Stablecoin Panic? Professor Says Banks Are Chasing Myths, Not Facts

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-01-13Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-01-13

Introduzione

Columbia Business School professor Omid Malekan challenges five banking industry myths about stablecoin yields, arguing that concerns holding up market structure legislation are unsubstantiated. He refutes claims that stablecoins automatically drain bank deposits or harm lending, noting that reserves are often held in Treasuries and bank accounts, which can support banking activity. Malekan emphasizes that the core issue is who captures the interest on reserve assets—banks or crypto issuers. As the Senate Banking Committee prepares to mark up a bill, community banks push to restrict yield-sharing with stablecoin users, warning of deposit flight, while negotiations continue over potential compromises.

Columbia Business School adjunct professor Omid Malekan challenged what he called five common banking-industry misunderstandings about stablecoin yields as Congress moves a market structure bill toward markup this month.

He pushed back on claims that stablecoins will automatically drain bank deposits or collapse lending, and argued the real fight is over who receives interest on the reserves that back those tokens.

“I’m disappointed that market structure legislation seems to be held up by the stablecoin yield issue,” he said. “Most of the concerns bouncing around Washington are based on unsubstantiated myths,” Malekan added.

Misconceptions About Stablecoin Yields

Based on reports, Malekan listed five specific points where industry talking points have wandered from the facts. He said stablecoins are fully reserved in many cases, and that issuers often park reserves in Treasury bills and bank accounts — activity that can feed, not sap, banking business.

He also noted that much US credit is delivered outside community banks, through money market funds and private lenders, so the link between stablecoins and bank lending is not as direct as some industry statements imply.

Banks Press Lawmakers Over Yield Rules

Lawmakers are racing to settle those questions before a committee markup. The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to mark up the market structure text on January 15, 2026, and sources say negotiators remain split on whether to restrict third-party yield arrangements tied to stablecoins.

Community banks and trade groups have urged senators to close what they call “yield loopholes,” saying unregulated rewards could lure deposits away and raise liquidity risks.

BTCUSD trading at $91,860 on the 24-hour chart: TradingView

Who Captures The Interest Matters

Malekan focused attention on the distribution of interest from reserve assets. According to his comments, the policy choice is not about banning stablecoins but about deciding whether banks or crypto issuers capture returns on reserves.

If issuers are allowed to share interest or rewards with customers, that could pressure bank profits — a point banks are making loudly in hearings and letters to lawmakers.

File Drafting And Last-Minute Haggling

Reports have disclosed that committee staff were racing to file a bipartisan market structure text and reconcile yield language ahead of a deadline this week. Negotiations continued into late sessions as senators weighed compromises that could allow some forms of rewards while guarding against run risks and bank disintermediation.

Featured image from Global Finance Magazine, chart from TradingView

Domande pertinenti

QWhat are the main misconceptions about stablecoin yields that Professor Omid Malekan challenges?

AProfessor Malekan challenges five main misconceptions: that stablecoins will automatically drain bank deposits, collapse lending, and that they are not fully reserved. He argues that reserves are often parked in Treasury bills and bank accounts, which can actually feed banking business.

QAccording to the article, what is the real point of contention regarding stablecoins?

AThe real point of contention is over who receives the interest on the reserves that back stablecoins—whether it will be the banks or the crypto issuers and their customers.

QWhat action are community banks and trade groups urging senators to take?

ACommunity banks and trade groups are urging senators to close what they call 'yield loopholes,' arguing that unregulated rewards could lure deposits away from banks and raise liquidity risks.

QWhen is the Senate Banking Committee scheduled to mark up the market structure bill?

AThe Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to mark up the market structure text on January 15, 2026.

QHow does Malekan describe the link between stablecoins and bank lending?

AMalekan notes that much US credit is delivered outside community banks through money market funds and private lenders, so the link between stablecoins and bank lending is not as direct as some industry statements imply.

Letture associate

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

The article "a16z: AI's 'Amnesia' – Can Continual Learning Cure It?" explores the limitations of current large language models (LLMs), which, like the protagonist in the film *Memento*, are trapped in a perpetual present—unable to form new memories after training. While methods like in-context learning (ICL), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and external scaffolding (e.g., chat history, prompts) provide temporary solutions, they fail to enable true internalization of new knowledge. The authors argue that compression—the core of learning during training—is halted at deployment, preventing models from generalizing, discovering novel solutions (e.g., mathematical proofs), or handling adversarial scenarios. The piece introduces *continual learning* as a critical research direction to address this, categorizing approaches into three paths: 1. **Context**: Scaling external memory via longer context windows, multi-agent systems, and smarter retrieval. 2. **Modules**: Using pluggable adapters or external memory layers for specialization without full retraining. 3. **Weights**: Enabling parameter updates through sparse training, test-time training, meta-learning, distillation, and reinforcement learning from feedback. Challenges include catastrophic forgetting, safety risks, and auditability, but overcoming these could unlock models that learn iteratively from experience. The conclusion emphasizes that while context-based methods are effective, true breakthroughs require models to compress new information into weights post-deployment, moving from mere retrieval to genuine learning.

marsbit2 h fa

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

marsbit2 h fa

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

An individual manipulated a weather sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport with a portable heat source, causing a Polymarket weather market to settle at 22°C and earning $34,000. This incident highlights a fundamental issue in prediction markets: when a market aims to reflect reality, it also incentivizes participants to influence that reality. Prediction markets operate on two layers: platform rules (what outcome counts as a win) and data sources (what actually happened). While most focus on rules, the real vulnerability lies in the data source. If reality is recorded through a specific source, influencing that source directly affects market settlement. The article categorizes markets by their vulnerability: 1. **Single-point physical data sources** (e.g., weather stations): Easily manipulated through physical interference. 2. **Insider information markets** (e.g., MrBeast video details): Insiders like team members use non-public information to trade. Kalshi fined a剪辑师 $20,000 for insider trading. 3. **Actor-manipulated markets** (e.g., Andrew Tate’s tweet counts): The subject of the market can control the outcome. Evidence suggests Tate’sociated accounts coordinated to profit. 4. **Individual-action markets** (e.g., WNBA disruptions): A single person can execute an event to profit from their pre-placed bets. Kalshi and Polymarket handle these issues differently. Kalshi enforces strict KYC, publicly penalizes insider trading, and reports to regulators. Polymarket, with its anonymous wallet-based system, has historically been more permissive, arguing that insider information improves market accuracy. However, it cooperated with authorities in the "Van Dyke case," where a user traded on classified government information. The core paradox is reflexivity: prediction markets are designed to discover truth, but their financial incentives can distort reality. The more valuable a prediction becomes, the more likely participants are to influence the event itself. The market ceases to be a mirror of reality and instead shapes it.

marsbit3 h fa

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片