Stablecoins not a ‘systemic risk’: Coinbase pushes back on GENIUS Act critics

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-02-04Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-04

Introduzione

The debate over stablecoin regulation continues between the crypto industry and traditional banks. Coinbase strongly opposes claims that stablecoins pose a "systemic risk" to the U.S. financial system. Chief Policy Officer Faryar Shirzad argues that stablecoins follow a secure government-backed model, unlike the risky money market funds that contributed to past financial crises. Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal emphasizes that stablecoin reserves are backed dollar-for-dollar by short-term instruments like U.S. Treasuries and are not relent like traditional bank deposits. However, the proposed GENIUS Act allows stablecoin reserves to include riskier assets such as uninsured deposits and money market fund shares. Critics, including Better Markets and the Bank Policy Institute, warn this could make stablecoins vulnerable to bank-like runs. Despite ongoing discussions and a planned meeting among Senate Democrats, the future of stablecoin legislation remains uncertain, with no clear timeline for the bill's advancement.

The debate over stablecoin yields shows no signs of ending soon. At the center of the issue are two opposing sides, the crypto industry and traditional banks, both pushing for a compromise but remaining firmly divided.

Meanwhile, Coinbase has taken a strong position. The exchange has consistently pushed back against claims that stablecoins pose a “systemic risk” to the broader U.S. financial system.

Stablecoins are way safer, says Coinbase

In a recent statement, Faryar Shirzad, Coinbase’s Chief Policy Officer, dismissed claims that stablecoins mirror money market funds (MMFs), which triggered past financial crises.

Shirzad said that it was a misconception to equate risky prime MMFs that triggered the 2008 financial crisis with safer government-backed MMFs. According to Shirzad, stablecoins follow the ‘secure’ government model and will be “future safe haven.”

“But it is just the opposite (of projected financial crisis)– stablecoins will be the future safe haven.”

Another Coinbase official, Paul Grewal, the firm’s chief legal officer (CLO), echoed the same in a recent CNBC interview.

“Stablecoin issuer deposits (reserves) are not re-lent out like the fractionalized reserve system used by banks. They’re backed dollar-for-dollar in short-term instruments, principally U.S. Treasuries. They are much safer than the banks.”

Crypto bill on the lifeline

But not all the issuers’ reserves are backed by short-term bonds. The stablecoin law, the GENIUS Act, allows for the reserves to include uninsured deposits, repurchase agreement loans, and shares of MMFs.

According to Better Markets, a financial reform nonprofit, this ‘risky’ reserve composition makes stablecoin vulnerable to bank-like runs seen in 2020 and 2008.

The same framing was applied by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), a lobby group for banks, which called stablecoins a ‘less regulated cousin’ of money market funds.

In fact, these arguments by Better Markets and BPI were the ones Shirzad addressed. The ongoing discussion is part of the larger push for compromise on stablecoin yield that has stalled the market structure bill.

Meanwhile, reports indicate that Democrats have planned a meeting to discuss the bill. This follows White House meeting held on the 2nd of February, to broker a stablecoin yield deal between banks and the crypto industry by the end of the month.

It remains unclear whether the bill will progress out of the Senate Banking Committee by Q1 2026.


Final Thoughts

  • Coinbase officials have maintained that stablecoins are much safer and carry less risk than banks.
  • Senate Democrats planned a meeting on the crypto bill, but uncertainty remains on the legislation’s momentum.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main argument Coinbase makes against claims that stablecoins pose a systemic risk?

ACoinbase argues that stablecoins are much safer than banks and money market funds (MMFs) because their reserves are backed dollar-for-dollar in short-term instruments like U.S. Treasuries and are not re-lent out like in the fractionalized reserve banking system.

QAccording to the article, what does the GENIUS Act allow stablecoin reserves to include?

AThe GENIUS Act allows stablecoin reserves to include uninsured deposits, repurchase agreement loans, and shares of money market funds (MMFs).

QWhich two groups are mentioned as being opposed to the crypto industry's view on stablecoins?

AThe two groups opposed to the crypto industry's view are traditional banks, represented by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), and the financial reform nonprofit Better Markets.

QWhat specific event from the past do critics cite when warning about the risks of stablecoins?

ACritics cite the bank-like runs seen in the 2008 financial crisis and in 2020 as a risk for stablecoins, comparing their reserve composition to that of risky prime money market funds (MMFs).

QWhat is the current status of the stablecoin market structure bill according to the article?

AThe bill's progress is uncertain, and it remains unclear whether it will advance out of the Senate Banking Committee by the first quarter of 2026, despite planned meetings among Democrats to discuss it.

Letture associate

US Senate Makes Important Amendments to "Conflict of Interest" Section of Cryptocurrency Bill

The U.S. Senate has taken a key step regarding the CLARITY Act, which could shape the future of the U.S. crypto market. On July 29, Senators Tom Tillis and Ruben Gallego finalized amendments to the bill's "conflict of interest" rules, one of its most contentious aspects. The bipartisan bill aims to tighten restrictions on high-level federal officials' ties to digital assets. The new text, crafted as an alternative to a White House-endorsed ethics code, is expected to impose stricter rules limiting officials' ability to issue or directly participate in digital asset projects. However, with Congress entering an August recess and the revised text not yet reviewed by much of the Senate, the bill's timeline is uncertain. Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated a procedural vote could occur between July 29 and August 1 but expressed doubt the full bill could pass before the break. The House-approved CLARITY Act, passed in July 2025, has been under Senate negotiation for over a year. Key goals of the CLARITY Act include clarifying jurisdictional boundaries between the SEC and CFTC, setting rules for digital commodity spot markets, and addressing topics like stablecoin yields, DeFi, and illicit financing. The stablecoin yield provisions could significantly impact U.S.-based DeFi protocols, exchanges, and issuers, affecting their global competitiveness. The outcome is being closely watched by both the U.S. and global digital asset markets.

cryptonews.ru47 min fa

US Senate Makes Important Amendments to "Conflict of Interest" Section of Cryptocurrency Bill

cryptonews.ru47 min fa

Pavel Durov Designated as a Terrorist in Russia. What Does This Mean for Telegram Users?

Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram, has been added to Russia's list of terrorists and extremists by Rosfinmonitoring, as published on July 30. The entry includes his name and date of birth. The designation follows an announcement by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) on July 29, which charged Durov with aiding terrorist activity. The FSB alleges that a Telegram dating bot named "DaiVinchik" was used to recruit 46 individuals for attacks on police and arson, orchestrated by Ukrainian special services. The FSB also accuses Telegram's administration of failing to remove channels and bots used by Ukrainian intelligence and extremist groups. Durov is reportedly subject to an international arrest warrant. Inclusion on the Rosfinmonitoring list leads to significant restrictions: the freezing of Durov's bank accounts and assets, severe limitations on financial transactions, and a ban on election participation, media interaction, and event organization. Transfers to his accounts may be considered terrorism financing. For ordinary Russian Telegram users, purchasing Telegram Premium is not classified as financing terrorism, according to an IT expert. General use of the messenger—messaging, managing channels—does not automatically make a user a participant in extremist activity. There has been no official decision to ban Telegram itself. It is noted that French authorities are also investigating Durov over allegations of inadequate measures against criminal activity on the platform and insufficient cooperation with law enforcement. Durov denies all charges.

cryptonews.ru56 min fa

Pavel Durov Designated as a Terrorist in Russia. What Does This Mean for Telegram Users?

cryptonews.ru56 min fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片