Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

USD-backed stablecoins could strain banks and policymaking

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is advocating tighter international coordination on stablecoins, warning that USD-denominated tokens could pose material risks to financial stability and economic policy if their scale rivals traditional money. The BIS perspective emerged from remarks by General Manager Pablo Hernández de Cos at a Bank of Japan seminar in Tokyo, where he stressed that current stablecoin arrangements do not yet meet the standards required for widespread everyday payments, despite offering potential benefits such as faster cross-border transfers and deepened smart-contract integration.

De Cos highlighted the largest USD-backed stablecoins, including USDT and USDC, as illustrative cases. He argued that these tokens exhibit features closer to investment products than cash-like money, citing fee structures, redemption constraints on primary markets, and episodes where prices deviate from par in secondary trading. In the BIS view, such dynamics give stablecoins ETF-like characteristics and introduce run and contagion risks because issuers typically hold reserves composed of short-term government debt and bank deposits. In a stress scenario, rapid outflows could force the sale of these reserves into constrained markets or transmit funding pressures to the banking system.

The BIS warnings come amid a broader regulatory dialogue on how to manage fast-growing stablecoins and other tokenized forms of money. De Cos also noted that activity on public, permissionless blockchains and with unhosted wallets sits largely outside conventional Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter-Terrorism Financing (CTF) controls, raising concerns that stablecoins could be misused without tailored safeguards at on- and off-ramps.

Key takeaways

  • The BIS urges international coordination to mitigate stability risks from large USD-backed stablecoins, arguing they could affect monetary policy and financial stability if they gain substantial scale.
  • USDT and USDC are described as sharing characteristics with investment products rather than cash-like money, due to redemption features, fees, and price dislocations from par.
  • Reserve assets backing stablecoins—primarily short-term government debt and bank deposits—may become a source of systemic risk through rapid outflows and forced asset sales in stressed markets.
  • Regulators emphasize that much stablecoin activity operates outside traditional AML/CTF oversight, underscoring the need for bespoke safeguards at exchange gateways and wallet interfaces.
  • Regulatory responses are being observed globally, with Europe, the UK, and Switzerland pursuing tighter controls or pilot programs to assess how stablecoins fit within existing financial frameworks.

Global regulatory momentum and Europe’s tightening stance

The BIS remarks sit within a wider policy debate about how to regulate stablecoins and other tokenized money. In Europe, policymakers are actively considering tighter controls on non-euro stablecoins and related instruments, beyond the current Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA). Earlier reports noted that Bank of France officials have urged the European Union to curb non-euro-denominated stablecoins used in everyday payments and to tighten restrictions on issuing the same coin inside and outside the bloc to reduce regulatory arbitrage during periods of stress.

The European Central Bank (ECB) has also contrasted euro-stablecoins with tokenized money market funds, pointing out that while both enable liquidity transformation and carry run risk, they differ in transparency, liquidity management, and regulatory oversight. Those differences could influence how stress propagates through funding markets and how institutions manage associated risk—information that is central to policy design and supervisory expectations.

Advertisement

Cross-border policy dynamics: UK and Switzerland as case studies

In the United Kingdom, lawmakers examined the stability implications of stablecoins as part of a bespoke regime under development for fiat-backed tokens. During a parliamentary inquiry, questions were raised about whether stablecoins could drain commercial bank deposits, trigger runs akin to those seen in some private banks, or facilitate illicit activity, underscoring the need for robust regulatory guardrails in a market that remains highly interconnected with traditional finance.

Switzerland’s approach illustrates a different regulatory trajectory. UBS and several domestic banks launched a franc-denominated stablecoin pilot in a sandbox environment on the heels of broader efforts to explore blockchain-enabled franc payments while anchoring the instrument in a tightly regulated financial system. The initiative signals an emphasis on practical testing within a controlled regulatory perimeter, balancing innovation with risk management and compliance standards.

These developments reflect a broader policy trend: as stablecoins scale, policymakers are seeking coherence across jurisdictions to address cross-border issues, supervisory alignment, and consumer protection—all within the framework of MiCA, existing banking regulation, and AML/CTF regimes. The overlaps among market structure, liquidity transformation, and regulatory oversight are increasingly central to institutional planning and compliance strategies for banks, exchanges, and other financial market participants.

Closing perspective

As policymakers weigh the proper balance between fostering innovation and safeguarding financial stability, the key question is how to design safeguards that are effective across borders, assets, and chains. The coming months are likely to bring further policy consultations and potential revisions to cross-border rules, as authorities seek to close gaps in oversight while preserving the efficiency and resilience benefits that tokenized money can offer.

Advertisement

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Brent Surges 5% on Hormuz Crisis

Published

on

Brent Surges 5% on Hormuz Crisis

Oil price news Monday showed Brent crude jumped 4.3% to $94.18 and WTI rose 5.6% to $88.54, reversing Friday’s 9% collapse as Iran reimposed Strait of Hormuz restrictions over the weekend, the US Navy seized the Iranian cargo vessel Touska, and Kpler maritime data recorded zero tanker crossings of the strait on Sunday.

Summary

  • Iran’s IRGC fired on two vessels attempting to transit Saturday before declaring the strait closed until the US lifts its naval blockade.
  • The USS Spruance fired several rounds at the Touska after it ignored six hours of warnings, then US Marines boarded and took custody of the ship.
  • Iran’s Foreign Ministry said Monday it has “no plans” for the Pakistan talks, leaving the ceasefire that expires Wednesday without a diplomatic path forward.

Oil price news opened the week with a sharp reversal of Friday’s optimism. Iran’s foreign minister had announced Friday that the Strait of Hormuz was completely open, sending Brent crude crashing 9%. By Saturday, Iran had reimposed restrictions, its gunboats were firing on tankers, and by Sunday the US had seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship in the Gulf of Oman. The physical market confirmed the reversal: Kpler data recorded no oil tankers crossing the strait on Sunday.

The strait normally carries roughly 20% of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas. ADNOC CEO Sultan Al Jaber put the cumulative supply loss at nearly 600 million barrels over approximately 50 days of the crisis, a figure that does not normalize quickly even under a genuine ceasefire.

Advertisement

“Markets are trading in a world where there is plenty of spin, statements, and speculation, but very little information of substance,” UBS Global Wealth Management chief economist Paul Donovan wrote in a Monday morning note. “Events over the weekend have reversed some of that optimism.”

Iran announced Saturday it was reimposing restrictions on the strait, accusing the US of failing to lift its naval blockade despite the April 8 ceasefire terms. IRGC gunboats fired on two India-flagged vessels attempting to transit. The UK Maritime Trade Operations Centre reported a tanker approached and fired upon with no prior radio warning.

The US Navy destroyer USS Spruance fired several rounds from its 5-inch gun at the Iranian-flagged cargo vessel Touska on Sunday after the ship ignored six hours of warnings to comply with the blockade. US Marines then rappelled from helicopters and took custody of the vessel. Trump announced the seizure on Truth Social, calling it a situation that “did not go well for them.”

Advertisement

Iran’s military called the seizure “maritime piracy” and warned retaliation would follow once the safety of the crew and their family members aboard was confirmed.

The Market’s Read and What Comes Next

The ceasefire expires Wednesday. Iran has declared it has no plans to attend a second round of Pakistan talks. The US delegation led by Vice President JD Vance is heading to Islamabad regardless. That asymmetry, Washington traveling for talks while Tehran publicly refuses to show up, defines the next 48 hours as the highest-risk window since the original ceasefire was struck.

Wholesale gasoline prices rose over 3% Monday and heating oil futures, a proxy for jet fuel, spiked 4%. S&P 500 futures fell 0.5% while Nasdaq futures dropped 0.6%, signaling that energy-driven inflation fears are once again bleeding into broader equity risk pricing.

For oil bitcoin dynamics, Monday’s Brent print at $94 returns crude to the level where oil inflation expectations begin to suppress Federal Reserve rate cut prospects and compress risk appetite simultaneously. Tracking prior week sessions shows that each Hormuz escalation has produced a progressively smaller BTC drawdown, suggesting institutional demand is absorbing the selling pressure even as the macro headwind persists.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Aave Pitches Two Solutions to Resolve Kelp DAO Hack Dilemma

Published

on

Aave Pitches Two Solutions to Resolve Kelp DAO Hack Dilemma

Decentralized lending platform Aave’s risk management provider has outlined two scenarios on how bad debt from the Kelp DAO exploit over the weekend could impact the ecosystem, depending on how the losses are allocated.

The incident began on Saturday when hackers stole 116,500 Kelp DAO Restaked ETH (rsETH) tokens worth $293 million from Kelp DAO’s LayerZero-powered bridge and used them as collateral on Aave V3 to borrow wrapped Ether (wETH).

On Monday, LlamaRisk modeled two possible scenarios for how this “bad debt” could materialize on Aave, noting that the final decision rests with Kelp DAO.

The incident highlights the contagion risk in DeFi, where a single bridge exploit can trigger liquidity crunches and mass withdrawals across interconnected protocols like Aave, which has seen nearly $10 billion in value leave the protocol since the Kelp DAO exploit took place.

Advertisement
Source: Aave

Two scenarios and potential paths forward

The first scenario would see losses spread across all rsETH token holders on Ethereum mainnet and Ethereum layer 2s, resulting in roughly $123.7 million of bad debt on Aave while risking a 15% depeg in rsETH relative to Ether (ETH).

LlamaRisk said this first scenario would spread losses more thinly across all chains, while noting that wrapped Ether (wETH) would be “absorbing the bulk in absolute terms but barely noticing it relative to its reserve depth.”

Aave could also use its Umbrella security model to cover losses in wETH under the first scenario, noting that 18,922 Aave Wrapped ETH (aWETH) tokens worth nearly $43.7 million have entered the unstaking cooldown phase.

The second scenario would shift the entire shortfall to Ethereum layer 2 networks, such as Arbitrum and Mantle. However, the bad debt would be significantly higher at $230.1 million.

LlamaRisk also noted that Aave has around $181 million in its treasury that could be used to address a potential bad debt shortfall.

Advertisement
Scenario comparison of LlamaRisk’s two scenarios. Source: Aave

Related: Aave DAO backs V4 mainnet plan in near-unanimous vote

On Monday, Kelp DAO said it is still assessing the financial impact of the exploit and how to safely unpause the protocol, adding that it is working with Aave, LayerZero and other stakeholders on a path forward.

Kelp DAO sheds more light on the exploit

Kelp DAO also shared more details about the incident, saying that two nodes tied to the LayerZero bridge were compromised, while a third was hit with a distributed denial-of-service attack.

The attacker forged a seemingly valid transfer message that the system approved, allowing 116,500 rsETH to be minted on one of LayerZero’s bridges.

Kelp said it paused all relevant contracts on Ethereum and Ethereum layer 2s and blacklisted all wallets tied to the exploiter shortly after, preventing them from stealing another 40,000 rsETH worth $95 million.

Advertisement

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?