GENIUS Act vs Digital Asset Basic Act: Comparing U.S. and South Korean Stablecoin Rules

ccn.comPublicado em 2025-06-10Última atualização em 2025-06-10

Key Takeaways
  • South Korea and the U.S. are moving forward with landmark legislation regulating stablecoins.
  • The U.S. proposes a dual regulatory framework based on issuer size, while South Korea opts for centralized approval under its Financial Services Commission.
  • Both governments have received pushback for parts of their regulatory push, as pressure mounts to provide clear legislation in the rapidly growing asset class.

South Korea’s newly appointed President, Lee Jae-myung, has announced that the country plans to fast-track his pledge to allow companies to issue stablecoins.

The move comes as the U.S. prepares for a key vote on stablecoin legislation this week, signaling a global shift as governments begin to craft policies that balance innovation with regulatory oversight.

While the U.S. and South Korean bills aim to legitimize stablecoins, they reflect different regulatory philosophies and economic strategies.

South Korean Stablecoin Push

On Tuesday, June 10, the ruling Democratic Party introduced the Digital Asset Basic Act, a proposed law intended to boost local innovation and improve market transparency.

According to Bloomberg , South Korean companies will be permitted to issue stablecoins if they have at least 500 million won (approximately $367,876) in equity capital.

Issuers must guarantee refunds through their reserves, and the Financial Services Commission must approve all stablecoins and other asset-linked digital assets.

GENIUS Act

The GENIUS Act, officially known as the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, has returned to the U.S. Senate for a crucial vote.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture on two significant amendments on June 10, setting up a final procedural vote expected later this week.

The landmark bill aims to establish clear federal and state-level rules for stablecoin issuers, including regulatory oversight and anti-money laundering requirements.

The GENIUS Act has faced repeated delays , particularly from Democratic lawmakers calling for stricter provisions.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren called for limiting stablecoin issuance to traditional banking institutions, but that amendment was ultimately voted down.

“The bill invites scammers into the market by refusing to prohibit people convicted of fraud and money laundering from owning stablecoins,” Warren said .

In response, Sen. Bill Hagerty, who introduced the bill in February, defended it, stating, “It presents common-sense rules that protect consumers, promote competition, and foster innovation.

“It’s time we provide the clarity and stability that our country and its innovators so desperately need.”

GENIUS Act vs. Digital Asset Basic Act

At a broad level, both the GENIUS Act and South Korea’s Digital Asset Basic Act aim to place stablecoins within clear legal frameworks.

Both propose licensing requirements and seek to promote the safer adoption of stablecoins for everyday use.

However, their structures and ambitions diverge.

The GENIUS Act focuses on payment stablecoins and avoids sweeping all digital assets under the same framework.

In contrast, under a comprehensive digital finance umbrella, South Korea’s Digital Asset Basic Act is designed to regulate a broader range of digital assets, including other asset-linked tokens.

The GENIUS Act introduces a dual regulatory model: Large issuers with over $10 billion in circulation fall under federal oversight, while smaller issuers may be managed at the state level.

South Korea, by contrast, requires all stablecoin issuance to be centrally approved by the Financial Services Commission.

While this move promises consistency, it concentrates regulatory power into a single authority, which has drawn criticism from the Bank of Korea.

Another area that differs is the specificity of consumer protection in the GENIUS Act.

The U.S. bill mandates strong transparency requirements and anti-fraud measures, including the enforcement of anti-money laundering and know-your-customer compliance.

Meanwhile, while South Korea’s bill emphasizes transparency and reserve guarantees, it does not yet provide detailed rules around user-facing protections.

Stablecoin Boom

These legislative efforts come as stablecoin use continues to surge globally.

According to Yonhap News, South Korea’s trading of stablecoins like USDT and USDC reached 57 trillion won in the first quarter across five domestic exchanges.

Globally, the stablecoin market is valued at around $254 billion, with Standard Chartered projecting that figure could reach $2 trillion by 2028 if the U.S. passes comprehensive regulation.

Tether and Circle remain dominant in the space, commanding over 85% of the market, with total circulating values of $150 billion and $61 billion, respectively.

Was this Article helpful? Yes No

Leituras Relacionadas

Tiger Research: Zuckerberg Begins Betting on Prediction Markets, While Asian Nations Still View Them as Gambling

This article examines the rise of prediction markets, contrasting their growing institutional acceptance in the West with their restrictive regulation in Asia. It details how prediction markets, which originated from informal political betting and academic experiments like the Iowa Electronic Market, aggregate crowd wisdom into probabilistic prices through binary contracts. Their growth accelerated around 2020, reaching over $14 billion in monthly volume. A key driver is the "skin in the game" principle, where users risk their own capital, leading to high accuracy in predicting events like Fed rate decisions and elections, as demonstrated by platforms like Polymarket. Meta's entry, with Mark Zuckerberg reportedly leading the development of the Arena app, signals the market's maturation. In the U.S., court rulings have distinguished prediction markets from gambling, facilitating entry by traditional financial institutions. However, most Asian jurisdictions still classify them as gambling, focusing on social control rather than financial innovation. The article argues this stance creates three problems for Asia: 1) regulatory arbitrage pushes users to riskier offshore platforms, 2) loss of sovereign information infrastructure as valuable social sentiment data accumulates abroad, and 3) abandonment of user protection. It concludes that Asia needs a policy shift from prohibition to constructive regulation, integrating these markets into the formal system to harness their data as a national asset, as initiatives like Limitless Research are beginning to do.

marsbitHá 40m

Tiger Research: Zuckerberg Begins Betting on Prediction Markets, While Asian Nations Still View Them as Gambling

marsbitHá 40m

Ethereum's Next Decade in the Eyes of Vitalik

"Lean Ethereum" Long-Term Roadmap Unveiled by Vitalik Buterin On July 5, 2026, Vitalik Buterin published the "Lean Ethereum" roadmap, positioning it as Ethereum's third major evolution following the Merge. This multi-year, multi-phase upgrade aims to fundamentally transform Ethereum's core protocol through staged network upgrades extending to 2029. Key goals include achieving 1 gigagas per second L1 throughput (a massive increase from the current ~32 TPS), near-instant finality, and quantum-resistant cryptography. The plan involves transitioning Ethereum's security model from full transaction re-execution by all nodes to native verification via recursive STARK proofs. A major proposed change is replacing the EVM with a proof-friendly architecture like RISC-V or leanISA, though this remains a point of contention, especially with L2s like Arbitrum favoring alternatives like WASM. Other planned upgrades include a restructured state model with a large, cheap "warehouse" storage layer to drastically reduce fees for migrated applications, multi-dimensional gas pricing, and a new focus on making privacy a first-class, native protocol feature. While the roadmap significantly raises Ethereum's long-term technical ceiling, analysts note it does not directly address ETH's mid-term token economics or value capture. The plan's multi-year timeline means near-term price impact will likely depend on observable progress milestones, such as the successful deployment of the upcoming Glamsterdam gas limit increase, growth in L2 activity and blob usage, and trends in L1 fee revenue and ETH burn.

链捕手Há 2h

Ethereum's Next Decade in the Eyes of Vitalik

链捕手Há 2h

In Just 11 Days, Claude Rewrote Millions of Lines of Code, an Epic AI Engineering Feat Sparks Fury

In just 11 days, Bun's founder Jarred Sumner used Anthropic's Claude AI models to rewrite its million lines of code from Zig to Rust. This move sparked significant controversy, particularly from Zig's creator, Andrew Kelley, who publicly criticized Sumner's engineering practices and the decision to use AI for such a massive rewrite. Bun, a high-performance JavaScript/TypeScript runtime and rival to Node.js, was originally written in Zig. After Anthropic acquired Bun, the team encountered persistent stability and memory safety bugs in the Zig codebase. These issues, combined with Zig's strict policy against LLM-generated code, led to the decision to rewrite in Rust. The rewrite was executed using Claude AI tools at an estimated API cost of $165,000, dramatically reducing the expected time and financial cost. Andrew Kelley's response was scathing. He blamed the original bugs on poor engineering habits, calling Bun's Zig code a collection of "hacks on top of hacks." He expressed relief that Bun was no longer associated with Zig, fearing it would misrepresent the language and attract low-quality, AI-generated contributions. The tech community is divided; some view Kelley's critique as unprofessional, while others see it as a defense of engineering integrity. A major concern about the AI-driven rewrite is the resulting code quality. The translation from Zig left approximately 27,000 lines of unsafe Rust code, raising fears about long-term maintainability and technical debt. The debate centers on whether this project is a milestone in AI-assisted development or a future maintenance nightmare.

marsbitHá 3h

In Just 11 Days, Claude Rewrote Millions of Lines of Code, an Epic AI Engineering Feat Sparks Fury

marsbitHá 3h

From Auto Finance to Bitcoin to AI Engines: An Analysis of Cango's 'What Not to Do' Strategy

From Auto Finance to Bitcoin and Now AI: Cango's "What Not to Do" Strategy Cango, a Chinese auto finance platform that went public on the NYSE in 2018, is undergoing its third major transformation. After selling its entire auto business in 2024, it pivoted to become a large-scale Bitcoin miner, acquiring 50 exahash of mining rigs from Bitmain. However, its true goal was never Bitcoin, but owning and controlling energy infrastructure. Now, Cango is pivoting again. While most listed Bitcoin miners are leasing power to giant hyperscalers for AI training clusters, Cango is taking the opposite path. It has launched an AI inference subsidiary called EcoHash, focusing not on training but on distributed inference. The company's strategy hinges on the insight that over 70% of mining industry power is controlled by small, independent sites (10-50 MW), which are too small for hyperscalers but ideal for low-latency AI inference. Cango aims to partner with these small operators, providing the AI technology, customers, and financing through its EcoLink software layer, which can distribute workloads across sites for reliability. Cango maintains a hybrid model, running roughly 31.7 EH/s of Bitcoin mining for cash flow while aggressively cleaning its balance sheet—slashing long-term debt by 94.5% to $30.6 million and raising $75 million for its AI venture. Its first AI deployment will be at a 50 MW site in Georgia. The strategy faces skepticism, given the high costs of converting mining sites and the potential for an AI bubble. However, Cango's leadership believes discipline around "what not to do"—avoiding direct competition with hyperscalers in training—positions it to capture the long-tail demand for distributed AI inference power.

Foresight NewsHá 3h

From Auto Finance to Bitcoin to AI Engines: An Analysis of Cango's 'What Not to Do' Strategy

Foresight NewsHá 3h

Trading

Spot
活动图片