U.S. Banks Push Congress to Restrict Stablecoins and Crypto Data Access

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-01-22Last updated on 2026-01-22

Abstract

U.S. banks, led by the American Bankers Association (ABA), are urging Congress to impose restrictions on stablecoins and financial data access. They advocate for a ban on yield-bearing stablecoins, warning that such products could draw trillillions of dollars from bank deposits, reducing lending capacity and creating financial stability risks. Additionally, banks seek changes to Section 1033 banking rules to impose stronger liability rules and potential fees on data sharing, which currently allows users to connect bank accounts to crypto platforms. Crypto and fintech groups argue these efforts are anti-competitive, designed to protect banks from innovation, and could effectively kill open banking by blocking connections or charging fees. This dispute has delayed a key crypto market structure bill in the U.S. Senate.

The traditional banks in the U.S. are pushing the lawmakers to change the crypto rules that would limit the stablecoins and financial data sharing. This push was led by the American Bankers Association (ABA), which is the major group of U.S. banks.

Why Banks Want Stablecoin Yields Banned

ABA’s are demanding a ban on the stablecoin yield. They say that the yield-bearing stablecoins could pull money out of the banks’ deposits and reduce the banks’ ability to lend, which creates financial stability risks. Brian Moynihan, CEO of Bank of America, warns that “trillions of money” will move from banks into stablecoins if the yield is allowed.

In reply, Crypto and Fintech groups argue that this would protect banks from the competition and make the stablecoins less useful and lock innovations behind the bank-controlled products.

ABA is also pushing to change the banking rules of Section 1033, which allows users have the right to share their financial data with the apps they choose. Right now, under the existing rules, users can connect their bank accounts to crypto wallets, exchanges, stablecoin apps, and fintech tools. But Banks are opposing the current rules and need the stronger liability rules and potential fees or restrictions on data sharing.

Crypto and fintech groups warn that the banks could use these crypto rule changes in their favor by charging fees for the data access, block connections, and slowly kill the open banking without banning it right away.

Stablecoin Yield Dispute Delays Key U.S. Crypto Bill

These disagreements and debate slows the progress on a major crypto market structure bill in the U.S. Senate, which involves who regulates crypto, how the stablecoin works, and how crypto fits into traditional finance. The current debate on stablecoin yield and financial stability sharing has caused a delay in voting from the Senate Banking Committee, and the coinbase has withdrawn its support for the bill.

Overall, banks want to grow crypto under the banking system, but crypto firms prefer decentralization on digital assets, user access, and financial data.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Crypto Analyst Underlines Possible ETH Price High After Revised Monthly Projection

TagsbanksCryptoStablecoin

Related Reads

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

No one truly teaches you how to do research. You're often given a desk, a pre-selected problem, and vague instructions to "create something new." Consequently, many people reverse-engineer the job based on visible outputs—papers, posts, announcements—learning only how to *appear* like a researcher rather than how to *become* one. True research capability is built from stacking small, trainable skills, nearly all of which can be developed through deliberate practice. **Pick Your Own Problem:** Most researchers absorb problems from advisors or trends, lacking the underlying reasoning. Choosing a problem you genuinely care about, as John Schulman advises, leads to original work. Develop "taste" like a muscle: predict experiment outcomes, guess paper results from methods, and track which findings remain important over time. **Upgrade Your Inputs:** Relying on shared reading lists (arXiv hot lists, filtered group chats) leads to unoriginal conclusions. Undervalued old literature often holds crucial insights (e.g., MoE, LSTM, backpropagation). Richard Sutton's "The Bitter Lesson" or Claude Shannon's 1952 talk on creative thinking are more predictive than lengthy modern surveys. Breadth matters as much as depth: draw from neuroscience, mechanism design, hardware knowledge, and honest statistics. Read papers directly, especially appendices and limitations sections. **Write Everything Down:** As Paul Graham noted, writing exposes flaws in seemingly mature ideas. Writing is the cheapest defense against self-deception. Following Feynman's principle, Darwin programmatically wrote down facts contradicting his theory to combat memory bias. Maintain a detailed log of hypotheses, setups, predictions, results, and updated understandings. Reviewing past logs fosters essential humility.

marsbit45m ago

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

marsbit45m ago

Following US Ban on Fable 5, Zhipu AI's Stock Soars 47%

On June 15th, shares of Zhipu AI surged dramatically on the Hong Kong stock market, peaking at a 47.6% gain before closing 32.82% higher. This sharp increase was directly triggered by two recent industry events. On June 12th, Anthropic announced it was suspending global access to its latest flagship models, Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5, to comply with a U.S. government export control order. The next day, Zhipu AI announced it would open access to its latest open-source flagship model, GLM-5.2, under the permissive MIT license. The Anthropic incident highlighted a critical issue beyond raw model capability: the risk of sudden, unpredictable loss of access to advanced AI models, especially for developers and enterprises deeply integrated with them. This has shifted industry and market focus toward factors like stability, sustainable access, and controllability. Zhipu's move, promoting "frontier intelligence for all," positions its openly available model as a reliable and accessible alternative. The GLM-5.2 model emphasizes "Long Horizon Task" capabilities with a 1M context window, targeting complex, multi-step coding and engineering workflows where maintaining context is crucial. Analysts note this event exposes the risk of dependency on closed-source models subject to single jurisdictional controls, potentially accelerating a shift toward domestic base models and localized deployments. The market's reaction signals a new valuation dimension in AI: providers who can offer stable, long-term, and sustainably accessible AI capabilities are gaining strategic importance.

marsbit1h ago

Following US Ban on Fable 5, Zhipu AI's Stock Soars 47%

marsbit1h ago

Fully Entering the AI Era: Alipay Bets on Conversation, WeChat Holds Fast to Social

In May 2026, Alipay announced over 300 million AI payment transactions. Shortly after, WeChat opened its mini-programs for AI integration, sparking controversy by requiring developer source code access. This highlights their diverging approaches to AI integration. Alipay is testing "Project Treasure," an optional AI-native interface replacing traditional app grids with a conversational window. Users can command complex tasks (e.g., "book a ride and order coffee") handled end-to-end by AI. This shift follows an abandoned standalone AI app, focusing instead on enhancing its existing user base. For unmodified mini-programs, Alipay's AI uses "screen-reading" to simulate user interactions, bypassing the need for developer overhaul. It also introduced "Token Pay" for micro-transactions and "AI Wallets" for autonomous agent spending. WeChat, prioritizing its core social function, is taking an embedded approach. Its AI agent will operate within existing contexts like group chats and official accounts, assisting without a separate interface. To enable this, WeChat offers developers two paths: granting source code access for direct AI control ("Automatic Mode") or manually encapsulating services into standardized "Skills." Both place significant burden on developers. Key differences emerge in handling legacy services: WeChat demands developer cooperation (code or labor), while Alipay's screen-reading offers immediate, if potentially less stable, compatibility. Alipay's 3 billion AI transactions demonstrate user acceptance of AI-driven commercial actions. The divergent strategies may reshape mini-program ecosystems—Alipay passively "AI-fying" services, WeChat potentially favoring resource-rich developers—and set competing technical standards. Ultimately, the competition centers on where users entrust the command to "help me get things done."

marsbit1h ago

Fully Entering the AI Era: Alipay Bets on Conversation, WeChat Holds Fast to Social

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片