Fed signals crypto pivot, floats ‘skinny master account’ for stablecoin players

ambcryptoPublicado em 2025-10-22Última atualização em 2025-10-23

Key Takeaways

Why is the Fed open to crypto?

According to Gov. Waller, it would reflect the changes that have happened in the sector, including stablecoins. 

What’s the broader benefit of the update to the sector?

Crypto leaders believe it would offer more legitimacy and boost stablecoins and the overall tokenized market. 


Alt HDs

Federal Reserve considers limited access to payment rails for stablecoin firms

Waller says Fed ready to integrate stablecoins into U.S. payment system

The U.S Federal Reserve appears ready to embrace crypto disruption, especially stablecoins. During the first-ever payment innovation conference by the regulator, Fed Governor Christopher Waller instructed the staff to accommodate stablecoin players into the U.S payment rails. 

Waller suggested a limited “skinny master account” that would allow stablecoin issuers and other innovative firms access Fed’s payment rails while mitigating risks. It would also eliminate the need for partner banks. 

Waller added that the sector has gone mainstream and the regulator will embrace it for payment innovations. 

“This is an acknowledgement that distributed ledgers and crypto-assets are no longer on the fringes but increasingly are woven into the fabric of the payment and financial systems.”

Crypto leaders welcome the move

The so-called “master accounts” are like a direct bank account at the Federal Reserve. If fintech and crypto firms get one, then they could hold reserves directly and settle transactions instantly with the Fed. It would also cut overall costs, which increase if they are forced to go through a middleman. 

Some of the beneficiaries of Waller’s proposal would be Ripple, especially since it applied for a Fed master account and banking charter this year. 

The conference was attended by top crypto and tech leaders, and they hailed the move as a game-changer. For his part, Nathan McCauley, CEO and Co-Founder of Anchorage Digital, said

“This will enable a whole host of opportunities to further the US as the leader in payments and stablecoins.”

Fed crypto

Source: X

According to Rob Hadick, General Partner at VC firm Dragonfly, the pivot would make adoption of tokenized assets and stablecoins inevitable. 

Cuy Sheffied, Head of Crypto at Visa, called the move “powerful,” while Fundstrat’s CIO Tom Lee viewed it as a preparation for onboarding Wall Street. 

He said

“This is a step towards facilitating moving Wall Street onto the blockchain.”

Worth pointing out, however, that the Fed, especially during the Biden era, has been cautious about the sector in the past.

In fact, some crypto-focused banks like Custodia Bank were denied access to a Fed master account. The argument? Crypto is “inherently unsafe,” “unsound,” and could pose a financial stability risk. 

Caitlin Long, founder of Custodia Bank, praised Gov. Waller’s pivot. She added that they have tried to get access for five years.  

Fed crypto

Source: X

Under the current pro-crypto administration, most of the regulators, including the Fed, have pivoted. In fact, even banks were barred from supporting digital assets during Biden’s reign.

By April 2025 though, most of the anti-crypto directives had been rolled back

Share

Leituras Relacionadas

Agentized OS: It's Not About AI, It's About the Foundation

The Agentic OS: Beyond AI, It's About the Foundational Stack In 2026, major operating systems like Android, iOS, HarmonyOS, and Windows are entering the "Agentic" era, integrating proactive AI assistants deeply into the system layer. However, the real competition lies not in the flashy AI features showcased at events, but in the three-layer foundational stack that enables them: the system-level AI Runtime, proprietary/controllable chips, and the on-device/cloud model matrix. The AI Runtime acts as the central scheduler, managing model inference, resource allocation, and exposing capabilities to apps. Controllable chips (e.g., Apple Silicon, Google Tensor, Huawei Kirin) are crucial for deep hardware-software co-optimization, determining the efficiency and experience limits of on-device Agents. The on-device/cloud model matrix provides the "intelligence," with proprietary, chip-optimized small models (like Gemini Nano, Apple's ~3B model) handling daily tasks locally for low latency, privacy, and reliability, while cloud models tackle complex requests. Deep synergy between these three layers enables key Agent differentiators: ultra-low latency and power efficiency, genuine "on-device first" privacy, access to system-level personal context across apps, and reliable performance as a system service even offline. OS vendors with strong integration across this stack (like Apple, Google, and Huawei) build a deeper moat. Beyond this core stack, long-term competitiveness depends on variables like structured App integration (e.g., App Intents/AppFunctions) for reliable multi-step workflows, and robust privacy frameworks that build user trust. This shift towards Agentic OS extends beyond phones and PCs to IoT, cars, and XR glasses via existing multi-device ecosystems. The race is won not in a keynote, but through generations of meticulously co-developed chips, models, and system software.

marsbitHá 1h

Agentized OS: It's Not About AI, It's About the Foundation

marsbitHá 1h

Why Sam Altman's 'Water and Electricity Theory' Sparks Copyright Controversy

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman's recent statement that "intelligence will become a utility like electricity or water" has sparked significant controversy, primarily around copyright issues and the nature of AI development. While positioning AI as a utility serves as a compelling narrative for infrastructure investors, critics argue the analogy is flawed in three key areas. First, there's a fundamental "property gap." Traditional utilities like water and power create new, physical infrastructure from scratch. In contrast, major AI models are trained by reorganizing vast amounts of existing human-created content—books, articles, code, etc.—often scraped from the web without explicit permission or compensation to creators. This "free acquisition, paid resale" model is seen by many as ethically problematic. Second, there's a "pricing gap." True public utilities are typically regulated to ensure universal service with non-discriminatory, cost-plus pricing. AI's token-based pricing, however, involves significant price discrimination (e.g., output tokens costing much more than input tokens) and is designed for revenue maximization, not equitable access. Third, a "governance gap" exists. Utilities operate under public oversight, while AI pricing and development are currently controlled by a few private companies. Furthermore, the industry's own shift toward buying licensed training data (e.g., deals with Reddit or news publishers) undermines its previous legal reliance on "fair use" for freely scraped data. In conclusion, while AI is indeed becoming a foundational technology, calling it a public utility remains contentious. The title requires not just scale and a pay-per-use model, but also credible solutions for data provenance, equitable pricing, and public governance.

marsbitHá 1h

Why Sam Altman's 'Water and Electricity Theory' Sparks Copyright Controversy

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片