3 ms·
From the "Recommendations" section: > Legislation should address the risks outlined in this report by establishing an appropriate federal prudential framework
by colatkinson 5y ago
From the "Recommendations" section:
> Legislation should address the risks outlined in this report by establishing an appropriate federal prudential framework for payment stablecoin arrangements.29 In particular, with respect to stablecoin issuers, legislation should provide for supervision on a consolidated basis; prudential standards; and, potentially, access to appropriate components of the federal safety net. To accomplish these objectives, legislation should limit stablecoin issuance, and related activities of redemption and maintenance of reserve assets, to entities that are insured depository institutions.
> The standards to which these [insured depository] institutions are subject include capital and liquidity standards that are designed to address safety and soundness and, for the largest banking organizations, also include enhanced prudential standards that address financial stability concerns. Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, insured depository institutions also are subject to a special resolution regime that enables the orderly resolution of failed insured depository institutions by, among other mechanisms, protecting customers’ insured deposits, and according priority to deposit claims over those of general creditors, and limits any potential negative systemic impacts in the event of bank failure.
I suspect that we're going to very quickly (by legislative standards) find out which stablecoins are backed by real currency and which are "backed by real currency." I'm betting short-term there'll be some issues with liquidity, especially on smaller exchanges. But longer-term, having the gaps filled in by stabler stablecoins can't hurt.
- X6S1x6Okd1st 5y agowe already know that USDT isnt actually backed by currency
- sanderjd 5y agoExactly. Regulation can only be long-term good for the space, which is sorely lacking in legitimacy.
- __MatrixMan__ 5y agoI'm not so sure. There's a type of person who would deem the US Government having a privileged role in coin governance as a legitimacy-reducing factor for that coin, and that type of person is over-represented in crypto circles. Also there's a possibility that whatever coins decide to comply end up spending their reserves on humans-in-the-loop to ensure compliance, thereby giving an advantage to the noncompliant coins. Something analogous to this happened where I'm from: We voted to legalize recreational cannabis, but most people still use the black market because regulatory burdens put the legal shops at too great of a disadvantage to be competitive.
- anonporridge 5y agoThe space has so far peaked at a $2.6 trillion valuation without a sense of legitimacy. Where the hell could it go if it gets an official stamp of approval by the US government?