Canada introduces stablecoin regulation framework in Federal budget: More inside

ambcryptoPubblicato 2025-11-05Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-11-06

Key Takeaways

How will the framework be funded?

The Bank of Canada will allocate $10 million over two years starting in 2026, plus $5 million annually from fees collected from regulated issuers.

Why does Canada see a need for stablecoin regulation now?

Stablecoins now make up about 30% of all crypto transactions, with global volumes surpassing $4 trillion, highlighting the need for stronger oversight.


Canada is taking a decisive step toward regulating digital finance.

As part of its 2025 Federal budget, the Canadian Department of Finance has proposed the country’s first national framework for fiat-backed stablecoins.

The plan, unveiled this week, would require all stablecoin issuers to hold sufficient asset reserves and establish clear redemption policies to protect users.

Canada’s Federal budget

Alongside financial safeguards, the proposal also introduces enhanced privacy and national security measures for digital transactions.

The budget noted, 

“The legislation will also include national security safeguards to support the integrity of the framework so that fiat-backed stablecoins are safe and secure for consumers and businesses to use.”

To support implementation, the Bank of Canada will allocate $10 million over two fiscal years starting in 2026, with an additional $5 million in annual operational costs funded by regulated issuers.

Stablecoins: The crypto showstopper

Needless to say, stablecoins have quickly become central to the global crypto economy. They now account for nearly 30% of all transactions and over $4 trillion in trading volume this year.

With over 90% pegged to the U.S. dollar, led by Tether [USDT] and Circle [USDC], Canada’s proposed framework arrives amid rising calls for stronger oversight to balance innovation with financial stability.

Additionally, Visa on-chain analytics data indicate a total transaction volume of nearly $$49.1 trillion, while Standard Chartered predicts that up to $1 trillion could shift from emerging market deposits into U.S. stablecoins by 2028. 

However, while the budget mentions “national security safeguards,” it provides few specifics on how they’ll be implemented.

Seeing this, experts are warning that even top stablecoins remain vulnerable to systemic shocks.

For instance, Chainalysis pointed to the TerraUSD collapse and major DeFi exploits in 2023 as proof of weak collateralization and smart contract security.

These events rippled across both DeFi and traditional markets, showing how fast instability can spread.

Therefore, as more banks adopt stablecoins, Chainalysis cautions that a major depegging or hack could trigger wider financial losses.

Was the GENIUS Act a catalyst or a blocker?

Canada’s proposed stablecoin framework also mirrors the U.S. GENIUS Act passed in mid-2025.

The GENIUS Act, backed by President Donald Trump, defined “payment stablecoins” and distinguished them from securities.

With the EU’s MiCA, Japan, and South Korea advancing similar rules, Canada joins a growing push for clarity.

But, while Canada moves toward embracing stablecoins under a regulated framework, not everyone shares the optimism.

The U.S. Bank Policy Institute (BPI) has recently renewed warnings about the potential risks of stablecoins and DeFi, citing recent market shocks like the $20 billion USDe depegging event as proof of their systemic threat.

BPI argues that leveraged yield farming and uninsured deposits could amplify liquidation risks, though critics claim banks are more concerned about losing deposits to higher-yield crypto products.

However, despite the skepticism, the stablecoin market continues to expand rapidly suggesting that, regulation or not, global adoption is already well underway.

Share

Letture associate

South Korean Retail Investors 'Move from Seoul to Wall Street': Buying SK Hynix ADR, Betting on Triple-Leverage ETF

A surge of Korean retail investors is shifting funds from the volatile Seoul market to Wall Street, intensifying their bets on the AI theme through unconventional and high-risk instruments. Data shows Korean investors were net buyers of about $4.5 billion in US stocks in July, nearing a yearly peak. A notable trend is their purchase of approximately $840 million worth of SK Hynix American Depositary Receipts (ADRs), despite a significant 10% premium over the company's domestic shares, leading analysts to label the move as speculative and irrational. Simultaneously, Korean traders are heavily favoring leveraged ETFs. The triple-leveraged semiconductor ETF SOXL was the most-bought US product in July, with leveraged products occupying four of the top ten spots. Experts note that this shift in geography does not represent a diversification of risk; instead, investors are merely expressing the same concentrated bet on AI hardware through different, often riskier, US-listed vehicles. Analysts warn that while this capital inflow is unlikely to systemically impact the vast US institutional market, it risks creating localized distortions and amplifying volatility, particularly in the targeted sectors and instruments. The move follows a sharp correction in the Korean market, where high leverage in semiconductor stocks and related ETFs had previously led to significant losses, prompting this search for alternative avenues to chase the AI narrative.

marsbit7 min fa

South Korean Retail Investors 'Move from Seoul to Wall Street': Buying SK Hynix ADR, Betting on Triple-Leverage ETF

marsbit7 min fa

Bithumb's First Half Report: Net Loss Exceeds $76 Million, Where Did the Profits Go?

**Title: Bithumb H1 2026 Report: Net Loss Exceeds $76M – Where Did the Profits Go?** Despite a headline net loss of approximately 108.7 billion KRW (~$76.44 million) for the first half of 2026, a detailed breakdown reveals Bithumb's core exchange business remained profitable. The significant loss was primarily driven by two major non-operating items: substantial losses on the disposal and valuation of the company's own cryptocurrency holdings (net loss ~$48.21 million) and a sharp increase in litigation provisions (~$25.93 million), largely linked to a regulatory fine. Operating revenue fell 48.7% year-on-year to ~$119 million, almost entirely from transaction fees, as market activity cooled. While the company drastically cut marketing and subsidy expenses by ~70% to protect margins, more rigid costs like payment processing and salaries declined only modestly. This highlights the vulnerability of its highly fee-dependent revenue model in a down market. Total assets decreased by ~$584 million, but this was largely attributable to an ~86% drop in client KRW deposits. The market value of client crypto assets under custody also fell (~32.7%), partly influenced by declining cryptocurrency prices rather than solely client withdrawals. In summary, the report indicates underlying exchange profitability was eroded by significant crypto asset losses and mounting regulatory/legal costs, against a backdrop of declining trading revenue. Future focus should be on revenue recovery, managing crypto-related损益, and the ongoing impact of regulatory challenges.

marsbit27 min fa

Bithumb's First Half Report: Net Loss Exceeds $76 Million, Where Did the Profits Go?

marsbit27 min fa

BitMart's Final 9 Days: A True Exchange Crisis Is Never About Shutting Down

BitMart's Final 9 Days: A True Exchange Crisis Is Not About Shutting Down On August 17, 2026, with just 9 days until BitMart's scheduled cessation of trading, the focus shifted from the platform's orderly closure to serious questions about user withdrawals, platform solvency, employee payments, and reserve transparency. Stakeholders, claiming to represent users and staff, publicly demanded asset/liability disclosures, explanations for withdrawal delays, a user repayment plan, and an independent audit, setting an August 19 deadline. While BitMart CEO Sheldon Lee denied allegations of insolvency or wrongdoing, the controversy highlighted a core vulnerability of centralized exchanges (CEXs). When an exchange announces its shutdown, normal user behavior changes dramatically, triggering a mass withdrawal event—the ultimate stress test for its liquidity and custodial integrity. The key question becomes not whether the platform has assets, but whether it holds sufficient *liquid* assets to cover all user liabilities on demand. The article argues that the trust placed in CEXs is based on the convenience they provide, abstracting users from direct control of their private keys. This trust is rarely questioned during normal operations but becomes critically exposed during a wind-down. The situation underscores the limitations of simple Proof of Reserves, which shows "what we have" but not the crucial "what we owe." True financial credibility requires transparent, auditable data on assets, liabilities, and segregated user funds. BitMart's situation reflects a broader, often overlooked issue in the crypto industry: while there is extensive focus on growth mechanisms for exchanges, there is little discussion or established protocol for a safe and transparent "exit mechanism." The final measure of an exchange's integrity, the article concludes, is not its user count or trading volume during a bull market, but its ability to ensure every last user can successfully withdraw their assets when the doors are closing. The outcome will be determined not by statements, but by whether the final user's funds securely leave the platform.

marsbit1 h fa

BitMart's Final 9 Days: A True Exchange Crisis Is Never About Shutting Down

marsbit1 h fa

Don't Speculate on 100x Coins, Just Bet on 'Cash Cows': Which Projects Are Worth Dollar-Cost Averaging in the Bear Market?

In a bearish crypto market, finding sustainable investments is more prudent than chasing speculative meme coins. This article analyzes projects generating consistent revenue, highlighting them as potential "cash cows" for long-term dollar-cost averaging (DCA). The top performers are "picks-and-shovels" plays. **Pump.fun**, a Solana-based meme coin launchpad, leads with $415.3M in monthly revenue, profiting from a 1.25% fee on token transactions. Despite market volatility, it has averaged tens of millions in monthly income in 2024. Perpetual DEX **Hyperliquid** stands out as a "bear market star," accumulating ~$352M in revenue over seven months. Its model funnels ~99% of fees into buying back and permanently burning its HYPE token. Established giants are also adapting. **Uniswap**, after enabling its fee switch, now earns protocol revenue (e.g., $5.6M recently), which is used to buy back and burn UNI, giving the token direct value accrual. Similarly, oracle provider **Chainlink** generates stable monthly revenue (~$4.57M recently) from its essential data, cross-chain, and automation services. Its new Payment Abstraction feature automatically converts service fees into LINK, accruing value in its treasury. The core thesis is clear: in a downturn, focus on projects with proven, resilient business models—those acting as essential infrastructure or capturing consistent transaction fees—rather than speculative narratives.

marsbit1 h fa

Don't Speculate on 100x Coins, Just Bet on 'Cash Cows': Which Projects Are Worth Dollar-Cost Averaging in the Bear Market?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片