# Пов'язані статті щодо Forex

Центр новин HTX надає останні статті та поглиблений аналіз на тему "Forex", що охоплює ринкові тренди, оновлення проєктів, технологічні розробки та регуляторну політику в криптоіндустрії.

Under the squeeze between giants Tether and Circle, how can foreign exchange stablecoins break through?

In the face of dominance by Tether (USDT) and Circle (USDC), new entrants in the stablecoin space face significant challenges competing directly, especially in the foreign exchange (FX) market. A more viable and efficient path forward is the adoption of synthetic foreign exchange (Forex) built atop existing USD stablecoin rails. The rise of stablecoin neo-banks represents the next major growth area for mass crypto adoption, with FX becoming a core component. However, replicating the vast liquidity, distribution channels, and network effects of USDT/USDC is extremely difficult for new FX stablecoin issuers. The total market cap of all FX stablecoins is a fraction (roughly 1/700th) of USD stablecoins, leading to issues like poor liquidity, peg instability, limited acceptance, and complex compliance hurdles. Instead of issuing spot FX stablecoins, the article advocates for a model inspired by traditional finance's non-deliverable forwards (NDFs). Users would continue to hold underlying USDT/USDC, while their account balances are displayed and economically settled in their preferred local currency through MtM (Mark-to-Market) NDF structures. This approach leverages the deep liquidity and infrastructure of USD stablecoins while providing synthetic forex exposure. Key advantages include strong peg stability via oracles, retained access to USD stablecoin yields and liquidity, high capital efficiency, and easy scalability to new currencies. Primary use cases for this on-chain NDF forex include: 1. Neo-banks, custodians, and wallets offering multi-currency accounts to attract international users and increase deposits. 2. Forex carry trade strategies, potentially offering more stable and scalable yields compared to crypto-native products like Ethena. 3. Global corporate payments, allowing businesses to receive payments in local currencies while hedging forex risk on-chain, similar to services offered by Stripe in traditional finance. This synthetic forex model presents a pragmatic solution to overcome the network effects of incumbents and unlock the next wave of stablecoin utility for global consumers and businesses.

marsbit05/24 00:30

Under the squeeze between giants Tether and Circle, how can foreign exchange stablecoins break through?

marsbit05/24 00:30

Why Haven't Forex Stablecoins Taken Off?

Why FX Stablecoins Never Took Off: A Path Forward via Synthetic FX Despite the explosive growth of stablecoin-powered digital banking, which has seen ~$6B in VC investment and a 24x surge in crypto card spending in under a year, a major limitation persists: these banks are essentially dollar-only accounts. This leaves 95-99% of global accounts, which are denominated in non-USD currencies, underserved. Attempts to create native foreign currency (FX) stablecoins (like EURC) have largely failed, with total FX stablecoin TVL at ~$600M compared to $400B for USD stablecoins—a 700x gap. These FX tokens face critical challenges: fragile pegs due to low liquidity, limited exchange/FinTech acceptance, poor on/off-ramps, complex regional compliance, and a chicken-and-egg adoption problem. The article argues that the solution lies not in competing with entrenched USD stablecoin networks (USDT/USDC), but in adopting a synthetic FX model inspired by traditional finance. Specifically, it advocates for Mark-to-Market Non-Deliverable Forwards (NDFs)—cash-settled FX derivatives that allow users to maintain underlying USD stablecoin holdings while having their account balance and P&L denominated in a foreign currency. This approach offers key advantages: strong oracle-based pegs, retention of deep USD stablecoin liquidity and yield, superior on/off-ramps, scalability to any currency with a reliable feed, and capital efficiency. It mirrors how modern institutional FX markets operate. Primary use cases for on-chain NDFs include: 1. **Digital Banks/Wallets:** Enabling multi-currency accounts for international users without leaving the USD stablecoin ecosystem, boosting deposits and retention. 2. **FX Carry Trade Vaults:** Offering access to sovereign interest rate differentials (e.g., earning yield on BRL) in a more stable and scalable format than crypto-native products like Ethena. 3. **Global Enterprise Payments:** Allowing merchants to receive payments in local currency equivalents while settling in USD stablecoins, similar to services offered by Stripe for fiat. The conclusion is that synthetic FX, not native FX stablecoins, is the viable path to integrating foreign exchange into the growing stablecoin digital banking landscape, potentially unlocking the next phase of institutional DeFi and multi-trillion-dollar global adoption.

链捕手05/23 04:02

Why Haven't Forex Stablecoins Taken Off?

链捕手05/23 04:02

How OTC Merchants Step into the Trap of 'Illegal Business Operation Crime' Step by Step

OTC商家 selling virtual currencies like USDT for profit can inadvertently receive funds linked to illegal foreign exchange activities, leading to potential criminal charges such as Illegal Business Operations or Concealment of Crime Proceeds. This article, based on a real case handled by lawyer Shao Shiwei, discusses how such traders may face legal risks when funds from underground banks involved in unauthorized forex trading enter their accounts during routine transactions. The key issue is whether OTC traders should bear criminal responsibility solely for receiving such funds. Authorities may treat them as accomplices in illegal forex operations, but the traders’ actual role, intent, and awareness must be carefully evaluated. A referenced case illustrates differentiated handling: individuals directly involved in illegal forex were convicted, while those merely providing accounts without clear profit motives or direct participation were not prosecuted. The profit from virtual currency trading differs fundamentally from illegal forex gains; the former stems from market fluctuations, while the latter involves facilitating cross-border transfers. If no intent to assist illegal activities is proven, charges may not apply. Alternatively, Concealment of Crime Proceeds charges require proof that the funds were criminal proceeds and that the trader knowingly handled them. Factors like transaction frequency, anomalies, and prior knowledge are considered, but hindsight alone isn’t sufficient for conviction. In summary, while trading virtual currencies isn’t illegal, involvement with illicit fund sources creates significant risks. Case outcomes depend on evidence regarding the trader’s awareness and role, emphasizing the need for individualized legal assessment.

marsbit03/05 14:32

How OTC Merchants Step into the Trap of 'Illegal Business Operation Crime' Step by Step

marsbit03/05 14:32

The 'Abnormal' Business of U Merchants? Defense Points and Boundaries of Determination for Three Major Charges

In a case involving a U merchant trading USDT (Tether) with transactions worth billions, the defendant was accused of illegal foreign exchange operations using virtual currency. Despite the large scale and use of multiple bank accounts, which authorities viewed as suspicious, the author argues that the defendant’s actions do not constitute crimes such as illegal business operations, concealing criminal proceeds, or assisting information network crimes. The article explains that OTC trading of virtual currencies like USDT is not illegal in China, and many platforms and individuals engage in it legally. The key is whether the trader knowingly facilitated illegal activities, such money laundering or illegal forex transactions. For illegal business operations, conviction requires proof that the defendant knowingly assisted in illegal forex exchanges, as in a cited case where the defendant helped convert foreign currency to RMB via USDT. For concealing criminal proceeds, the author emphasizes that the funds involved are often the principal amounts from transactions, not criminal profits, so merely handling these funds does not meet the legal definition. For assisting information network crimes, the crime must involve online illegal activities; if forex transactions occur offline despite online communication, it doesn’t qualify. The conclusion stresses the need for strict legal scrutiny and avoiding presumption of guilt based solely on transaction scale or methods.

marsbit02/23 01:53

The 'Abnormal' Business of U Merchants? Defense Points and Boundaries of Determination for Three Major Charges

marsbit02/23 01:53

活动图片