The GENIUS Act can drain $6.6T from U.S. banks – THIS is how

ambcrypto發佈於 2026-01-08更新於 2026-01-08

文章摘要

The GENIUS Act of 2025 has drawn sharp criticism from major U.S. banks, warning it could drain $6.6 trillion from the banking system due to a regulatory loophole. Banking groups, including the Bank Policy Institute, argue that the act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest but allows crypto affiliate companies to offer high yields, effectively acting as shadow banks. This could trigger massive migration of deposits away from traditional banks, potentially restricting credit access for mortgages and business loans. Critics like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene also opposed the act, fearing it enables a central bank digital currency (CBDC). As the stablecoin market grows—now valued at $317.8 billion—the yield loophole drives adoption. Closing it may reduce stablecoins’ appeal as high-return investments and revert them to payment tools, posing a critical question: whether Congress will act to eliminate this risk or allow crypto shadow banking to persist.

The ink is barely dry on the GENIUS Act of 2025, but a massive crack has already appeared, with the nation’s largest lenders claiming that the act could drain $6.6 trillion from the U.S. banking system.

In a letter to Congress on the 6th of January, the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) and a coalition of powerful banking groups issued a warning.

The letter highlighted a major loophole in the new stablecoin rules, one that lets crypto exchanges operate like high-yield shadow banks.

The chaos around the GENIUS Act

The GENIUS Act bans stablecoin issuers from paying interest, but banks say their affiliate companies are dodging the rule by offering yields that regular savings accounts could never match.

This has sparked fears of a major shift in how Americans store their money.

If stablecoins turn from a payment tool into a high-interest investment, the BPI warns it could trigger a deposit migration.

Such a shift wouldn’t just hurt bank balance sheets.

It could cut off credit to Main Street, making mortgages, business loans, and farm financing harder to get.

The tension isn’t new

During the floor debates leading up to the act’s passage in July 2025, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene emerged as a vocal critic, though for vastly different reasons.

She said,

“Back in July, I voted NO on the GENIUS Act because it contained a back door to a central bank digital currency (CBDC).”

Greene added,

“I support crypto but I will never support giving the government the ability to turn off your ability to have full control of your money and to buy and sell.”

And, to date, the loopholes seem not to have been addressed.

Recently, providing clarity on the GENIUS Act, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, noted,

“The problem with a GENIUS Act-like approach is that it is focused only on stablecoins, providing no way to balance competition between stablecoins and other payment mechanisms.”

However, as a solution, he further added,

“A better approach would have a comprehensive approach to regulation, i.e., a Clarity Act, and seek to put all traditional and digital payments and assets on a level playing field and let the chips fall where they may.”

Stablecoin market dynamics

Meanwhile, the total stablecoin market cap surged to $317.8 billion, dominated by Tether (USDT) and Circle’s USDC.

For perspective, USDT alone commanded a market cap of roughly $187 billion, while USDC has seen an aggressive 73% growth over the last year, reaching $75 billion.

As stablecoins continue to grow, the yield loophole has become their main driver of adoption, but closing it could trigger a major shift.

If Congress blocks exchanges from offering interest or rewards, stablecoins may lose their appeal as high-return savings alternatives and be forced back into their original role as simple payment tools.

Thus, this warning signals that crypto’s shadow-banking era is nearing its end, leaving one pressing question: if the rewards vanish, does the $317 billion stay?


Final Thoughts

  • The stablecoin loophole has officially escalated from a regulatory oversight to a systemic risk that banks can no longer ignore.
  • With $317 billion already parked in stablecoins, Congress must decide whether to shut the loophole or risk letting the crypto shadow banking system remain.

相關問答

QWhat is the main concern raised by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) regarding the GENIUS Act?

AThe BPI warns that a loophole in the GENIUS Act could drain $6.6 trillion from the U.S. banking system by allowing crypto exchanges to operate like high-yield shadow banks, potentially triggering a massive deposit migration.

QHow are affiliate companies of banks reportedly circumventing the GENIUS Act's ban on stablecoin issuers paying interest?

AAffiliate companies are dodging the rule by offering yields on stablecoins that regular savings accounts could never match, effectively turning stablecoins into high-interest investments.

QWhat was one of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's primary reasons for voting against the GENIUS Act?

ARep. Greene voted against the act because she believed it contained a back door to a central bank digital currency (CBDC), which she opposes as it could give the government the ability to control individuals' money.

QAccording to Douglas Holtz-Eakin, what is the fundamental problem with the GENIUS Act's approach to regulation?

AHe stated that the problem is it focuses only on stablecoins and provides no way to balance competition between stablecoins and other payment mechanisms, advocating instead for a comprehensive 'Clarity Act' to create a level playing field.

QWhat is the potential consequence for the stablecoin market if Congress closes the loophole allowing exchanges to offer interest or rewards?

AIf Congress blocks exchanges from offering interest, stablecoins could lose their appeal as high-return savings alternatives and be forced back into their original role as simple payment tools, potentially destabilizing the $317 billion market.

你可能也喜歡

意大利央行未发现稳定币在汇款中存在系统性优势

意大利银行的一项研究显示,稳定币在跨境汇款中并未展现出持续的成本与速度优势。其潜在优势被法币出入金手续费以及本地支付基础设施的处理流程所抵消。 研究比较了通过200 USDC在意大利与巴西、阿根廷、日本、阿联酋和南非等10条双向通道进行汇款的成本与结算时间,并与标准汇款服务进行对比。 结果显示,稳定币转账的总成本在0.3%到近9%之间波动,具体取决于汇款方向。在具备即时支付系统的通道中,结算可在20分钟内完成;若缺乏此类基础设施,则需一至两个工作日。 主要成本和延迟源于货币兑换以及当地基础设施的质量。区块链网络手续费并非主要因素。 尽管在大多数研究通道中,稳定币成本低于世界银行统计的全球平均汇款成本(6.65%),但与传统汇款服务商Wise相比,仅在七条可比通道中的三条具备成本优势。 研究者认为,若稳定币能直接用于商品服务消费而无需兑换成当地货币,其优势将更为明显。同时指出,禁令性监管无法消除市场对稳定币的需求,而过严的规则只会增加零售用户的使用难度。 此外,报告提及,稳定币总市值在7月已从5月峰值下跌超100亿美元,至约3100亿美元,创下自2022年5月Terra崩溃以来的最大月度跌幅。

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

意大利央行未发现稳定币在汇款中存在系统性优势

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

比特币热潮正酣:塞勒尔新声明引发关于购买的猜测

纳斯达克上市公司MicroStrategy(代码:MSTR)的执行董事长迈克尔·塞勒于8月2日发布信息“Bitcoin Drive engaged”(比特币驱动已启动),再次引发市场对于该公司将在周一宣布新一轮比特币购买的猜测。其周日的帖子附带了该公司惯用的购买追踪图表,这符合塞勒通常在每周财报发布前暗示其金库变动的做法。 塞勒的附图报告显示,MicroStrategy的比特币储备为843,775枚BTC,市值约532.5亿美元。平均购买成本为每枚75,653美元,未实现亏损为105.8亿美元(-16.58%)。截至8月2日,累计进行了113次购买操作。 此前在7月27日,类似的周日信号曾预告了公司的公告,当时塞勒发文称“我们还需要一种颜色”,随后MicroStrategy披露了其更大的现金储备。这种时间上的巧合强化了市场对周一将发布新金库状况公告的预期。 然而,该公司实时账本显示,在最近两次共计出售3,588枚BTC(包括1,363枚和2,225枚)后,其比特币储备已从847,363枚降至843,775枚。根据提交给美国证券交易委员会(SEC)的文件,这些出售是为了资助优先股支付并补充美元储备。最近的报告还显示,在截至7月26日的一周内,MicroStrategy没有购买任何比特币,同时将其美元储备增加至约37.5亿美元,这使其优先股股息和债务利息的预计覆盖期限延长至约2.1年。 财务风险依然高企,该公司报告2026年第二季度运营亏损83.3亿美元,与上年同期140.3亿美元的运营利润形成急剧逆转。这些业绩包含了公司数字资产方面83.2亿美元的未实现亏损,而2025年第二季度为未实现利润140.5亿美元。 管理层还可能通过额外出售比特币获得高达12.5亿美元,以补充用于支付优先股股息和债务利息的美元储备。因此,预计周一的披露将揭示“Bitcoin Drive”信息是否标志着资产积累的恢复,因为MicroStrategy需要在平衡其843,775枚BTC自有储备与不断增长的现金负债和积极的资本管理之间做出抉择。

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

比特币热潮正酣:塞勒尔新声明引发关于购买的猜测

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

交易

現貨
活动图片