# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Legislation

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Legislation", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

Why Must Banks Ban Stablecoin Yields?

The article explores why U.S. banks are strongly opposing interest-bearing stablecoins, despite claims that such assets could cause bank deposit outflows. It argues that funds flowing into stablecoins like USDC do not leave the banking system—instead, they are held as reserves in highly liquid assets like cash or Treasury bills, which eventually return to banks. The real concern for large banks is not the total volume of deposits, but a shift in deposit structure. U.S. megabanks rely heavily on low-cost transactional deposits (used for payments and transfers), which pay near-zero interest. These deposits allow banks to profit from the spread between the Fed funds rate and what they pay depositors, as well as from transaction fees. Interest-bearing stablecoins threaten this model. They offer similar transactional utility but also provide yield, incentivizing users to move funds out of traditional bank transactional accounts. While the money may return to the banking system, it would likely be placed in higher-yielding deposit accounts, increasing banks’ funding costs. Additionally, stablecoins could disrupt banks’ fee income from payment services. The core issue is profit redistribution: stablecoins—especially those offering yield—could reduce banks’ low-cost funding advantage and erode their transaction revenue, explaining the fierce opposition to interest-bearing models in proposed legislation like the CLARITY Act.

Odaily星球日报01/19 09:26

Why Must Banks Ban Stablecoin Yields?

Odaily星球日报01/19 09:26

A 'Clarity Act': Why Has It Caused Such an Uproar in the Crypto World?

A historical perspective reveals that money has rarely been neutral—it inherently carries an expectation of return. From ancient Mesopotamia to modern banking, the principle that holding or lending money should yield compensation has persisted. Against this backdrop, stablecoins emerged, promising faster settlement, lower costs, and 24/7 availability within a borderless digital economy. However, the proposed U.S. CLARITY Act, combined with the already-passed GENIUS Act, seeks to prohibit stablecoin issuers from paying interest or rewards to holders, permitting only limited “activity-based rewards.” This has sparked intense opposition from both the crypto industry and banking sectors. Critics argue that the bill effectively reduces stablecoins to mere payment conduits rather than capital-optimizing assets, contradicting the historical function of money. Key concerns include unfair competition, as traditional banks can offer interest and rewards while stablecoin issuers are restricted. The bill also introduces ambiguities around decentralized finance (DeFi) and tokenized assets, potentially stifling innovation and pushing capital overseas. Prominent industry figures, including Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, have withdrawn support, stating they would prefer no legislation over a harmful one. The bill currently lacks sufficient congressional support, particularly from Democrats, and faces skepticism for reinforcing existing banking structures rather than fostering healthy competition. Ultimately, the debate highlights the challenge of regulating a form of money inherently designed for efficiency and competition, urging lawmakers to create rules that integrate rather than isolate digital assets.

比推01/17 00:08

A 'Clarity Act': Why Has It Caused Such an Uproar in the Crypto World?

比推01/17 00:08

活动图片