Blockchain Association says no to expanding stablecoin yield prohibition

cointelegraph2025-12-19 tarihinde yayınlandı2025-12-19 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

The Blockchain Association, along with over 125 crypto industry groups, has written to the US Senate Committee on Banking opposing a proposed expansion of the ban on offering yield rewards to stablecoin holders. The letter argues that extending the prohibition—originally targeting stablecoin issuers under the GENIUS Act to include third-party platforms—would stifle innovation, increase market concentration, and unfairly disadvantage crypto services compared to traditional financial providers like banks and credit card companies that offer similar rewards. The Association contends that stablecoin rewards help consumers offset inflation and are a standard feature of competitive markets. It also challenges banking industry claims that yield-bearing stablecoins threaten bank lending, stating there is no evidence to support such concerns. Additionally, the letter comes as the FDIC proposes rules allowing banks to issue stablecoins through subsidiaries, subject to reserve requirements and regulatory oversight.

The Blockchain Association, a non-profit crypto advocacy organization, wrote a letter to the US Senate Committee on Banking, signed by over 125 crypto industry groups and companies, opposing the ban on third-party service providers and platforms offering customer rewards to stablecoin holders.

Expanding the prohibition on stablecoin issuers sharing yield directly with customers, outlined in the GENIUS stablecoin regulatory framework, to include third-party service providers stifles innovation and leads to “greater market concentration,” the letter said.

The letter compared the rewards offered by crypto platforms to those offered by credit card companies, banks and other traditional payment providers.

The letter opposes efforts to stop crypto platforms from sharing yield with customers. Source: The Blockchain Association

Prohibiting crypto platforms from offering similar rewards for stablecoins gives an unfair advantage to incumbent financial service providers, the Blockchain Association said.

“The potential benefits of payment stablecoins will not be realized if these types of payments cannot compete on a level playing field with other payment mechanisms. Rewards and incentives are a standard feature of competitive markets.”

The Blockchain Association has issued several statements and letters pushing back against efforts to prohibit crypto platforms from sharing yield-bearing opportunities with customers, arguing that these rewards help consumers offset inflation.

Related: Bank of Canada lays out criteria for ‘good money’ stablecoins

FDIC paves the way for banks to issue stablecoins, industry group says stables aren’t a threat

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the US regulatory agency that oversees and insures the banking sector, published a proposal on Tuesday that would allow banks to issue stablecoins through subsidiaries.

Under the proposal, both the bank and its stablecoin subsidiary would be subject to FDIC rules and assessments for financial fitness, including reserve requirements.

The FDIC proposal to allow banks to issue stablecoins. Source: FDIC

The Blockchain Association continues to push back on claims that yield-bearing stablecoins and sharing rewards with customers threaten the banking sector and bank lending.

“Evidence does not support claims that stablecoin rewards threaten community banks or lending capacity,” the Blockchain Association said, adding that it is difficult to make the case that bank lending is actually constrained by customer deposits.

Despite this, the banking industry has lobbied against yield-bearing stablecoins and crypto platforms sharing yield with clients over fears that interest offered on digital asset products will erode the market share of banks.

Magazine: Unstablecoins: Depegging, bank runs and other risks loom

İlgili Sorular

QWhat is the Blockchain Association's main argument against expanding the stablecoin yield prohibition to third-party service providers?

AThe Blockchain Association argues that expanding the prohibition to third-party service providers stifles innovation, leads to greater market concentration, and gives an unfair advantage to traditional financial service providers by preventing crypto platforms from competing on a level playing field.

QHow does the Blockchain Association compare the rewards offered by crypto platforms to those in traditional finance?

AThe letter compares the rewards offered by crypto platforms to the rewards offered by credit card companies, banks, and other traditional payment providers, stating that such incentives are a standard feature of competitive markets.

QWhat recent proposal did the FDIC make regarding banks and stablecoins?

AThe FDIC published a proposal that would allow banks to issue stablecoins through subsidiaries, with both the bank and its subsidiary being subject to FDIC rules, assessments for financial fitness, and reserve requirements.

QWhat is the banking industry's primary concern regarding yield-bearing stablecoins, according to the article?

AThe banking industry fears that the interest offered on digital asset products like yield-bearing stablecoins will erode their market share, leading them to lobby against these products and platforms sharing yield with clients.

QWhat reason does the Blockchain Association give for supporting the ability of platforms to share yield with stablecoin holders?

AThe Blockchain Association argues that these rewards help consumers offset inflation and are necessary for the potential benefits of payment stablecoins to be realized in a competitive market.

İlgili Okumalar

Sequoia Dialogue with Jensen Huang: Computing Model Undergoes a 60-Year Transformation; You Won't Be Replaced by AI, But You Will Be Dimensionality-Reduced by 'Those Who Master AI'

NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang, in a conversation with Sequoia Capital's Konstantine Buhler, argues that we are witnessing the most significant computing shift in 60 years—from retrieval-based to generative computing. Instead of just storing and retrieving data, future systems will generate highly personalized content (text, images, video) on demand, powered by massive "AI factories." Huang envisions a global "intelligence network" that will envelop the planet, following the historical patterns of energy and communication grids. He outlines a five-layer investment framework: 1) Energy, 2) Chips/Computers, 3) Infrastructure (data centers), 4) AI Models, and 5) Applications. He predicts this ecosystem will reach a scale of $20 trillion annually. Crucially, Huang pushes back against fears of AI-driven job loss. He distinguishes between specific "tasks" (e.g., typing, analyzing images) and overall "jobs" (e.g., CEO, radiologist). While AI automates tasks, it increases efficiency and demand for the higher-value problem-solving aspects of professions, thus creating more jobs and "up-leveling" careers. The real risk, he asserts, is not being replaced by AI, but being outperformed by someone who effectively leverages it. He urges everyone to embrace AI as a tool for augmented capability and innovation.

marsbit3 dk önce

Sequoia Dialogue with Jensen Huang: Computing Model Undergoes a 60-Year Transformation; You Won't Be Replaced by AI, But You Will Be Dimensionality-Reduced by 'Those Who Master AI'

marsbit3 dk önce

"I Don't Need a Better Model Anymore": A Panorama of AI Users Under a Reddit Hot Post

Titled "I Don't Need a Better Model Anymore": AI User Reactions on Reddit Anthropic recently released Claude Fable 5, its first publicly available 'Mythos'-tier model, achieving 80.3% on the SWE-Bench Pro benchmark and significantly outperforming its predecessor and competitors. However, a viral Reddit post titled "Claude Fable made me realize I don't need better models anymore" highlighted a growing user sentiment of "good enough." Top comments expressed "model fatigue," with users stating that earlier models like Opus 4.5/4.8 already sufficed for their workflows. High cost was a key concern, as Fable 5's API is nearly twice the price of Opus 4.8, with users questioning the return on investment and suggesting the field has hit a plateau. The most frequent complaint targeted Fable 5's stringent safety filters. Designed to intercept high-risk requests (e.g., cybersecurity), the system was perceived as overly conservative. Users reported frequent rejections for routine security-related tasks, leading to automatic fallbacks to the older Opus model. Paying users were particularly frustrated, feeling they paid a premium for a less usable product. Dissenting voices came from users with heavy, complex tasks. For workloads like high-energy physics simulations with thousands of code lines, Fable 5's improved long-context understanding and error detection represented a significant, worthwhile leap—described as moving from a "college player to an NBA starter." The debate underscores a divergence between benchmark performance and practical utility. For most users, current models meet their needs, making further advances relevant only for extreme use-cases. The discussion also raised concerns about a potential "Public AI Freeze," where the most powerful models (like the restricted Mythos 5) remain exclusive to enterprises and governments, while public offerings stagnate. The launch presents two report cards: one of technical excellence and another of user skepticism. Fable 5's ultimate reception may depend on Anthropic's ability to refine its safety filters and justify its cost for specialized, high-demand users.

marsbit10 dk önce

"I Don't Need a Better Model Anymore": A Panorama of AI Users Under a Reddit Hot Post

marsbit10 dk önce

When AI Traffic Surpasses Humans, How Do You Prove You're Human?

With AI-generated web traffic surpassing human activity, websites face a crisis as AI agents bypass ads, avoid clicks, and scrape data without generating revenue. This disrupts the ad-based internet economy, diverting traffic and reducing site visits. In response, sites are blocking AI crawlers and deploying traps like Cloudflare's "honeypot" pages. Traditional CAPTCHAs are now ineffective against advanced AI. The focus has shifted to behavioral biometrics—analyzing unique human patterns such as cursor movement, typing rhythm, and keystroke dynamics. Companies like IBM and BioCatch use this data to distinguish humans from bots, even detecting fraud through behavioral inconsistencies. Two competing approaches aim to verify human identity centrally. Sam Altman’s World (formerly Worldcoin) uses iris scanning to create unique credentials, though it faces privacy concerns and regulatory bans. Alternatively, cryptographic zero-knowledge proofs offer anonymous verification without revealing personal data, championed by Vitalik Buterin to avoid centralized surveillance. However, both systems have flaws. Centralized solutions risk biometric data misuse, while decentralized models may be exploited through identity rental markets in economically unequal regions. Despite challenges, the author favors cryptographic methods for preserving privacy over pervasive behavioral monitoring that permanently captures and controls personal biometric data.

marsbit19 dk önce

When AI Traffic Surpasses Humans, How Do You Prove You're Human?

marsbit19 dk önce

2026 Landscape of Decentralized AI: Why is Blockchain the Inevitable "Antidote" for AI?

**The 2026 Landscape of Decentralized AI: Why Blockchain is the "Cure" AI Cannot Ignore** Decentralized AI addresses fundamental bottlenecks of centralized AI: scarce and expensive computational resources, excessive control concentration, unverifiable model outputs, and increasing difficulty in acquiring training data due to privacy and regulation. Blockchain offers a path to make intelligence open, verifiable, and economically accessible. The technical stack comprises three layers: 1. **Applications & Services**: The main crypto use cases are "Agentic Finance" (converting natural language into on-chain actions) and "Agentic Payments" for machine-to-machine commerce. Projects like Giza, Infinity Labs, Coinvest AI, and x402 (handling 173M+ transactions) are key players. 2. **Middleware**: This coordination layer enables agents to discover, identify, and transact. Notable projects include Gokite AI (specialized L1), Virtuals (an OS for the agent economy), and especially Bittensor—a network of specialized subnets forming competitive AI micro-economies. 3. **Infrastructure**: The capital-intensive layer providing raw resources. It includes decentralized compute (Akash, Render, Aethir), verifiable inference (Venice AI, OpenGradient), distributed training (Prime Intellect, Templar AI), decentralized storage (Filecoin, Walrus), and privacy/verification layers (Nillion, Arcium, Phala Network) using technologies like ZKPs, MPC, and TEEs. The outlook for 2026-2027 indicates AI demand outpacing infrastructure, with AI agents as a primary growth engine. Computation is becoming an asset class, with on-chain markets as its financial layer. Tokenomics is emerging as a structural advantage for coordinating capital, compute, and data in decentralized AI networks. While still early—with adoption uneven and revenue often trailing token incentives—projects like Bittensor, NEAR, and Virtuals demonstrate a shift from speculative narrative to a new model for coordinating intelligence.

marsbit22 dk önce

2026 Landscape of Decentralized AI: Why is Blockchain the Inevitable "Antidote" for AI?

marsbit22 dk önce

a16z Crypto Partner: Cash Flow is the Moat

Cash Flow as the Moat: A Playbook for Crypto Founders Historically, the most enduring businesses have been built by positioning themselves within the "flow of funds"—facilitating the creation and transfer of value in a network and extracting a portion of it. Cryptocurrency is the first modern technology natively built for this purpose. For startups, failing to architect products and businesses to leverage these principles means missing a major opportunity. Blockchains are inherently network businesses. Each transaction settles on a shared ledger, and every new participant strengthens the underlying network for all. Well-designed network tokens amplify this by aligning users, developers, and validators around growing the network, with value flowing back to contributors in a transparent feedback loop. This model is not new; companies from railroads and Standard Oil to Google, Meta, and AWS have thrived by inserting themselves into critical flows of value (goods, attention, compute). Financial markets make it even clearer: firms like Visa and major market makers generate immense revenue not by predicting markets but by being in the path of transactions. The combination of fund flow and network effects creates one of the most durable business structures. The high margins in traditional finance (payments, custody, lending, FX) represent prime targets. Crypto founders have the opportunity to build the next version—programmable, instant, global, and natively in the flow of funds. The frontier extends beyond finance to areas like computing/GPUs, AI training data, energy, robotics, and space—markets without entrenched intermediaries, ripe for building new, efficient value rails on programmable infrastructure. Founders should ask: Are you in the flow of funds today? Does your revenue scale 10x with the value of activity on your platform? Where in your target market are profit margins highest relative to value created? The opportunity is clear: embed your startup into the new flows of value and let the network effects accumulate.

marsbit24 dk önce

a16z Crypto Partner: Cash Flow is the Moat

marsbit24 dk önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片