The Artificial Intelligence Economy Could Accelerate the Establishment of Dominance for Dollar-Pegged Stablecoins

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2026-07-31Last updated on 2026-07-31

Abstract

Economists from the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office (AMRO) suggest that the winner in the artificial intelligence (AI) race may not be the country developing the most powerful AI model, but the one whose currency underpins these models and their infrastructure. Their thesis outlines a potential cycle where AI-related costs—such as energy for data centers, infrastructure, and usage fees—are denominated in U.S. dollars. As AI grows into a massive industry, this could significantly increase global demand for U.S. dollar liquidity (first channel of dollar dominance). A second channel involves the currency used for payments between AI agents, expected to become widespread in logistics, inventory, and treasury management. Dollar-pegged stablecoins could provide the programmable settlements required for such agent commerce. These two channels may converge, creating a self-reinforcing "dollar loop" where AI computational payments are settled in stablecoins. Stablecoins could gain an early advantage over alternatives like CBDCs due to existing network effects, further entrenching dollar dominance. This would also boost demand for U.S. Treasury bonds used as collateral for stablecoin reserves. The report warns ASEAN+3 nations of over-reliance on this dollar loop and suggests developing regional data centers and tokenized money based on local currencies to participate in the AI economy without reinforcing dollar dependency.

Two economists from the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office (AMRO) believe that the winner in the artificial intelligence (AI) race will not be the country that develops the most powerful model, but the one that manages to establish the currency on which these models and their accompanying infrastructure are based.

Chancxu Fu and Xiago Huang recently suggested that the strengthening of an economic cycle, where the energy for AI data centers, AI infrastructure, and the very cost of using AI are valued in US dollars, could lead to an increase in the dominance of the US dollar through stablecoins.

The thesis underlying this premise is simple: if companies have to pay for everything AI-related in dollars, and AI becomes a much larger industry than today in terms of monetary turnover and significance, there will be a renewed sharp increase in global demand for dollar liquidity. The authors define this factor as the first channel of dollar dominance in AI.

The second channel is related to the use of a specific currency that will facilitate payments involving agents; such payments could become ubiquitous if AI, as many in the crypto industry believe, consistently displaces human-managed systems in logistics, inventory management, and treasury operations. "In particular, dollar-pegged stablecoins could provide the programmable settlements necessary for agent-based commerce," they explain.

These two channels can intersect, as agent systems could execute settlements for AI-related computational payments in stablecoins, creating a positive dollar loop, from which it is difficult to break free.

Although stablecoins are not the only available substitute for the dollar, they could benefit from early network effects, as they are already ready to play this role in the AI economy, while tokenized deposits of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) are not yet ready for this task.

This would have a side effect that would also benefit the US: increased demand for US Treasury bonds used as collateral to support the growing market capitalization of stablecoins.

The report calls on ASEAN+3 countries, including Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, China, Japan, and South Korea, to limit their dependence on this "dollar loop."

Creating regional data centers and developing tokenized forms of money based on local currencies could help avoid strengthening the link between stablecoins and AI, as well as help these countries participate in the AI economy without indirectly supporting a new level of dependence on AI.

Related Questions

QAccording to the AMRO economists, what determines the winner in the AI race?

AThe winner in the AI race will not be the country that develops the most powerful model, but the one that manages to establish the currency on which these models and their accompanying infrastructure are based.

QWhat are the two channels through which AI could reinforce US dollar dominance, as described by Chengxu Fu and Xiago Huang?

A1. The first channel is the renewed surge in global demand for US dollar liquidity if all costs associated with AI must be paid in dollars, making AI a vastly larger industry. 2. The second channel is the use of a specific currency to facilitate payments involving AI agents, where USD-linked stablecoins could provide the programmable settlements required for agentic commerce.

QWhy could stablecoins have an early advantage over tokenized CBDC deposits in the AI economy?

AStablecoins could win due to early network effects, as they are already primed to play this role in the AI economy, while tokenized Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) deposits are not yet ready for this task.

QWhat beneficial side effect for the US could result from a growth in stablecoin market capitalization backed by US treasuries?

AA growth in demand for US Treasury bonds, which are used as collateral to support the increasing market capitalization of stablecoins, would be a beneficial side effect for the United States.

QWhat recommendations are made for ASEAN+3 countries to limit their dependence on the potential 'dollar loop'?

AThe report recommends creating regional data centers and developing tokenized forms of money based on local currencies. This could help avoid strengthening the link between stablecoins and AI and allow these countries to participate in the AI economy without indirectly supporting a new level of AI dependency.

Related Reads

Analyzing the Impact of AI on Economic Growth and Productivity

**Title: Analyzing AI's Impact on Economic Growth and Productivity** This article examines three contrasting views on AI's influence on economic growth and productivity. **The Optimistic View** posits that AI, especially through automating R&D ("recursive self-improvement"), could dramatically accelerate growth, even triggering a technological "singularity" with explosive, potentially infinite, economic expansion. **The Moderate/Mainstream View** acknowledges AI's productivity benefits but emphasizes significant real-world constraints that could limit its impact. These include: limited cost savings per task, structural ceilings on which jobs and industries are "exposed" to AI, adoption bottlenecks (e.g., compute, energy, regulatory hurdles), and the "weak link" effect where non-automatable tasks cap overall gains. Consequently, the realized AI dividend may be far lower than optimistic projections, with estimates typically ranging from 0.1% to 1.3% annual productivity growth. **The Pessimistic View** stems from two strands. The first aligns with the moderate view but applies extremely conservative assumptions about task exposure and efficiency gains, yielding minimal projected impact. The second introduces a demand-side critique: if AI primarily replaces rather than augments labor, it could depress labor's share of income, weaken consumer demand, and create a "demand trap" that ultimately stifles growth, unless offset by redistribution policies. **The authors' assessment** is nuanced: * **Short-term (1-2 years):** AI will support growth primarily through investment spending, not significant productivity gains. * **Medium-term (3-5 years):** Three potential paths emerge based on AI demand and bottleneck severity: 1. **"Optimistic Path":** High demand, few bottlenecks. Rapid productivity gains but risk of major job displacement and social conflict without redistribution. 2. **"Moderate Path" (most likely):** High demand but significant, surmountable bottlenecks. Leads to moderate productivity gains, financial market volatility (K-shaped returns), and sectoral job losses. 3. **"Pessimistic Path":** Low demand or severe bottlenecks. Minimal productivity and growth impact, triggering financial market corrections but allowing a smoother societal transition with less labor disruption. * **Long-term:** AI holds potential for a major productivity revolution and prosperity. The conclusion stresses that no path is smooth. Technologically "optimistic" outcomes could be socially detrimental, while "pessimistic" technological diffusion might be more socially stable. Policymakers must monitor developments and prepare balanced responses to manage economic, financial, and social sustainability.

marsbit35m ago

Analyzing the Impact of AI on Economic Growth and Productivity

marsbit35m ago

The New Cold War is a Tech Stock War

The New Cold War is a Tech Stock War The article argues that the contemporary geopolitical and economic rivalry between the US and China represents a "New Cold War," but one fundamentally fought through technology and financial markets, not physical barriers or conventional trade. Historically, US dominance was secured through financial systems. The Soviet Union, reliant on the rigid "Transferable Ruble," was ultimately undermined by its dependency on the US dollar for oil trade. Later, Japan's semiconductor challenge was countered not just by tariffs (e.g., Plaza Accord, 301 investigations) but by binding it to US Treasury bonds. China presents a more complex, "embedded" challenger. While it holds vast dollar reserves and US debt like Japan, its industrial base is stronger and more diversified than the Soviet Union's. Surviving the initial 2018 trade war phase, the conflict has evolved into a "tech-financial war." The core battlefield is now the stock market. US tech stocks (AI, semiconductors) are treated as sovereign assets, buoyed by bipartisan national will. China is pushing to strengthen its own financial markets to convert industrial strength into financial power and fund its tech ambitions. Companies like ChangXin (semiconductors), Moonshot AI, and DJI compete not just for market share but as financial proxies for their respective systems. The new paradigm is moving from globally efficient monopolies (Apple, Google) towards companies that achieve monopolistic profits within their respective geopolitical spheres. This competition over "pricing power" and financial valuation in segmented markets defines the current era, making the stock market the primary arena for this tech-centric struggle.

marsbit44m ago

The New Cold War is a Tech Stock War

marsbit44m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片