Mutual Agreement: Bank-Like Stablecoin Regulation

Republicans and Democrats Agree: Regulating Stablecoin Issuers Like Banks is a Bad Idea

Written by Aaron S.,

Editor-In-Chief

Last Updated: June 01, 2022

Stop overpaying - start transferring money with Ogvio. Join the waitlist & grab early Rewards NOW! 🎁

BITDEGREE IN YOUR SOCIAL FEED

Last month, the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets (PWG) issued a stablecoin-related report. Within the report, the PWG outlined the logic behind the decision to regulate stablecoin-issuing institutions in the same manner as traditional banks are regulated.

Notably, this provoked bipartisan dissatisfactory remarks. Mostly all crypto-literate representatives (from both major parties) are against such an idea.

During a Chainalysis event hosted on Monday, Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) exclaimed that such regulations, if placed on stablecoin issuers, would “kill American competitiveness”. Emmer would go on to emphasize that many members of PWG simply do not understand stablecoins, and thus, cannot comprehend the magnitude and implications of such regulations.

What is SushiSwap? DEX & Sushi Token Animated Explainer

Did you know?

Want to get smarter & wealthier with crypto?

Subscribe - We publish new crypto explainer videos every week!

Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) agreed with Emmer, stating that he is skeptical of such legislation, as well.

On the other hand, Emmer also pointed out that, while he doesn’t agree with the regulatory suggestions in question, this does not mean that he’s opposed to crypto regulation, in a more-general sense. However, he was adamant that regulatory changes should be done with the full comprehension of the space, and that any “enforced action” of bureaucrats and regulators would only mean further confusion and additional issues.