Tensions Emerge Following the Passage of the GENIUS Act

In the wake of the recent passage of the GENIUS Act, a law regulating stablecoins, a significant rift has emerged between traditional banking associations and cryptocurrency advocacy groups. This conflict highlights the ongoing struggle between established financial institutions and new-age digital currencies, with both sides presenting compelling arguments about the future of the financial ecosystem.

The GENIUS Act and Its Implications

The GENIUS Act introduces a regulatory framework for stablecoin issuers, mandating that they maintain one-to-one reserves in cash or high-quality liquid assets. Issuers will also need to operate under federal or qualified state licensing and supervision. This approach aims to ensure that stablecoins do not function like traditional bank deposits or money market funds, emphasizing their unique role in the financial landscape.

However, this regulation has been met with alarm from US banking associations that represent all fifty states. They have raised concerns about potential vulnerabilities in the law, suggesting that it may not adequately safeguard consumers or the financial system as a whole.

Crypto Advocates Warn Against Uncompetitive Environment

In a strong counter to these banking associations, two prominent crypto organizations—the Blockchain Association and the Crypto Council—have voiced their dissent against the recent proposals. Their joint statement criticizes letters issued on August 12, 2025, by the Bank Policy Institute and various state bankers associations, which they argue revisit issues that were thoroughly debated during the legislative process of the GENIUS Act.

Prioritizing Banks Over Innovation

The blockchain advocates contend that the proposed changes could create an uncompetitive environment for stablecoins, potentially prioritizing the interests of banks over industry growth, competition, and consumer choice. They emphasize that payment stablecoins are inherently different from bank deposits or investment products and should not be subject to the same regulatory scrutiny.

By doing so, they aim to preserve a landscape where both banks and crypto firms can innovate, particularly in serving underbanked consumers who increasingly rely on digital wallets.

The Role and Features of Stablecoins

Central to the discussion around stablecoins is their regulatory framework. Under the GENIUS Act, stablecoins must function with stringent reserve requirements that largely keep their reserves within the traditional financial system. This is a crucial point for crypto advocates, who argue that the stability and liquidity of stablecoins do not mimic traditional banking.

Opponents of stricter regulations question the claim that certain practices, such as exchanges sharing rewards, undermine the GENIUS Act’s prohibition on issuer-paid interest. The crypto groups assert that a level playing field is crucial for competitive innovation, underscoring the importance of allowing all players in the market, whether banks or crypto platforms, to share benefits with consumers.

Potential Risks and Regulatory Challenges

The potential elimination of features that benefit stablecoin users could tilt the competitive landscape heavily in favor of larger legacy institutions that may not provide optimal returns. One contentious aspect is Section 16(d) of the GENIUS Act, which permits subsidiaries of state-chartered institutions to conduct money transmission to support lawful stablecoin issuer activities across state lines.

The advocacy groups argue that repealing this provision could hinder redemption rights for out-of-state holders, creating a fragmented regulatory environment that stifles interstate commerce and innovation. Another controversial proposal to ban non-financial companies from issuing payment stablecoins raises alarms about curtailing entrepreneurial efforts in fintech.

Emphasizing Financial Inclusion and Innovation

The Blockchain Association and the Crypto Council assert that successfully regulated platforms can facilitate financial inclusion by sharing benefits with customers. They reject the notion that these practices constitute loopholes, instead framing them as integral features that enhance access and innovation in the financial landscape.

Their strong defense of stablecoins underscores a crucial point in the current debate: that responsible regulation should allow for competition and innovation while also protecting consumers. The future of stablecoins, as well as the broader cryptocurrency landscape, may hinge on how these discussions and subsequent policy changes unfold in the coming years.

Image from TradingView.com

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. Past performance is not indicative of future results.