Stablecoin

Japan pushes for friendlier environment for crypto with Web3 proposals

Japan’s Web3 project team released a white paper suggesting ways to expand the country’s crypto industry to establish a welcoming atmosphere for crypto.

The Web3 project team of Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party has released a white paper containing suggestions for expanding the country’s industry, which has been incorporated into the national strategy by Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s administration.

The Web3 project team aims to bypass the usual bureaucratic processes to formulate regulatory proposals for everything from nonfungible tokens to decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs).

In contrast to other governments seeking to implement consumer protection regulations, Japan is striving to establish a more welcoming atmosphere for cryptocurrency, as many companies have relocated to other countries due to high tax obligations.

According to the white paper, Japan must exhibit leadership during this year’s G7 summit, which will address cryptocurrency issues. The document recommends that the nation focus on the potential benefits of Web3 and establish a prominent stance on technology-agnostic and ethical innovation.

Additionally, the white paper recommends additional modifications to tax regulations, acknowledging that a notable exception for token issuers has already been granted. These include tax exemptions for companies that possess tokens issued by other firms that are not meant to be traded in the short term. It suggests enabling self-assessments and allowing investors to carry forward their losses for up to three years and proposes that cryptocurrency should only be taxed when it is converted into fiat currency.

The white paper identifies a pressing concern regarding the absence of accounting standards, which has made it challenging for Web3 enterprises to locate auditors. The document recommends that ministries and agencies assist the Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants in creating guidelines. Additionally, it suggests that a DAO law be established, modeled after Japan’s godo kaisha, which is comparable to a limited liability company. It also suggests modifications to the Companies Act and the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

Related: Japan’s FSA flags Bybit, others for operating without registration

The white paper highlights that while the screening process for tokens already in circulation is becoming shorter, the assessment of new tokens issued by foreign entities is still sluggish. It suggests that procedures should be made more transparent, enabling issuers to provide essential information for evaluation.

In 2022, Japan adopted a framework for regulating stablecoins. The new white paper emphasizes the significance of preparing the environment for stablecoin registration and creating a self-regulatory organization. It also suggests developing proposals for yen-backed stablecoins.

Magazine: Samsung’s Bitcoin ETF, $700M bust, Coinbase exits Japan: Asia Express

ANZ bank completes Australian CBDC use case for carbon credit trading

The first Australian dollar-backed stablecoin was used with Australian CBDC support to trade carbon credits with Grollo Carbon Ventures.

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group (ANZ) has completed its use case in the pilot project run by the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and Digital Finance Cooperative Research Centre using central bank digital currency (CBDC). ANZ partnered with Grollo Carbon Ventures (GCV) to trade carbon credits.

ANZ tokenized Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) and GCV used its A$DC stablecoin to trade carbon credits on a public, permissionless blockchain. Settlement occurred “in near real-time via ANZ smart contracts,” the bank said. Australian CBDC was used to back A$DC. ANZ banking services lead Nigel Dobson said:

“When applied to carbon markets, tokenisation has the potential to improve efficiency and transparency, reduce risk and preserve the unique characteristics of underlying projects to incentivise investment in climate solutions.”

This was the first of three Australian CBDC pilot use cases in which ANZ will participate. It will also be involved in use cases for offline payments and pension fund payments, which are among the 14 use case projects the RBA announced in March. Besides the three projects, ANZ will also be involved in distributing the CBDC.

Related: Putting carbon credits on blockchain won’t solve the problem alone: Davos

A$DC premiered in March 2022 as the first Australian dollar-based stablecoin issued. It was used in June in an ACCU trade between the Victor Smorgon Group and Zerocap.

The second Australian bank-issued stablecoin was the AUDN, issued by National Australia Bank with carbon credit trading specifically in mind. That coin was used in the first-ever cross-border stablecoin transaction in March.

Pro-crypto Australian Senator Andrew Bragg introduced legislation to regulate stablecoin and cryptocurrency services as a private bill (one not introduced by a government minister) in March. He had released a draft of the bill in September. The RBA published a white paper on stablecoins and their regulation in December.

Magazine: Green consumers want supply chain transparency via blockchain

Tether ‘unequivocally reiterates’ no exposure to Signature Bank

The stablecoin provider denied the allegations that began to surface in regard to its exposure to the now-collapsed Signature Bank.

After a Bloomberg article alleged exposure between stablecoin provider Tether and the now-collapsed Signature Bank, rumors began to circulate regarding the involvement between the two companies. 

However Tether immediately reached out to clarify the claims made in the original article. In an email sent to Cointelegraph among other outlets, Tether gave an official response to the situation in which it said it wants to “unequivocally re-iterate that it has no exposure to Silvergate, Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.”

The stablecoin issuer went on to highlight a section of the article that pointed out no issue of a collaboration between Tether and Signature Bank, and that it “failed” to explain that there was no account set up.

Cointelegraph reached out to Tether for further clarification on the situation.

Initial claims in the article said that Tether was gaining access to the United States banking system through Signature by encouraging users to send U.S. dollars via Signature’s Signet to its Bahamian partner Capital Union Bank.

These claims from Bloomberg surfaced despite the fact that Tether chief technology officer Paolo Ardoino took to Twitter on March 12 to clarify that the company had zero exposure to Signature Bank. On March 2 and 10 he tweeted that the company had no exposure to Silvergate and Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), respectively.

Related: Tether CTO on USDC depeg: ‘Bitcoin maxis were right all along’ | PBW 2023

At the recent Paris Blockchain Week 2023 event, Ardoino told Cointelegraph that Tether has around $1.7 billion in excess reserves. He continued to call USDT (USDT) one of the “safest assets to hold in the world” in the aftermath of the banking crisis.

This comes after Tether came back at the Wall Street Journal’s ‘stale allegations’ on March 3 that the company faked documents to open bank accounts. The report alleged that Tether faked sales invoices, transactions and hid behind third parties to have opportunities to open bank accounts it couldn’t have otherwise.

Magazine: US enforcement agencies are turning up the heat on crypto-related crime

Tether ‘unequivocally reiterates’ no exposure to Signature Bank

The stablecoin provider denied the allegations that began to surface in regard to its exposure to the now-collapsed Signature Bank.

After a Bloomberg article alleged exposure between stablecoin provider Tether and the now-collapsed Signature Bank, rumors began to circulate regarding the involvement between the two companies. 

However, Tether immediately reached out to clarify the claims made in the original article. In an email sent to Cointelegraph, among other outlets, Tether gave an official response to the situation in which it said it wants to “unequivocally re-iterate that it has no exposure to Silvergate, Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.”

The stablecoin issuer went on to highlight a section of the article that pointed out no issue of a collaboration between Tether and Signature Bank and that it “failed” to explain that there was no account set up.

Cointelegraph reached out to Tether for further clarification on the situation.

Initial claims in the article said that Tether was gaining access to the United States banking system through Signature by encouraging users to send U.S. dollars via Signature’s Signet to its Bahamian partner, Capital Union Bank.

These claims from Bloomberg surfaced despite the fact that Tether chief technology officer Paolo Ardoino took to Twitter on March 12 to clarify that the company had zero exposure to Signature Bank. On March 2 and 10, he tweeted that the company had no exposure to Silvergate and Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), respectively.

Related: Tether CTO on USDC depeg: ‘Bitcoin maxis were right all along’ | PBW 2023

At the recent Paris Blockchain Week 2023 event, Ardoino told Cointelegraph that Tether has around $1.7 billion in excess reserves. He continued to call Tether (USDT) one of the “safest assets to hold in the world” in the aftermath of the banking crisis.

This comes after Tether came back at The Wall Street Journal’s “stale allegations” on March 3 that the company faked documents to open bank accounts. The report alleged that Tether faked sales invoices and transactions and hid behind third parties to have opportunities to open bank accounts it couldn’t have otherwise.

Magazine: US enforcement agencies are turning up the heat on crypto-related crime

Stablecoin issuer Tether accessed US banking system using Signature: Report

At the time New York regulators took control of Signature in March, there was reportedly a system in place for Tether clients to send dollars through the bank’s Signet platform.

Tether, the firm behind the largest stablecoin by market capitalization, reportedly allowed its clients to send funds through Signature Bank’s payments platform — granting the firm access to United States banks.

According to an April 4 Bloomberg report, Tether had a pathway to the U.S. banking system by instructing its users to send dollars though Signature’s Signet to its Bahamian partner Capital Union Bank. The report cited “people with knowledge of the situation,” who added this system was in place at the time regulators took control of Signature in March.

While the arrangement between Tether and Signature reportedly would not have been illegal, failing to disclose such information to the investing public would suggest high-risk practices. According to a Tether spokesperson, banks used by the stablecoin issuer “always had access to several banking channels and counterparties,” and associate entities “wouldn’t be affected by either direct or indirect exposure to Signature.”

The New York Department of Financial Services announced the shutdown of Signature on March 12, saying at the time the decision had been made with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in an effort to “protect the U.S. economy.” Stablecoin issuer Paxos reported at the time it had $250 million tied to Signature, while Tether’s chief technology officer Paolo Ardoino said the firm didn’t have any exposure to the failed bank.

Related: Signature’s crypto clients told to close their accounts by April 5: Report

U.S. lawmakers continue to look into the collapse of the crypto-friendly bank, the third in a chain starting with Silvergate and Silicon Valley. At a March 28 hearing of the Senate Banking Committee, FDIC chair Martin Gruenberg said Signature had not adequately managed traditional banking risks. Though Signature had reduced its exposure to digital assets in the wake of the collapse of the FTX exchange, one user has filed a lawsuit alleging the bank “aided and abetted” fraud facilitated by former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried. 

The bank plans to sell its roughly $38 billion worth of deposits and $13 billion in loans to Flagstar Bank, a subsidiary of New York Community Bancorp. Gruenberg said $4 billion in crypto deposits would likely be returned to users sometime this week.

Magazine: Unstablecoins: Depegging, bank runs and other risks loom

Brazil bank BTG Pactual to issue USD-pegged stablecoin

The new U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoin aims to help BTG Pactual’s customers interact between the traditional financial system and the digital economy.

Major Brazilian investment bank BTG Pactual continues onboarding new cryptocurrency services with the launch of its own stablecoin backed by the U.S. dollar.

BTG Pactual is preparing to launch the BTG Dol, a new stablecoin pegged to the U.S. dollar on a 1:1 ratio, using the bank’s custody services. Announcing the news on April 4, BTG Pactual said that the stablecoin would enable holders to “dollarize” a part of their equity, and help customers interact between the traditional financial system and the new digital economy.

“We are innovating in using financial technology for our client’s benefit. When buying BTG Dol, investors have access to an easier, safer and smarter way to invest in dollars,” BTG Pactual’s head of digital assets, André Portilho, said.

According to the announcement, the new BTG Dol stablecoin is based on Mynt, BTG Pactual’s proprietary crypto technology platform. Launched one year ago, Mynt allows users to invest in cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH). Mynt’s head of operations, Marcel Monteiro, said:

“We recently launched eight new assets, we already have 22 cryptocurrencies on the platform, and now we have our own stablecoin. This shows that the Bank trusts technology and will continue with its commitment to offering new innovative digital products and services.”

As previously reported, Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss-founded crypto exchange Gemini partnered with BTG Pactual to provide custody for some of the bank’s digital asset-related funds. BTG Pactual’s Bitcoin 20 Multi-Market Investment Fund reportedly became one of the first Bitcoin funds launched in Brazil in 2021, with custody and other services provided by two Gemini subsidiaries, Gemini Custody and Gemini Fund Solutions.

Related: Russia talks up prospects of BRICS countries developing new currency

Brazilian banks have been adopting more cryptocurrency-friendly services for a while. In February, major Brazilian bank Banco do Brasil enabled customers to pay their taxes with cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin through a joint initiative with the local crypto firm Bitfy.

Magazine: Unstablecoins: Depegging, bank runs and other risks loom

Stress test? What Biden’s bank bailout means for stablecoins

A major stablecoin depegging event raised concerns about the stability of these assets amid a U.S. banking crisis. The result may have been an improvement in their position in traditional finance.

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), which suffered a bank run after revealing a hole in its finances over the sale of part of its inflation-hit bond portfolio, led to a depegging event for major stablecoins in the crypto sector, leaving many to wonder whether it was a simple stress test or a sign of weakness in the system.

The second-largest stablecoin by market capitalization, the Centre Consortium’s USD Coin (USDC), saw its value plunge to $0.87 after it was revealed that $3.3 billion of its over $40 billion in reserves was held at SVB and was, as a result, possibly lost. Coinbase seemingly exacerbated the crisis when it, a member of the Consortium, announced it was halting USDC-to-dollar conversions over the weekend.

As USDC lost its peg, so did decentralized stablecoins using it as a reserve asset. The most notable of which is MakerDAO’s Dai (DAI), a cryptocurrency-backed stablecoin that has well over half of its reserves in USDC.

Stablecoins restored their peg after the United States government stepped in and ensured depositors at SVB and Signature Bank would be made whole, in a move meant to stop other entities from suffering irreparable damage. According to United States President Joe Biden, taxpayers did not feel the burn of the bailout, and the traditional finance system was safe after the intervention.

The crisis, however, did not end there. While the U.S. government stepping in helped stablecoins recover their peg, many quickly pointed out that taxpayers would ultimately suffer the depositors’ bailout.

The banking crisis’ effects on digital assets

Financial institutions have since banded together to protect other banks, with investors and depositors raising questions about the stability of a number of other institutions, including Deutsche Bank.

Credit Suisse collapsed after investments in different funds went south and an unsubstantiated rumor on its impending failure saw customers pull out over 110 billion Swiss francs of funds in a quarter from it, while it suffered a loss of over 7 billion CHF.

Recent: The secret of pitching to male VCs: Female crypto founders blast off

The collapse saw the Swiss government broker an “emergency rescue” deal where Credit Suisse was acquired by rival UBS at a steep discount. Speaking to Cointelegraph, Jason Allegrante, chief legal and compliance officer at blockchain infrastructure company Fireblocks, said that the banking crisis was partly caused by rising interest rates exposing banks with large portfolios of low-interest-rate bonds to risk.

Per Allegrante, the role of the liquidity coverage ratio, a regulatory requirement forcing banks to hold a certain amount of “high-quality liquid assets” to prevent these liquidity crunches, is not being openly discussed.

He said it’s “entirely possible we are in the early stages of a nationwide run on regional banks.” If this happens, he said, there will not only be widespread regional bank failure but there will “likely be further consolidation and concentration of deposits in a handful of large, systematically important banks.”

He added that such a crisis would put pressure on regional banks to sell assets to meet liquidity needs and could ultimately lead to more bank failures. Allegrante added that this would have “far-reaching consequences for the digital asset industry in the United States and abroad.”

Becky Sarwate, spokesperson and head of communications at cryptocurrency exchange CEX.io, told Cointelegraph that the crisis could be a boon for digital assets, saying:

“One thing is clear: Similar to how Bitcoin blossomed from the wreckage of the 2008 financial crisis, the failure of institutions like SVB and Signature Bank is compelling evidence for diversification across multiple investment verticals.”

Sarwate added that when “traditional pathways prove equally volatile from the perspective of a crypto curious participant, it throws the inherent risk of any market participation into relief.” She added that while digital assets lack some of the protections seen in traditional finance, they “offer an alternative set of benefits that, in our current climate, could be appealing to nervous investors.”

Investors holding onto stablecoins and earning yield through them, however, may have believed they were already diversifying and sidestepping the market rout that was occurring. Circle, the issuer of USDC, suggested the depeg event was a “stress test” that the system weathered.

Mitigating risk for stablecoins

If the Federal Deposit and Insurance Corporation (FDIC) were to extend insurance to crypto-related institutions, it could alleviate concerns about the security of digital assets under their custody. That same insurance helped USDC and other stablecoins recover their peg after the collapse of SVB, making a strong case for FDIC insurance to boost crypto adoption.

While that insurance typically only goes up to $250,000, the FDIC opted to make every depositor whole, essentially protecting Circle’s $3.3 billion in reserves held at the bank. Speaking to Cointelegraph, a spokesperson for the stablecoin issuer said that the events highlighted “how there’s a co-dependency — not a conflict — in banking and digital finance.”

The spokesperson added that just as the 2008 global financial crisis led to comprehensive banking reforms, it may be “well past time that the U.S. acts on federal payment stablecoin legislation and federal oversight of these innovations.” The spokesperson added:

“The emphasis here is the importance of shoring up markets and confidence, protecting consumers and ensuring that outcomes, in the long run, prove that the stress test could have been weathered by traditional financial firms and Circle.”

To Circle, a stable U.S. banking system that ensures deposits are safe and accessible is essential to the financial system, and the U.S. government’s actions to make depositors whole demonstrated their “recognition of this fact.” The safety and soundness of the banking system are critical to dollar-backed stablecoins, the firm added.

Circle has revealed that it has since moved the cash portion of USDC’s reserve to Bank of New York Mellon, the world’s largest custodian bank with over $44 trillion in assets under custody, with the exception of “limited funds held at transaction banking partners in support of USDC minting and redemption.”

The firm added it has “long advocated for regulation such that we can become a full reserve, federally supervised institution.” Such a move would insulate its “base layer of internet money and payment systems from fractional reserve banking risk,” the spokesperson said, adding:

“A federal pathway for legislation and regulatory oversight allows for the U.S. to be represented and have a seat at the table as the future of money is being discussed around the world. The time to act is now.”

Commenting on the depeg, Lucas Kiely, chief investment officer of Yield App, noted that what happened can be “largely attributed to fears around liquidity,” as most stablecoins are “essentially an IOU note backed by securities that holders don’t have a lien on.”

Per Kiely, stablecoins have “been sold as asset-backed instruments, which like any other asset carry investment risk.” Danny Talwar, head of tax at crypto tax calculator Koinly, said that USDC and Dai may “temporarily suffer from a lack of confidence over the short to medium term following the mini-bank run.”

CEX.io’s Sarwate, however, said the confidence in these stablecoins “has gone unchanged,” as both Dai and USDC “retreated back to their reflections of the U.S. dollar and resumed all prior uses they enjoyed before the depegging event.”

To members of the decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) that governs Dai, MakerDAO, confidence was seemingly unaffected. A recent vote has seen members of the DAO opt to keep USDC as the primary collateral for the stablecoin over diversifying with Gemini Dollar (GUSD) and Paxos Dollar (USDP) exposure.

Given USDC’s move of the cash portion of its reserves to a stronger custodian, the depegging event may have simply strengthened both stablecoins after a short period of panic.

Leveling the playing field

That strengthened position, according to Koinly’s Talwar, could also come as cryptocurrency startups and exchanges search for alternative banking providers, although the “de-banking of crypto businesses could seriously harm the sector and innovation in blockchain-based technologies” if they fail to find alternatives.

In the medium term, Talwar said, the collapse of cryptocurrency-friendly banks “will compound with the more crypto-native collapses from the past year, resulting in a challenging environment for blockchain innovation to thrive within the United States.”

Yield app’s Kiely said that the U.S. government’s recent bailout was different from the one seen in the global financial crisis, although it raises “questions over whether there needs to be an adjustment in the supervisory guidelines to address interest rate risk.”

The Fed’s bailout, he said, could be removing incentives for banks to manage business risks and send a message they can “lean on the government’s support if customer funds are mismanaged, all with no alleged cost to the taxpayer.”

Recent: How a TikTok ban in the US could affect the crypto industry

As for stablecoins, Talwar said he sees a need for more stablecoin options, even though the launch of euro-backed stablecoins helped in this regard. CEX.io’s Sarwate noted that the U.S. banking and stablecoin crisis helped “level the playing field between traditional finance and crypto.”

While crypto is still a nascent industry, she said, there’s “potential within the space for visionaries to lead by example and carve out an alternative to speculative investing. In the long term, this could help yield a more balanced system.”

In the typical crypto ethos, players in the space are already finding ways to mitigate risks associated with the traditional financial system. While U.S. regulators warn against crypto, the sector moves to strengthen its position in the financial world.

Do algorithmic stablecoins have a future as centralized coins are under scrutiny?

Fiat stablecoins are too deeply rooted in exchanges for algorithmic stablecoins to rise, according to some experts.

Binance’s native stablecoin — Binance USD (BUSD) — was the third-largest stablecoin pegged to the United States dollar, minted by blockchain infrastructure platform, the Paxos Trust Company, through a transfer of technology agreement between the two firms. 

However, on Feb. 13, the New York Department of Financial Services ordered Paxos to stop minting any new BUSD tokens.

The move came just days after the United States Securities and Exchange Commission issued a Wells notice alleging BUSD violates securities laws.

Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao even predicted that regulatory clampdowns would force several other crypto businesses to move away from dollar-pegged stablecoins in the near future, and look for alternative tokens pegged to the euro or Japanese yen.

Zhao’s comments came during a Twitter AMA (ask me anything) session where he said that although gold is a good backing option, most people’s assets are in fiat currencies. He admitted that the U.S. dollar’s dominance in international markets makes it a go-to fiat currency, which is one of the main reasons behind the popularity of dollar-pegged stablecoins. However, regulatory action against such assets might make way for other stablecoins.

Zhao also talked about the role of algorithmic stablecoins, many of which are largely decentralized, and said that these types of stablecoins might play a more prominent role in the crypto ecosystem in the future but are inherently riskier than fiat-backed tokens.

Algorithmic stablecoins are not traditionally collateralized; instead, they use mathematical algorithms often linked to a tokenomics model rather than backed by a real-world asset like the U.S. dollar.

Most algorithmic stablecoin projects use a dual token system: a stablecoin and a volatile asset that maintains the stablecoin’s peg by maintaining the demand and supply system that keeps the stablecoin’s value unchanged. To mint a specific value of the stablecoin, an equal amount of the native token or volatile token is burned.

Following the regulatory action against BUSD, Binance turned to several alternative stablecoins, including a few decentralized ones, to fulfill its stablecoin-centered liquidity needs. From Feb. 16–24, Binance minted 180 million TrueUSD (TUSD) stablecoins.

Binance minted TrueUSD after BUSD’s ban. Source: Twitter

Decentralized stablecoins have a tainted past

Decentralized stablecoins were first popularized in the decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem with the creation of Dai (DAI) by MakerDAO. DAI maintains its peg through a smart contracts system governed by a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO). Although DAI has remained true to its decentralized values, it was caught up in the recent banking contagion that led to its depeg along with the Circle-issued USD Coin (USDC).

While algorithmic stablecoins stay true to the crypto ecosystem’s decentralized values, their real-life implementation has had a troubled history, especially with the collapse of the Terra ecosystem and its algorithmic stablecoin TerraUSD (UST), now called TerraClassicUSD (USTC).

Terra’s algorithmic stablecoin was once seen as the prime example of how a decentralized stablecoin could make it to the mainstream. However, after its depeg and subsequent ecosystem collapse, it has cast doubt on the future of such stablecoins.

Decentralized stablecoins suffered a heavy setback from the Terra saga, and the reputation of such stablecoins was tarnished further by the actions of Terraform Labs co-founder Do Kwon. Kwon evaded law enforcement agencies while maintaining that the debacle was not his fault, despite on-chain evidence suggesting the depeg was caused by one entity dumping over $450 million of UST on the open market. Kwon himself allegedly controlled that entity. He was recently arrested by Montenegrin authorities.

With centralized stablecoins under regulatory scrutiny and confidence in algorithmic stablecoins demolished, what does the future of a decentralized stablecoin look like? Is there a future at all?

Hassan Sheikh, the co-founder of the decentralized incubator platform DAO Maker, told Cointelegraph that a shift to decentralized stablecoins would not be in the form that people may expect. Centralized exchanges are highly vertically integrated, creating chains, wallets, staking solutions, mining ops and more.

“Any decentralized stablecoin to be adopted by exchanges is not yet on the market. It won’t be DAI or the like. The market caps aren’t significant enough to have the necessary network effect,” Sheikh said, adding, “Exchanges would be likely to fork off protocols like Maker and push for the traction of their controlled ‘decentralized’ stablecoin for that value capture. The decentralized stablecoin on exchanges wouldn’t be truly decentralized, and it most likely doesn’t exist yet, as the major ones would likely pursue their own.”

Talking about BUSD’s regulatory troubles, Sheikh said that it was merely the first test of people’s willingness to shift to a new exchange-issued stablecoin. If proven, the market will shift. Expecting a Binance version of DAI is reasonable, he added.

Sheikh also shed light on the major issues with decentralized stablecoins currently in the market. He said that the majority of these stablecoins are so deeply rooted in USDC that they’re hardly decentralized.

Many decentralized exchange pools and decentralized stablecoins, such as DAI and Frax (FRAX), have significant collateral exposure to USDC. This is why DAI issuer MakerDAO introduced an emergency proposal to address risks from its $3.1 billion USDC collateral exposure during the recent depeg.

If anything, “the aura of their marketing as decentralized is now wiped out with the recent struggles of USDC, which quickly eroded the peg of DAI. The switch to a decentralized stablecoin is too distant as the to-be dominant stablecoin doesn’t exist yet. Exchanges are supporting these purely for volume profits. The few BTC/DAI and similar pairs that do exist are so weak in an activity that the foreseeable future doesn’t show any sign of a shift to decentralized stables across major liquidity partners,” Sheikh said.

Crypto exchanges are integrated with fiat-backed stablecoins

Fiat-backed stablecoins have become a lifeline in today’s crypto world. In the early days of crypto exchanges, these stablecoins acted as an onboarding tool for many traders, and in the last decade, they have also become a key liquidity provider. 

“Fiat-backed stablecoins are so deeply rooted in exchanges that it’s highly unlikely to expect a mammoth shift despite the regulatory scrutiny.” Shiekh told Cointelgraph.

Abdul Rafay Gadit, the co-founder of crypto trading platform Zignaly, told Cointelegraph that despite the recent USDC depeg, crypto trading platforms still prefer U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoins.

“I personally believe that [Tether] USDT is the best stablecoin at this moment, carefully pegged 1:1 and kind of away from unfair regulations as well. USDC was unfortunate because of its ties to SVB [Silicon Valley Bank]; otherwise, they run a great business,” he said.

He told Cointelegraph that centralized stablecoins are lifelines to the crypto ecosystem, and despite the regulatory pressure, they will continue to be a dominant force.

Gadit said that exchanges might move away from the U.S., but fiat-backed stablecoin will continue to rule:

“BUSD action looks like victimization to me; I think it’s uncalled for and totally unfair. Going forward, stable issuers will try to stay away from the U.S., just like USDT issuer Tether operates out of Hong Kong.”

Tether (USDT) continues to dominate the stablecoin market despite ongoing regulatory scrutiny against many other U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoins. Industry experts believe that even though decentralized stablecoins look promising, their real-world implementations have been questionable. Thus, centralized stablecoins will likely continue to dominate the crypto market.

Blockchain and regulated stablecoins to be widely used by 2030, industry execs say

Digital regulatory professionals have predicted the wide use of stablecoins worldwide by 2030, despite the current competition between TradFi and DeFi.

Regulated stablecoins are in the spotlight of policymakers as a panel of professionals in the digital regulatory space discusses the future use of the assets at the World of Web3 (WOW) Summit in Hong Kong. 

In the panel titled “Digital Assets: Policies & the Road Ahead,” the group discussed how regulated stablecoins would most likely remain in use by 2030, and how the current growth rate of the stablecoin market helps to ensure this.

While recognizing the crypto industry’s growth, Alexandra Sasha, the first deputy to the Danish Parliament, and an advocate for blockchain technology and innovation, said regulated stablecoins would grow stronger.

In her statement, Sasha said, “So I think there’s still two forms of need because you will have people who will want to centralize the digital era, and you will always have the people who do want this decentralized way of using payments, of course, unless it gets banned, but I do not think that’s the goal of anyone.”

Related: Stablecoins are solution to crypto’s banking problem, exec says

Concerning the wide acceptance of regulated stablecoins by 2030, Kelvin Lester Lee, commissioner of the Securities Exchange Commission of the Philippines, said he isn’t sure whether regulated digital assets would be thriving by then. However, they would still be present and might also look different.

Rounding up, Douglas Arner, a professor working in the areas of interconnection between finance and technology regulation at the University of Hong Kong, added that this entire decade would be a competition between centralized approaches and decentralized approaches. According to Arner, the competition applies just as much in the context of the metaverse as it does in the context of the crypto ecosystem, and by the end of the decade, there would be a spectrum of different structures where there’s a high likelihood that regulated stablecoins will emerge as the most widely used monetary instrument embedded in blockchain applications.

Magazine: Are CBDCs kryptonite for crypto?

Stablecoins are solution to crypto’s banking problem, exec says

Stablecoins are seen as a potential solution to crypto’s banking problem, but some of them are currently not immune to banking issues.

The collapses of banks like Silvergate have certainly impacted cryptocurrency exchanges but there are ways for the industry to survive without the support of banks, one executive believes.

Crypto exchanges significantly rely on traditional banking systems for customer deposits, which makes them vulnerable to various banking issues, according to Bitstamp USA CEO and global commercial officer Bobby Zagotta.

The executive believes that stablecoins — cryptocurrencies whose value is tied to fiat currencies or other assets — could be a solution to crypto’s banking problem.

“We are currently discussing how stablecoins can offer us an alternative to traditional banking,” Zagotta said in an interview with Cointelegraph on March 27. He added that stablecoins could potentially unlock new capabilities for the industry, allowing it to look at banking from a new perspective and to go back to the genesis and purpose of crypto, adding:

“One of the founding principles of our industry is to enable individuals to transact without dependence on third-party institutions, so there are other possibilities to be explored, such as the use of stablecoins to reduce frictions born of the banking system.”

According to Zagotta, stablecoins provide many benefits like faster and more cost-effective transactions, reduced reliance on banks and increased liquidity. “Depending on regulations it’s possible we will see a continued evolution and integration of stablecoins within exchanges amid the banking crisis,” the exec stated.

In the interview, Zagotta emphasized that the crypto industry needs to figure out the factors that led regulators to step in at Signature bank. That is necessary for the industry to ensure that crypto-friendly banks are operating in a safe and sustainable manner moving forward. He also cautioned exchanges against creating more risk for customers by hastily moving customer funds around different U.S. banks that may be stressed or at risk.

Related: Coinbase wants devs to build inflation-pegged ‘flatcoins’ on its new ‘Base’ network

According to the exec, Bitstamp currently has 15 banking partnerships globally, including U.S. banks like Customers Bank and MVB Bank, as well as European banks like LHV Bank and Gorenjska Banka that can process payments in USD as well. “We are also in conversations to onboard United Texas Bank, Western Alliance Bank, Axos Bank, and Cross River Bank to ensure we maintain a robust network in the midst of all of this change,” Zagotta added.

While Bitstamp is looking at stablecoins as a potential solution to crypto’s banking problem, it’s worth noting that some major stablecoins like USD Coin (USDC) aren’t immune to banking problems themselves. USDC issuer Circle faced major issues in March due to its $3.3 billion exposure to the collapsed Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). The events caused USDC to briefly lose its 1:1 peg with the U.S. dollar.

According to media reports, the banking crisis has been subsiding over the past few weeks but isn’t close to being over. According to José Manuel Campa, the head of the European Banking Authority, European banks have remained vulnerable following the demise of SVB and the subsequent emergency rescue of Credit Suisse by UBS.

Magazine: Unstablecoins: Depegging, bank runs and other risks loom