OCC Seeks Public Feedback on GENIUS Act Implementation Proposal

TheNewsCryptoPublicado a 2026-02-26Actualizado a 2026-02-26

Resumen

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has proposed new rules to implement the GENIUS Act, which was enacted in July 2025 to regulate payment stablecoin issuers. The proposal, spanning 376 pages, aims to create a clear regulatory framework for stablecoin issuance and custody activities under OCC supervision. It excludes anti-money laundering and sanctions rules, which will be addressed separately. The public is invited to provide feedback within 60 days. The rules are expected to be updated after the GENIUS Act takes effect, potentially by January 2027. OCC Comptroller Jonathan V. Gould emphasized the importance of public input to shape an effective and practical final rule.

The OCC has proposed rules to implement the GENIUS Act, and aksing the public feedback for the proposal within 60 days of publication, as the move is aimed to support innovation while ensuring safety in the growing stablecoin market.

Firstly, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act was enacted on July 18, 2025, which establishes a regulatory framework for payment stablecoin issuer activities.

According to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s official statement on February 25, the proposal would create a clear framework for stablecoin issuers operating under its supervision, including rules related to issuance and certain custody activities.

Key Details of the Proposal

The proposal spans approximately 376 pages and notes, “The OCC will have regulatory or enforcement authority over certain permitted payment stablecoin issuers, including subsidiaries of national banks or Federal savings associations, Federal qualified payment stablecoin issuers, and State qualified payment stablecoin issuers subject to the OCC’s regulatory or enforcement authority.”

However, rules related to anti-money laundering (AML), the Bank Secrecy Act, and sanctions (OFAC) are not included in this proposal. Those will be introduced separately in coordination with the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

The proposal also noted that OCC anticipates that these implementing regulations will be updated in the years following the effective date of the GENIUS Act. Where the GENIUS Act’s effective date is the earlier of 18 months after the enactment date, which would be January 2027, after the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators issue final regulations implementing the Act.

Further, the Comptroller of the Currency, Jonathan V. Gould, said, “We welcome feedback on the proposal to inform a final rule that is effective, practical, and reflects a broad industry perspective. The OCC will continue its work to implement the GENIUS Act and provide OCC-regulated entities with more opportunities to meet the needs of their customers and communities,” noted in the OCC’s statement.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Nimiq Unveils SynapTrack AML Framework to Combat Cross-Chain Crypto Laundering

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main purpose of the OCC's proposed rules for the GENIUS Act?

AThe main purpose is to implement the GENIUS Act by creating a clear regulatory framework for stablecoin issuers, aimed at supporting innovation while ensuring safety in the stablecoin market.

QWhen was the GENIUS Act enacted and what does it establish?

AThe GENIUS Act was enacted on July 18, 2025, and it establishes a regulatory framework for payment stablecoin issuer activities.

QWhat types of entities will the OCC have regulatory authority over under this proposal?

AThe OCC will have regulatory or enforcement authority over certain permitted payment stablecoin issuers, including subsidiaries of national banks or Federal savings associations, Federal qualified payment stablecoin issuers, and State qualified payment stablecoin issuers subject to its authority.

QAre anti-money laundering (AML) and Bank Secrecy Act rules included in this proposal?

ANo, rules related to anti-money laundering (AML), the Bank Secrecy Act, and sanctions (OFAC) are not included in this proposal and will be introduced separately with the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

QWhat is the effective date for the GENIUS Act according to the proposal?

AThe effective date is the earlier of 18 months after the enactment date (which would be January 2027) or after the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators issue final regulations implementing the Act.

Lecturas Relacionadas

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

On the night of February 9th, GitHub suffered a major outage caused by a simple configuration change—reducing a cache refresh interval from 12 to 2 hours—that triggered a cascade of failures. This was not an isolated event, but part of a broader pattern. In early 2026, GitHub experienced at least 8 major incidents, failing to meet its promised 99.9% availability. These outages stemmed from structural issues: explosive growth in load, tight service coupling, and insufficient protection against abnormal traffic. This unprecedented load is driven by AI Agents. In 2025, GitHub handled ~1 billion commits. By 2026, weekly commits reached 275 million, projecting to ~14 billion for the year—a 14x increase. AI tools like Claude Code now contribute 4.5% of all public repository commits, with weekly submissions surging 25x in just three months. AI-generated pull requests jumped from 4 million to 17 million per month in half a year. Unlike human developers, AI Agents work continuously, generating commits at a scale that overwhelms infrastructure designed for human rhythms. The surge also shattered GitHub's business model. Copilot's flat-rate pricing, based on assisting human developers, became unsustainable as Agentic AI sessions consumed resources worth hundreds of dollars for a few dollars in fees. In response, GitHub imposed usage limits and, by June 1st, shifted to a pay-per-use "AI Credits" system. Facing this new reality, GitHub realized a 10x scaling plan was insufficient. It announced a need to *redesign* its architecture for 30x current scale—decoupling services, adding fault isolation, and improving change management to prevent cascading failures. Other platforms like Stripe and AWS are facing similar challenges with AI Agents. Fundamentally, GitHub is transitioning from a human collaboration platform to an "exhaust pipe" for automated AI workflows. Its detailed post-mortem reports aim to maintain trust during this turbulent rebuild. The February outage was not just a technical glitch, but a signal of the software industry's entry into a new, AI-driven era.

marsbitHace 17 min(s)

marsbitHace 17 min(s)

Visualizing Musk's Wealth: $3.6 Million Per Hour, Average Person Needs 11 Million Years of Work

Elon Musk is on the verge of becoming the world's first trillionaire, with a current estimated net worth of $970 billion. This wealth, largely tied to equity in SpaceX and Tesla, translates to him accumulating roughly $992 per second or $3.6 million per hour on average over his 31-year career. His fortune surpasses the annual GDP of over 125 countries and represents about 3% of U.S. GDP, double the relative wealth of historical figures like John D. Rockefeller. For perspective, an average U.S. household earning the median income would need to work over 11 million years to amass a comparable sum. Musk's wealth could buy approximately 2.4 million average American homes, all 32 NFL teams plus every NBA team, or over 10,000 private jets with operating costs. The analysis highlights the staggering scale and concentration of modern wealth, driven by successes in electric vehicles, space exploration, and artificial intelligence.

marsbitHace 20 min(s)

Visualizing Musk's Wealth: $3.6 Million Per Hour, Average Person Needs 11 Million Years of Work

marsbitHace 20 min(s)

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

Facing massive paper losses exceeding $90 billion each amidst a sharp market downturn, "Digital Asset Treasury" (DAT) giants Strategy and Bitmine find themselves in a precarious position, but with different underlying risks. Strategy, heavily invested in Bitcoin (BTC), faces significant financial strain. Its strategy relies heavily on debt, including convertible notes and preferred stock (STRC) requiring substantial dividend payments. With its cash reserves dwindling and BTC offering no staking yield for cash flow, Strategy's high leverage makes it vulnerable. A continued price decline could force asset sales to meet obligations, potentially creating a negative feedback loop. Its market value has already fallen sharply. In contrast, Bitmine, an Ethereum (ETH) holder, appears on firmer financial ground. It primarily funds its purchases through equity offerings (like ATM programs), avoiding debt pressure. It also generates income by staking a large portion of its ETH holdings. While not immune to market drops and shareholder dilution concerns, Bitmine maintains more flexibility, recently announcing a new preferred share offering to raise further capital. The core divergence lies in their financing: Bitmine uses equity (investor money), while Strategy uses debt (borrowed money). Consequently, Bitmine currently faces less immediate liquidity pressure than Strategy, which must navigate the dual challenge of servicing debt/dividends and a declining core asset (BTC) price.

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

Both Suffer Losses Exceeding $9 Billion, Which Is More at Risk: Strategy or Bitmine?

As Bitcoin and Ethereum prices drop significantly, two major corporate treasury holders, Strategy and Bitmine, are facing massive unrealized losses—approximately $100 billion and $90 billion, respectively. The article compares their financial health and underlying risks. Bitmine, holding over 5.4 million ETH, relies primarily on equity financing (like ATM offerings) and has substantial cash reserves, alongside staking income from its ETH holdings. It plans a $300 million perpetual preferred stock offering. In contrast, Strategy, holding Bitcoin, is burdened by significant convertible debt and preferred stock dividends, with cash reserves covering only about six months of its annual dividend obligations. Strategy's leverage is higher, and it faces potential liquidity pressure if BTC prices fall further, possibly forcing asset sales. While both companies are under pressure, Bitmine’s financial structure appears more resilient, whereas Strategy’s high leverage makes it more vulnerable to continued market declines.

Odaily星球日报Hace 29 min(s)

Both Suffer Losses Exceeding $9 Billion, Which Is More at Risk: Strategy or Bitmine?

Odaily星球日报Hace 29 min(s)

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

AI Bubble: Where It Really Is and Who's Swimming Naked This analysis dissects the AI industry not as a single entity but as a five-layer pyramid, arguing that bubbles are concentrated in specific tiers, not uniformly distributed. **Key Distinction from the 2000 Dot-com Bubble:** Unlike 2000, where companies had stock prices before revenue, today's leading AI players have massive, contract-backed revenue driving their valuations. Core infrastructure demand is real, with every GPU running at full capacity for paying customers. **The Five-Layer Pyramid & Bubble Assessment:** * **L0 (Fab/Manufacturing) & Top L4 (Leading AI Apps): NO BUBBLE.** Companies like TSMC, NVIDIA, major cloud providers (Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon), and top AI labs have real revenues and orders. Supply is tightly constrained by TSMC's disciplined capacity control and physical limits like power/land for data centers, preventing a supply glut. * **L1 (Memory): BATTLEGROUND.** Sky-high HBM margins could signal a new structural cycle or a classic "boom before bust." The oligopoly of three major players may enforce supply discipline, making this a high-stakes bet. * **L2 (Interconnect/Optical Modules): BUBBLE TERRITORY.** Companies like Lumentum and AAOI have seen stock surges (4-10x) far outpacing revenue growth. This hardware segment has lower physical barriers to expansion than fabs, allowing speculation. It mirrors the 2000 bubble's epicenter—optics. * **L3 (Infrastructure/"GPU Landlords"): VULNERABLE.** GPU leasing companies profit from the current compute shortage but own no long-term moat. Their business model relies on a temporary bottleneck that will ease as big tech expands and new tech (e.g., potential space-based data centers) emerges. * **L4 Long Tail (VC-backed Startups): STRONG BUBBLE SIGNALS.** VC funding concentration in AI is twice that of the 1999 peak. Many startups with little revenue use the valuation logic of successful giants to justify their own, creating high risk of a "valuation crunch" when funding dries up. **Critical Risks to Monitor:** 1. **GPU Depreciation & Accounting:** Companies extending the assumed useful life of GPUs artificially boost profits. The true economic life depends on future generational leaps from NVIDIA. 2. **"GPU Credit" & Off-Balance-Sheet Leverage:** Emerging structures where shell companies borrow to buy GPUs and lease them out (with chipmakers sometimes investing) move debt off major balance sheets. This echoes the "vendor financing" of 2000 and the securitization risks of 2008, though currently small-scale. 3. **TSMC Abandoning Caution:** If the primary supply bottleneck (TSMC's conservative capacity planning) breaks, runaway supply could trigger a bust. 4. **Algorithmic Efficiency Breakthrough:** A major leap in software efficiency could drastically reduce the need for raw compute hardware, undermining the investment thesis. **Conclusion:** The AI boom is expensive and has frothy areas, but its core is underpinned by real demand and physical supply constraints. The bubble risk is layered: most present in optical components, GPU leasing, and the long-tail startup ecosystem, while the foundational chip manufacturing and leading application layers remain relatively solid—for now.

marsbitHace 37 min(s)

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

marsbitHace 37 min(s)

Trading

Spot

Futuros