach to regulation, i.e., a Clarity Act, and seek to put all traditional and digital payments and assets on a level playing field and let the chips fall where they may.”

Stablecoin market dynamics

Meanwhile, the total stablecoin market cap surged to $317.8 billion, dominated by Tether (USDT) and Circle’s USDC.

For perspective, USDT alone commanded a market cap of roughly $187 billion, while USDC has seen an aggressive 73% growth over the last year, reaching $75 billion.

As stablecoins continue to grow, the yield loophole has become their main driver of adoption, but closing it could trigger a major shift.

If Congress blocks exchanges from offering interest or rewards, stablecoins may lose their appeal as high-return savings alternatives and be forced back into their original role as simple payment tools.

Thus, this warning signals that crypto’s shadow-banking era is nearing its end, leaving one pressing question: if the rewards vanish, does the $317 billion stay?


Final Thoughts

  • The stablecoin loophole has officially escalated from a regulatory oversight to a systemic risk that banks can no longer ignore.
  • With $317 billion already parked in stablecoins, Congress must decide whether to shut the loophole or risk letting the crypto shadow banking system remain.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main concern raised by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) regarding the GENIUS Act?

AThe BPI warns that a loophole in the GENIUS Act could drain $6.6 trillion from the U.S. banking system by allowing crypto exchanges to operate like high-yield shadow banks, potentially triggering a massive deposit migration.

QHow are affiliate companies of banks reportedly circumventing the GENIUS Act's ban on stablecoin issuers paying interest?

AAffiliate companies are dodging the rule by offering yields on stablecoins that regular savings accounts could never match, effectively turning stablecoins into high-interest investments.

QWhat was one of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's primary reasons for voting against the GENIUS Act?

ARep. Greene voted against the act because she believed it contained a back door to a central bank digital currency (CBDC), which she opposes as it could give the government the ability to control individuals' money.

QAccording to Douglas Holtz-Eakin, what is the fundamental problem with the GENIUS Act's approach to regulation?

AHe stated that the problem is it focuses only on stablecoins and provides no way to balance competition between stablecoins and other payment mechanisms, advocating instead for a comprehensive 'Clarity Act' to create a level playing field.

QWhat is the potential consequence for the stablecoin market if Congress closes the loophole allowing exchanges to offer interest or rewards?

AIf Congress blocks exchanges from offering interest, stablecoins could lose their appeal as high-return savings alternatives and be forced back into their original role as simple payment tools, potentially destabilizing the $317 billion market.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Las acciones de empresas de inteligencia artificial se negocian como 'memecoins', mientras que Bitcoin apenas cambia de precio: revisión de la semana

El artículo comienza con una advertencia de seguridad sobre una vulnerabilidad en las carteras frías Coldcard que podría comprometer las claves privadas, instando a los usuarios a tomar medidas inmediatas. En los mercados financieros tradicionales, la atención se centró en una fuerte venta masiva en el sector de la IA y los mercados asiáticos, especialmente en Corea del Sur, donde el índice KOSPI cayó un 35% en un mes. El fondo "Situational Awareness" de Leopold Aschenbrenner sufrió grandes pérdidas, lo que provocó liquidaciones forzosas y se especula con una posible manipulación por parte de Citadel. Los analistas debaten el futuro del sector de la IA y los semiconductores tras la corrección. En el ámbito macroeconómico, la reunión de la Fed generó preocupación, mientras que Japón intervino para frenar la caída del yen, con resultados limitados hasta ahora. En criptomonedas, el panorama fue negativo: varias plataformas como BitMart anunciaron su cierre, y empresas como Coinbase (COIN) reportaron resultados decepcionantes y despidos. MicroStrategy (MSTR) continuó acumulando reservas en dólares y recompró acciones propias, en una estrategia criticada por algunos. Se destacan debates sobre el futuro de DeFi (como Trade.xyz en Hyperliquid) y posibles actividades de información privilegiada. Finalmente, se menciona un renovado interés de inversores como Jason Calacanis en proyectos de cripto e IA como Bittensor ($TAO), aunque se advierte sobre la precaución necesaria con este tipo de recomendaciones. El artículo cierra reiterando la advertencia sobre la vulnerabilidad de Coldcard y la importancia de la autodeposición y la responsabilidad personal en cripto.

cryptonews.ruHace 11 min(s)

Las acciones de empresas de inteligencia artificial se negocian como 'memecoins', mientras que Bitcoin apenas cambia de precio: revisión de la semana

cryptonews.ruHace 11 min(s)

Frases semilla: 12 palabras que se interponen entre usted y la pérdida total

Una frase semilla, normalmente de 12 o 24 palabras de una lista de 2,048, es el núcleo matemático de una cartera de criptomonedas. Genera todas las claves privadas y direcciones. No hay copias de seguridad corporativas ni recuperación de contraseñas; quien posea estas palabras controla los fondos de forma absoluta e irreversible. Un robo de 292 millones de dólares en enero demostró que el riesgo real no es la criptografía, sino la ingeniería social. El atacante engañó a la víctima para que revelara su frase. Aunque se recuperó una pequeña parte, esto es una excepción que subraya la dificultad de recuperar fondos una vez comprometida la semilla. La seguridad de 12 palabras es astronómicamente alta frente a un ataque de fuerza bruta, requiriendo tiempos de cálculo mayores que la edad del universo. Sin embargo, si se filtran algunas palabras, la seguridad se desploma de forma no lineal. Conocer 7 de las 12 palabras reduce el tiempo de descifrado a menos de un año. La suma de verificación de BIP39 tiene una función práctica: detectar errores tipográficos al restaurar una cartera, evitando que se cree una cartera vacía por error. La causa principal de pérdida no es el robo, sino la pérdida de acceso propio. Se estima que hasta el 23% de todos los bitcoins minados son inaccesibles permanentemente debido a frases olvidadas, copias destruidas o falta de planificación sucesoria. La frase semilla es la prueba única e irrecuperable de propiedad. Perderla significa perder los activos para siempre.

cryptonews.ruHace 14 min(s)

Frases semilla: 12 palabras que se interponen entre usted y la pérdida total

cryptonews.ruHace 14 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片