Circle CEO's Seoul Visit: No Korean Won Stablecoin Issuance, But Met All Major Korean Banks

marsbitPublicado a 2026-04-23Actualizado a 2026-04-23

Resumen

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire's recent activities in Seoul indicate a strategic shift for the company, moving away from issuing a Korean won-backed stablecoin and instead focusing on embedding itself as a key infrastructure provider within Korea’s financial and crypto ecosystem. Despite Korea accounting for nearly 30% of global crypto trading volume—with a market characterized by high retail participation and altcoin dominance—Circle has chosen not to compete for the role of stablecoin issuer. Instead, Allaire met with major Korean banks (including Shinhan, KB, and Woori), financial groups, leading exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone), and tech firms like Kakao. This approach reflects a broader industry transition: the core of stablecoin competition is shifting from issuance rights to systemic positioning. With Korean regulators still debating whether banks or tech companies should issue stablecoins, Circle is avoiding regulatory uncertainty by strengthening its role as a service and technology partner. The company is deepening integration with trading platforms, building connections, and promoting stablecoin infrastructure. This positions Circle to benefit regardless of which entity eventually issues a won stablecoin. Allaire also noted the potential for a Chinese yuan stablecoin in the next 3–5 years, underscoring a regional trend of stablecoins becoming more regulated and integrated with traditional finance. Ultimately, Circle’s strategy highlights that future influence in ...

Discussions around stablecoins have long focused on one question: who will issue the next dominant stablecoin.

However, a series of recent actions by stablecoin issuer Circle in Korea are diminishing the significance of this question itself. (Related reading: On the Eve of Korean Stablecoin Launch: As Regulation Thaws, Circle and Tether Send Different Signals)

In the latest statement, Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire clearly stated: there are no immediate plans to launch a Korean Won stablecoin. Simultaneously, Circle is intensively advancing in Seoul:

Deepening cooperation with the exchange ecosystem
Establishing connections with banks and financial groups
Promoting the deployment of stablecoin infrastructure

This combination of "avoiding issuance while strengthening links" essentially points to a more critical change: the core of stablecoin competition is shifting from "issuance rights" to "systemic positioning."

The Korean Market: High Activity Coexists with Low Structure

Understanding Circle's strategy requires first看清ing the structure of the Korean market. According to data from crypto data firm Kaiko:

Korea accounts for about 30% of global crypto trading volume
Altcoin trading comprises up to 85% of this
Bitcoin and Ethereum combined account for less than 15%

Behind these figures lies not just "active trading," but three deeper characteristics:

Sentiment-driven: Funds concentrate on high-volatility assets, showing significant short-term gaming features
Retail-driven: Institutional participation is novice, market depth is insufficient
Structural imbalance: Liquidity quality is lower than in mature markets (e.g., Japan)

This means Korea is not a "mature financial market," but rather a "high-traffic market that hasn't completed structural upgrades." And this is precisely the timing of Circle's entry.

Circle's Three Key Actions

Within this market structure, Circle's布局 shows a highly consistent direction.

1. Embedding into Trading Flow Entrances

Circle expanded its cooperative relationships with Dunamu (operator of Upbit) and Bithumb. The core of this is not simple business expansion, but embedding USDC and related services into Korea's core trading infrastructure. This corresponds to a key position—the entrance point for capital flow.

2. Connecting with Core Financial System Institutions

Reports indicate Allaire's meetings included: Shinhan Bank, one of Korea's largest commercial banks; KB Financial Group, a leading comprehensive financial holding group; Woori Bank, Korea's second-largest national commercial bank and the only state-owned bank; Kakao Group, the Korean instant messaging giant; Hashed, a Korean crypto venture capital firm; and Coinone, Korea's third-largest exchange.

This combination has a clear direction:

Banking system: Potential issuers
Tech platforms: User entry points
Exchanges: Liquidity cores

Its essence is to complete the connection and binding of multiple stakeholders before regulation is finalized.

3. Clearly Avoiding Issuance Rights Competition

With Korea's stablecoin path still undetermined, Circle chose not to participate in issuing a Korean Won stablecoin. This decision is not conservative, but based on a clearer judgment: issuance rights are still being contested, but infrastructure demand is already certain.

Korea's Core Contradiction: The Dispute Over Issuance Rights

The current分歧 over stablecoins in Korea centers on: some forces within the policy layer favor issuance by tech companies, while the banking system and central bank advocate for bank-led issuance.

The essence of this conflict is: are stablecoins financial instruments or internet products?

Until this question is resolved:

The issuing entity cannot be determined
Business models are difficult to solidify
The market landscape remains unstable

This is perhaps the fundamental reason why Circle chose to "bypass the issuance right."

From Issuer to Infrastructure Provider

Integrating the above actions leads to a clear conclusion: Circle is transitioning from a "stablecoin issuer" to a "stablecoin infrastructure provider."

This transformation is reflected on three levels:

Revenue structure: Shifting from issuance scale to technology and service capabilities
Risk structure: Avoiding direct exposure to regulatory uncertainty
Market adaptation: Flexibly embedding into different regulatory systems

Under this model, regardless of who ultimately issues the stablecoin, Circle can participate.

Circle's Asia Observations

After the Korea trip, Jeremy Allaire also mentioned that a Chinese Yuan (RMB) stablecoin presents a huge opportunity, and China might launch one within the next 3 to 5 years.

This statement did not address the method or participation, and is closer to a general observation on regional trends. But combined with Circle's actual actions in Korea, it can be understood as a more holistic view of Asia. From the current situation, although the paths of China and Korea differ, they show several common characteristics:

Stablecoins are entering the core agenda of regulation
Relationships with the traditional financial system are increasingly close
Participating entities are becoming more diverse

In this process, the role of stablecoins is changing: from an early crypto trading medium to a broader financial infrastructure.

Circle's布局 in Korea, along with its continued attention to the Chinese market, essentially point to the same thing: finding a position to embed within this infrastructure evolution process.

The Future Stablecoin System

Behind Circle's strategy change lies a corresponding macro trend. The future stablecoin system will likely appear as:

Coexistence of multiple sovereign currencies
Constrained by strong regulatory frameworks
Deep integration with the traditional financial system

In this landscape, issuance rights belong to nations or licensed institutions, and technology and clearing capabilities also become new competitive cores. Therefore, for institutions like Circle, their value is no longer limited to USDC itself, but lies in whether they can become the connection layer and infrastructure layer between different stablecoin systems.

Who Issues is No Longer the Core Question

While the market is still discussing: Who will issue the stablecoin? Which country will land it first?

Circle has already provided another answer through its actions: what determines the long-term position is not the issuance right, but whether one is embedded in the system.

In the future stablecoin landscape, a structure is likely to emerge:

Highly localized issuers
Highly收敛 (convergent/concentrated) regulation
Underlying capabilities provided by a few globalized institutions

In this structure: some companies will not appear on the front line, but will exist in every transaction.

*This content is for reference only and does not constitute any investment advice. The market carries risks, investment requires caution.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the main strategy of Circle during its recent activities in South Korea, according to the article?

ACircle's main strategy was to avoid issuing a Korean won stablecoin and instead focus on embedding itself as a stablecoin infrastructure provider by deepening cooperation with exchanges, establishing connections with banks and financial groups, and promoting the implementation of stablecoin infrastructure.

QWhat are the three key characteristics of the South Korean crypto market structure mentioned in the article?

AThe three key characteristics are: 1) Emotion-driven, with funds concentrated in high-volatility assets and significant short-term speculation; 2) Retail-driven, with low institutional participation and insufficient market depth; 3) Structural imbalance, with lower liquidity quality compared to mature markets like Japan.

QWhy did Circle choose not to participate in the competition for issuing a Korean won stablecoin?

ACircle chose not to participate because the issue of who holds the stablecoin issuance rights in South Korea is still under debate and regulatory uncertainty, with policymakers divided between tech companies and banks. Circle instead focused on the already certain demand for infrastructure.

QWhat shift in role is Circle undergoing, as indicated by its actions in South Korea?

ACircle is shifting from being a stablecoin issuer to becoming a stablecoin infrastructure provider, focusing on technology and service capabilities, avoiding direct regulatory risks, and flexibly embedding itself into different regulatory systems.

QWhat did Jeremy Allaire suggest about the future of the Chinese Yuan stablecoin, and how does it relate to Circle's overall strategy?

AJeremy Allaire suggested that there is a huge opportunity for a Chinese Yuan stablecoin and that China might launch one within the next 3 to 5 years. This aligns with Circle's broader Asian strategy of observing regional trends and seeking to embed itself as infrastructure in the evolution of stablecoin systems, regardless of the specific issuance path taken by different countries.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

Bitcoin miners are capitulating as evidenced by a sustained drop in network hash rate and a record-steep 19.9% decline in mining difficulty, signaling the shuttering of unprofitable machines. However, in a significant divergence from historical patterns, the stocks of publicly traded mining companies have soared, with one major player gaining over 430% in the past year, even as BTC's price fell roughly 46%. This surge is largely attributed to these companies pivoting toward the more lucrative AI narrative. Simultaneously, miners face a structural squeeze. Daily block reward revenue in BTC terms has hit a new all-time low following the latest halving, with current dollar-denominated daily revenue around $30 million compared to a longer-term average of ~$40 million. Fee revenue remains negligible, covering less than one block's subsidy over a 28-day average and accounting for only about ten minutes of the network's daily security budget. This capitulation cycle is unique: miner stress and crypto price weakness have decoupled due to alternative revenue streams (AI), while the long-term reliance on increasing bitcoin prices to offset shrinking subsidies continues, with fee income still far from filling the impending gap.

marsbitHace 1 min(s)

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

marsbitHace 1 min(s)

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

The market's expectation for a September Fed rate hike surged dramatically in early August, jumping from under 50% to over 80% within a week. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting, where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed growing dissent from hawkish members advocating for an immediate hike to combat persistent inflation. The primary catalyst for this repricing is rising oil prices, driven by renewed geopolitical tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, which threaten global supply. Energy costs directly influence inflation metrics, making the upcoming July CPI report (due August 12th) a critical data point. If it shows inflation reaccelerating, the probability of a September hike will solidify. For Bitcoin and crypto assets, this is typically bearish news. Bitcoin continues to behave as a high-beta, liquidity-sensitive risk asset. A rate hike raises the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets and could drive capital toward money markets, pressuring crypto prices in the short term. However, historical patterns suggest that if a hike is perceived as the end of a tightening cycle rather than the start, any negative price impact may be brief. U.S. stocks, particularly crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and growth-oriented tech stocks, are also vulnerable. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, putting pressure on high-multiple companies. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditure to tangible revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flow and weak growth narratives could face heightened volatility if borrowing costs rise in September. In summary, a September Fed hike has evolved into a mainstream market scenario. Key factors to watch are oil prices, the July CPI report, and Fed communications, which will determine the final decision and its impact on volatile crypto and equity markets.

marsbitHace 1 min(s)

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

marsbitHace 1 min(s)

A 'Overlooked' Market Event: Joint US-Japan-South Korea Intervention, Rare US Treasury Involvement, and Bessent's Quiet 'Market Rescue'?

Summary: The United States, Japan, and South Korea executed their largest coordinated foreign exchange intervention in nearly 30 years. The action targeted depreciation pressure on the Japanese yen and South Korean won. This move is seen as a significant effort by the US to stabilize the financial markets of its key allies and prevent the spillover of risks. Key details: * Japan reportedly intervened on July 30 using approximately 8.45 trillion yen (about $52.8 billion). South Korean authorities also intervened that day, selling dollars to support the won. * Notably, the US Treasury Department intervened directly in yen markets for the first time in roughly 30 years. The New York Fed, reportedly acting on behalf of the Treasury, sold euros to buy yen via Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley on July 31. Analysts view the use of the euro-yen pair as a way to alleviate yen pressure without adding selling pressure to the US dollar. * Prior to the action, the New York Fed conducted "rate checks" on both USD/JPY and EUR/JPY, a newer signaling tool that falls between verbal and physical intervention. The intervention is interpreted as going beyond traditional currency stabilization. Analysts, such as Michael Hartnett of Bank of America, suggest it resembles a "Price Keeping Operation" for the AI era. The core US objectives are perceived to be: 1. Preventing rapid yen depreciation from triggering a sharp rise in Japanese government bond yields. 2. Containing financial stress from spreading across Asian markets like South Korea and Japan. 3. Reducing the risk of disorderly capital flows impacting the US bond market. This coordinated action underscores the importance of Japan and South Korea as critical partners in the US semiconductor and AI supply chain. Stabilizing their financial markets is seen as vital to mitigating risks to the broader tech industry and the US market itself. The intervention coincides with market pressures, including the KOSDAQ index hitting a low since October 2022. While seen as a move to control volatility, some analysts caution it may not fundamentally reverse existing market trends.

marsbitHace 5 min(s)

A 'Overlooked' Market Event: Joint US-Japan-South Korea Intervention, Rare US Treasury Involvement, and Bessent's Quiet 'Market Rescue'?

marsbitHace 5 min(s)

Will the Federal Reserve Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Cryptocurrencies and US Stocks Bear the Pressure?

In early August 2024, market expectations for a September Federal Reserve rate hike surged dramatically, from below 50% to over 80%, driven by renewed inflation concerns. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed a growing hawkish faction advocating for an immediate hike, citing prolonged above-target inflation. The key catalyst is escalating conflict near the Strait of Hormuz, which has pushed oil prices up approximately 20% in July, threatening to reignite inflation. The next critical data point is the July CPI report on August 12th; a hot reading could solidify hike expectations. For crypto assets, particularly Bitcoin, this represents near-term pressure. Bitcoin continues to exhibit high-beta, risk-on characteristics, making it sensitive to tightening liquidity and higher opportunity costs. However, historical precedent suggests that if a hike is perceived as the cycle's end rather than its start, the negative impact may be brief, with markets quickly pivoting to anticipate future rate cuts. U.S. stocks, especially crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and high-valuation tech stocks, face amplified volatility. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, pressuring growth stocks. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditures to demonstrable revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flows and weak growth narratives could see severe pressure if a September hike materializes, as financing costs would rise. Key indicators to watch include oil prices, upcoming inflation data, and Fed commentary at events like the Jackson Hole symposium.

Odaily星球日报Hace 5 min(s)

Will the Federal Reserve Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Cryptocurrencies and US Stocks Bear the Pressure?

Odaily星球日报Hace 5 min(s)

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

The article analyzes the possibility of TradeXYZ, a dominant project on Hyperliquid's HIP-3 real-world asset (RWA) perpetual contracts market, splitting off to build its own independent trading platform. With TradeXYZ commanding over 90% of HIP-3 volume and over 35% of Hyperliquid's total open interest, its leverage and influence are significant. The primary motive for a split is seen as capturing the underlying protocol fees, of which TradeXYZ currently receives only half. However, several factors strongly discourage such a move. First, replicating Hyperliquid's high-performance infrastructure would be challenging and could degrade TradeXYZ's product quality. Second, Hyperliquid serves as a crucial distribution channel, with most users accessing TradeXYZ's liquidity through its frontend. Third, the close, trusting relationship between the founders of both projects makes a hostile "betrayal" unlikely. The conclusion is that a split would likely result in a lose-lose scenario. Hyperliquid would lose its main growth narrative and see its valuation impacted, while TradeXYZ would face immense technical hurdles, lose its primary user channel, and damage its reputation. Instead of a full separation, the more probable path is for TradeXYZ to negotiate better terms while deepening integration, focusing on enhancing its own brand and user ownership.

marsbitHace 56 min(s)

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

marsbitHace 56 min(s)

Trading

Spot