Trillion-Dollar Stablecoins Challenge Traditional Payments, US Banks Launch Largest Coordinated Counterattack in History

Foresight NewsPublicado em 2026-07-15Última atualização em 2026-07-15

Resumo

Major U.S. banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citigroup, are launching a coordinated effort through The Clearing House to build a shared network for tokenized bank deposits. This move is a direct response to the rapid growth of stablecoins, which processed an estimated $33 trillion in transactions last year and threaten to erode banks' core payment businesses. The initiative aims to replicate the success of the Zelle network by creating interoperable, blockchain-based infrastructure for faster, cheaper digital dollar transfers that retain banking system benefits like deposit insurance. The project seeks to connect multiple bank-led digital currency systems, overcoming the current limitation of closed networks. While banks hold advantages in scale and regulation, the effort faces significant challenges, including slow decision-making among rivals, a crowded field of similar projects from consortia like SWIFT, and the need to keep pace with fast-moving crypto innovators. Despite these hurdles, banks are motivated by the clear competitive threat as stablecoins gain traction for corporate and cross-border payments. The network is slated to launch next year, initially focusing on wholesale payments and tokenized securities settlement.


By:Anna Irrera, Bloomberg

Compiled by:Saoirse, Foresight News


For years, major banks largely watched from the sidelines as stablecoins evolved from a niche cryptocurrency category into payment networks handling trillions of dollars annually. Now, the banking industry aims to replicate the collaborative model that built Zelle, hoping that shared infrastructure can stop various digital dollars from eroding their business turf.


Leading banks including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, HSBC Holdings, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo recently announced a plan to build an interoperable network for tokenized bank deposits. Tokenized bank deposits are a digital form of funds held within the commercial banking system, which can be transferred via blockchain payment rails – technology first popularized by the crypto industry.


The Zelle logo on a smartphone. Photographer: Tiffany Hagler-Geard / Bloomberg


This initiative, to be operated by The Clearing House (TCH), represents the U.S. banking industry's first large-scale coordinated effort to counter stablecoins. Stablecoins are typically pegged to the U.S. dollar and can process payments and settlements around the clock, with their use cases continually expanding.


Banks are increasingly realizing that the competitive threat posed by stablecoins is no longer theoretical. While initially used mostly for cryptocurrency trading, stablecoins are now being adopted by more payment firms and financial institutions seeking cheaper and faster channels for fund transfers. Data from analytics firm Artemis Analytics shows stablecoin transaction volume surged 72% last year to about $33 trillion. Bloomberg Intelligence predicts stablecoin payment flows could exceed $50 trillion by 2030.


The obvious blueprint for this banking action is Zelle. Over a decade ago, banks joined forces to create a person-to-person shared payment network to combat the rapid rise of consumer payment apps like Venmo. The project took years to materialize, but Zelle now processes over $1 trillion in payments annually, standing as one of the banking industry's most successful defenses against external competitors.


Whether banks can replicate this success is highly uncertain. With the market evolving rapidly, dozens of competing institutions need to agree on technical standards, governance rules, and commercial incentives. The financial sector has a history of alliance projects stalling due to diverging interests slowing decision-making and investment.


Alessandro Hatami, managing partner at fintech consultancy Pacemakers.io and former head of digital payments at Lloyds Bank, said: "These are the same banks that have been announcing various blockchain projects for the past decade. Banks compete with each other, making it inherently difficult to build shared infrastructure."


With regulatory winds shifting toward leniency during the Trump administration, Wall Street aggressively advanced tokenization efforts. U.S. policymakers believe dollar-pegged tokens can reinforce the dollar's global dominance while boosting demand for U.S. Treasury bonds.


The passage of the GENIUS Act last year, which established a comprehensive regulatory framework for stablecoins, effectively sounded the trumpet for stablecoins to enter the mainstream. Policy discussions have since shifted toward market regulations and whether to allow stablecoin issuers to offer interest or rewards – a policy that, if enacted, could severely divert bank deposits.


Nicole Sandler, Chief Ecosystem Officer at tokenized settlement startup Ubyx, stated: "The competitive threat is now visible and quantifiable. Banks are continuously finding their clients using stablecoins to move money. This is completely different from the distant, abstract potential threat of the past."


Connecting Various Payment Rails


Major banks have been experimenting with blockchain technology for years, both independently and collaboratively. Several large institutions, including JPMorgan, Citigroup, and Bank of New York Mellon, have launched their own blockchain-based payment systems allowing clients to transfer funds 24/7.


While these proprietary platforms share some characteristics with stablecoins and benefit from the advantages of commercial bank money—such as earning interest and deposit insurance—transfers are often limited to clients within the same bank. In contrast, stablecoin users can transfer funds to any party globally, unrestricted by their banking institution.


A core objective for The Clearing House is to achieve interoperability between different digital money systems, thereby significantly expanding reach and transaction scale.


Debopama Sen, Head of Payments for Citi's Services business, noted: "Achieving system interoperability and building a scalable platform to simplify client operations is crucial. Many of our large clients operate globally and work with more than one bank."


Blockchain-Based Forms of Money, Source: Bloomberg


The Clearing House plans to connect financial institutions that collectively manage trillions in deposits and serve tens of millions of customers. Upon completion, its scale and breadth would far surpass the current stablecoin market.


Christopher Ward, Head of Enterprise Payments at Truist Financial, said: "The logic is no different from when the U.S. pushed for real-time payment system development. Parties come together to set unified rules for widespread adoption. The current project follows the same thinking."


The Clearing House, with its deep experience in operating industry networks and balancing the needs of community banks, regional banks, multinational giants, and foreign institutions operating in the U.S., is well-suited for a coordinating role. The project aims for a formal launch next year.


Elena Casal, Chief Client Officer at The Clearing House, stated: "Building shared industry infrastructure is in our DNA. We already have mature governance frameworks and regulatory compliance processes, which can help accelerate the project's rollout."


Casal mentioned that demand is primarily concentrated in the wholesale payments space, particularly for corporate treasury management and liquidity调度. This network could also provide digital cash for the clearing and settlement of tokenized securities, empowering the development of tokenized capital markets. The Clearing House is currently selecting technology service providers, and the network is designed with extensibility to potentially support stablecoin settlement in the future.


A Crowded Field with Multiple Players


Despite The Clearing House's solid foundation for success, the bank-led digital currency arena is already crowded, with many similar projects initiated a decade ago. The simultaneous participation of banks in multiple parallel projects risks further industry fragmentation, making it difficult to consolidate efforts.


Last week, payments network SWIFT revealed that over 17 banks are preparing to pilot cross-border tokenized payments on its new distributed ledger. Additionally, an alliance including Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, and Spain's Santander formed late last year to develop stablecoin-like digital currency.


Manish Kohli, Global Head of Payments Solutions at HSBC, analyzed that platforms built by upgrading existing systems have a much higher chance of success than projects built from scratch. Taking The Clearing House's current plan as an example: "The project leverages existing infrastructure, has a stable membership base, clear domestic U.S. use cases, and much lower implementation risks." HSBC is participating in multiple projects, including the SWIFT pilot, the UK's "UK Tokenized Deposit Initiative," and Hong Kong's Ensemble project.


The Difficult Path of Self-Reinvention


While banks possess significant advantages in asset size and compliance credentials, their inherent weakness is slow decision-making and implementation. Zelle itself took years to develop and might not have flourished without pressure from competitors like Venmo; even after technical development was complete, alliance members debated over the product name.


Furthermore, transformation for established payment giants isn't guaranteed to be smooth. PayPal launched its PYUSD stablecoin in August 2023, but adoption has been minimal, with a circulation of only $2.9 billion—paltry compared to leading stablecoins: Tether's USDT circulation is about $184 billion, and Circle's USDC stands at $73 billion.


Major Stablecoins, Source: GoinGecko


From this perspective, leading stablecoin issuers need not panic excessively for now. However, banks also don't need to rush for first-mover advantage: many of the largest and most profitable corporate clients in banks' payment segments currently don't have an urgent need for programmable dollars.


Marieke Flament, co-founder of digital currency consultancy Currency of Power, commented: "Banks may seem slow to act, but once they decide to move forward with a project, they can mobilize massive resources. However, the crypto space evolves extremely fast, and whether banks can keep pace remains a major challenge."


Reporting assistance by Paige Smith, Olga Kharif, Yizhu Wang

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main goal of the banking consortium led by The Clearing House (TCH) in launching a tokenized deposit network?

AThe main goal is to create a unified, interoperable network for tokenized bank deposits using blockchain technology to prevent stablecoins from further eroding the banks' business in payments and to offer a bank-controlled, compliant digital dollar alternative with features like deposit insurance and interest.

QAccording to the article, what previous successful defensive collaboration by banks does this new initiative try to replicate?

AThe initiative tries to replicate the success of Zelle, a person-to-person payment network created over a decade ago by a consortium of banks to compete against rising fintech apps like Venmo, which now processes over $1 trillion annually.

QWhat key advantage do stablecoins currently have over the proprietary blockchain payment systems already launched by individual banks?

AStablecoins have the key advantage of interoperability and global reach, allowing users to transfer value to anyone worldwide regardless of their banking institution, whereas banks' proprietary systems are often limited to transactions between their own customers.

QWhy does the article suggest that success for the banking consortium is not guaranteed, despite their resources and experience?

ASuccess is not guaranteed because the market is evolving rapidly, and coordinating dozens of competing banks on technical standards, governance, and business incentives is historically difficult. The article cites that many past financial consortium projects have stalled due to divergent interests and slow decision-making.

QBeyond competing with stablecoins for payments, what other potential use case for the tokenized deposit network is mentioned in the article?

AThe network is also intended to provide digital cash for the clearing and settlement of tokenized securities, which would help power the development of tokenized capital markets.

Leituras Relacionadas

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

In a landscape dominated by power and profit motives, the author argues that decentralization is not merely one desirable feature among many in blockchain design—it is the singular, non-negotiable defense against corporate and capital capture. The article adopts a Machiavellian, realist perspective on human institutions, positing that businesses will inevitably attempt to co-opt any valuable network to protect their profits and dominance. While external attacks like 51% forks are often discussed, the greater existential risk is internal capture—the gradual erosion of a protocol’s neutrality by vested interests, as seen historically with platforms like Visa and Google. The piece critiques permissioned chains, highly centralized “permissionless” layer-1s, and layer-2s without sufficient decentralization (e.g., single sequencers) as inherently vulnerable. These compromised systems, promoted by established financial players, are framed as delaying tactics to stifle truly open networks that threaten existing high-fee, inefficient business models. Real-world examples, such as closed enterprise consortiums that exclude competitors, illustrate how such systems cement oligopolies rather than foster innovation. The author concludes that while decentralized protocols like Ethereum are imperfect and costly to operate, they represent the only viable long-term equilibrium. In a market where value naturally flows to the most secure and neutral settlement layer, only maximally decentralized public blockchains can resist being subsumed by capital and powerful incumbents.

Foresight NewsHá 11m

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

Foresight NewsHá 11m

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Bitcoin's governance is once again at the center of a heated debate, this time ignited by BIP-110, the "Reduced Data Temporary Softfork." This proposal aims to curb non-monetary data (like inscriptions and Runes) by introducing seven new consensus-layer restrictions over a year, such as limiting new output scripts to 34 bytes and restoring the OP_RETURN cap to 83 bytes. The controversy stems from BIP-110's fundamental shift: it moves the battle against "spam" from node relay and miner policies to the consensus layer, rendering currently valid transactions invalid. Supporters, arguing that default policy governance has failed (highlighted by Bitcoin Core v30's relaxation of OP_RETURN limits), see this as necessary to protect node resources and Bitcoin's monetary focus. Opponents, led by figures like Michael Saylor and Adam Back, warn it dangerously centralizes governance. Saylor listed 110 reasons against it, criticizing its low 55% miner activation threshold and potential for chain splits. Back emphasized Bitcoin's "permissionless" ethos, arguing no single group should impose value judgments via consensus rules. Further complicating matters, technical critiques suggest BIP-110 may be technically circumventable, and a "BlockSlop" vulnerability in its upgrade path poses a consensus risk. The debate has drawn in diverse stakeholders: miners (with pools like Ocean signaling support and Foundry polling clients), node operators (like Bitcoin Knots), and new players like corporate treasury holder MicroStrategy (Saylor), whose market influence adds a novel dimension. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a governance stress test, exposing the unresolved question: who decides Bitcoin's rules? It pits the authority of miners, node operators, developers, and capital holders against each other, with each side claiming to defend Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and security.

marsbitHá 28m

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

marsbitHá 28m

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Title: Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate A new technical proposal, BIP-110 (Reduced Data Temporary Softfork), has sparked a fundamental governance debate within the Bitcoin community. It aims to impose new consensus rules for one year to limit non-financial data (like inscriptions and Runes) on-chain, moving beyond simple node and miner policy filters to invalidate currently valid transactions. Supporters argue that default policies have failed due to workarounds, necessitating consensus-layer changes to protect Bitcoin's core monetary function from data spam. Critics, including Michael Saylor and Adam Back, contend this dangerously centralizes judgment, undermines permissionlessness, and sets a risky governance precedent. They advocate for market-based solutions like fees or Layer 2s instead. The debate exposes deeper tensions: miners are divided on activation; node operators assert their sovereignty; Bitcoin Core developers influence defaults without direct accountability; and large corporate holders like MicroStrategy now wield narrative influence. Technically, BIP-110 may not fully block data and carries a disclosed consensus bug risk. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a stress test, forcing the community to confront the unresolved question: who legitimately decides what Bitcoin is and how it evolves, amidst competing claims from miners, nodes, developers, and capital holders.

链捕手Há 39m

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

链捕手Há 39m

Zcash's New Node Zakura Goes Live: Privacy Payments Can Reach 50,000 TPS, Aiming to Rival Visa and Mastercard

Zcash, a privacy-focused cryptocurrency, has launched a new full node software called Zakura version 1.0.0. Developed by Zcash co-founder Sean Bowe and Dev Ojha, with private ZEC donations, its goal is to enable Zcash to process over 50,000 transactions per second (TPS)—matching the scale of Visa and Mastercard—while maintaining full transaction privacy and verifiability. This addresses a key bottleneck, as Zcash currently handles only about 1 private transaction per second. Zakura is a fork of the Zcash Foundation's Zebra node. It features chain pruning and snapshots, reducing disk usage and allowing new nodes to sync in under two minutes. It also offers compatibility with the legacy `zcashd` client interface. The scalability challenge stems from the large data size of privacy proofs. Bowe's Tachyon project aims to use recursive proofs to reduce consensus-layer data needs from ~500 MB/s to ~100 MB/s. For wallet scalability, Valar Group is researching Private Information Retrieval (PIR) tech to allow wallets to fetch their data privately. Zakura supports fast block propagation and the upcoming "Ironwood" network upgrade (NU6.3), scheduled for activation around July 28th. Ironwood was created to contain a critical inflation bug discovered in the Orchard shielded pool in May 2024. The fix uses "turnstiles" to trap any counterfeit ZEC created during the vulnerability period within the shielded pool, preventing it from entering circulation and restoring supply integrity.

marsbitHá 54m

Zcash's New Node Zakura Goes Live: Privacy Payments Can Reach 50,000 TPS, Aiming to Rival Visa and Mastercard

marsbitHá 54m

Trading

Spot
活动图片