
The Senate just advanced a bill to regulate stablecoins—what the GENIUS Act could mean for crypto and other investors
The legislation aims to regulate the roughly $238 billion stablecoin market, per CoinDesk data, creating a clearer framework for banks, companies and other entities to issue the digital currencies.
The bill has bipartisan support, as well as criticism from both parties, making its fate in the Senate uncertain.
Here's what to know about what's included in the bill and how it could impact investors — even those who don't hold crypto.
A stablecoin is a type of cryptocurrency that is pegged to another asset, typically the U.S. dollar, which makes it less volatile than other cryptocurrencies tend to be.
The currency is used in a number of ways, including for payments and futures trading. Since they're also more predictable than regular crypto tokens, traders also use stablecoins "to sit out times of volatility or market downturns," says Nic Puckrin, a crypto analyst, investor and founder of The Coin Bureau.
"Stablecoins are also being used increasingly in emerging markets, like Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa, to hedge against monetary instability, as well as for cheap cross-border payments," he adds.
"The use cases are very broad, and new ones are emerging all the time."
Ultimately, the GENIUS Act could make stablecoins more mainstream by bolstering trust in the currency and encouraging more competition in the market, Puckrin says.
"Right now, [the stablecoin market] is, for all intents and purposes, a duopoly. The market is nearly entirely dominated by Circle's USDC and Tether's USDT," Puckrin says.
Since the bill will create a clear pathway for banks and other entities to begin issuing stablecoins, "we'll likely see a flood of them rush into the market at the start," he says.
Big banks are gearing up to create their own coins. And while they may not all be successful, Puckrin says they will give consumers more options to find a stablecoin and issuer that works best for their needs.
Proponents say it will help safeguard investors and regulate the stablecoin market by ensuring issuers have the reserves needed to give stablecoins their value.
"If we fail to act now, not only will these benefits slip away — we will also fall behind in global competitiveness," Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), who introduced the bill, said in the Senate on Wednesday. "Without a regulatory framework, stablecoin innovation will proliferate overseas — not in America!"
Puckrin agrees stablecoin regulation could be a boon for the U.S. and its position in the global economy.
"Congress has also realized that instead of threatening the U.S. dollar, stablecoins can help cement its global dominance, because 99% of stablecoins are pegged to USD," he says. "With the dollar struggling to maintain its role in the global economy, the GENIUS Act could just be the thing that saves it."
Some supporters acknowledge the bill isn't perfect, but think it's better than not having regulation on stablecoins at all.
"The general outlook is that [the bill] will do better than anything that is currently happening," says Bezalel Eithan Raviv, CEO of blockchain security firm Lionsgate.
"It's a step in the right direction for everyone. There are ways to make it better. There are ways to make everything better. But this is the first one. Let's give it a try, and it will ripple in many ways."
Critics of the GENIUS Act argue it compromises crypto's decentralization and could enable corruption, such as officials favoring specific stablecoins under new regulations.
"We need guardrails that ensure that government officials aren't openly asking people to buy their coins in order to increase their personal profit or their family's profit," Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore), who opposed the current version of the bill, said during Wednesday's session.
"Where are those guardrails in this bill? They're completely, totally absent."
Some critics also say the bill gives too many entities the ability to create new stablecoins which could make enforcement of the regulation standards more difficult.
"As long as issuers are clearly following the rules and regulations, more competition in the stablecoin landscape is both welcome and necessary," Puckrin says.
During the GENIUS Act's passage through the House, some members sought to attach amendments, including proposals from the Credit Card Competition Act. The latter, introduced in 2023 but previously stalled, aimed to boost credit card payment competition by requiring issuers to allow more than two networks (beyond mainly Visa and Mastercard) to process transactions.
Some legislators saw enough similarities between the credit card and stablecoin marketplaces to justify adding the CCCA to the GENIUS Act, but Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) nixed that plan, fearing the CCCA's inclusion could cost votes in favor of the larger bill.
Still, the GENIUS act could impact retailers outside of crypto, Puckrin says.
"We'll likely see stablecoins increasingly adopted as a digital alternative to the U.S. dollar, so banks, fintechs and merchants will be forced to offer stablecoin payment options," he says. "Eventually, payment networks like Visa and Mastercard will have to do so as well, which will lead to lower fees. The CCCA proposals are an inevitable evolution of the GENIUS Act. It will just take a little longer if it isn't written into law."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
6,220 Reasons to Buy MicroStrategy Stock This Week
The first public Bitcoin (BTCUSD) treasury business MicroStrategy (MSTR) is back in the news again after buying 6,220 more BTC for nearly $740 million between July 14 and July 20. The acquisitions have increased its Bitcoin reserves up to a staggering 607,770 BTC and place the company even further ahead as the top corporate Bitcoin holder. The latest comes hot on the heels of President Donald Trump's signing of the Genius Act, which has rekindled the crypto world by offering regulatory and legal clarity on digital assets, with specific focus on stablecoins. Institutional interest has reared up again too with Bitcoin back above the level of $119,000. MSTR's aggressive Bitcoin accumulation and capital raise model once again places the stock as one of the most volatile but compelling bets among crypto-related equities. More News from Barchart NVDA Broken Wing Butterfly Trade Targets A Profit Zone Between 150 and 160 Is Opendoor Stock a Buy at New 52-Week Highs? Can Lucid Motors Stock Hit $7 in 2025? Our exclusive Barchart Brief newsletter is your FREE midday guide to what's moving stocks, sectors, and investor sentiment - delivered right when you need the info most. Subscribe today! About MicroStrategy Stock MicroStrategy (MSTR) is a Virginia company offering business intelligence software and enterprise analytics that transformed to become the first corporate Bitcoin treasury company. It now has a central strategy encompassing the purchasing and holding of Bitcoin. MicroStrategy's current market capitalization is approximately $112.8 billion. MSTR stock has experienced wild fluctuations in the last 52 weeks from a low at $102.40 to a high at $543. Despite this volatility, shares are up nearly 150% in the past year and nearly 45% in the year to date, dramatically outperforming the S&P 500 Index ($SPX) in each period. It has also performed Bitcoin during these periods, with the cryptocurrency up 80% and 27%, respectively. From a valuation standpoint, MicroStrategy is an unusual one. The stock carries a price-earnings ratio of 58.4x and an eye-popping price-sales ratio of 251.47x. With thin normalized earnings and more than a $1.1 billion net loss in the previous year, MSTR is little more than a leveraged Bitcoin proxy. MicroStrategy Beats on Bitcoin Gains The most recent quarter by MicroStrategy carried the signatures of its characteristic business model. Even though revenue declined moderately year over year to $111.1 million, the Bitcoin metrics of the company ran the show. The business incurred a massive fair value loss of $5.9 billion in response to accounting principles at the end of Q1 when the price of BTC was $82,445. However, with the price of Bitcoin now near $120,000, the company is anticipating a significant fair value gain in Q2. The company plans to report its Q2 results on July 31. Investors anticipate its release will reveal huge unrealized gains and possibly a record quarter given the timing at the end of Bitcoin's rally. What Do Analysts Expect for MicroStrategy Stock? Despite MicroStrategy's radical business model, analyst sentiment remains optimistic. MSTR has a 'Strong Buy' consensus rating. The consensus target price for MSTR is $543.62, translating into a 30% potential return from current prices. Bullish analysts have targets as high as $680, while the most negative target stands at $200, which shows the large range of sentiment created by exposure to Bitcoin. On the date of publication, Yiannis Zourmpanos did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Forbes
7 minutes ago
- Forbes
The GENIUS Act, Reading Between The Lines
Illustration Representing the GENIUS Act, First US Legislative Bill All of the crypto-sphere is atwitter with the implications of the final passage of the 'Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act'' or the ''GENIUS Act''. I went through the text of the act that was signed into law last week. Contrary to what the boosters of the bill believe, the implications for related digital assets and the economy are very mixed at best. As the first legislation to directly address one form of crypto-assets, the act is seminal. Of course, my own compatriots at the various blockchain companies and organizations are ecstatic over the act. It is best to temper your enthusiasm due to the details in the bill. First, the act focuses on payment stablecoins, and for other purposes. 'For other purposes' could cover an unspecified number of purposes. The constitution of the Stablecoin Review Board and research into non-payment Stablecoins (the bulk of currently issued Stablecoin total value), into interoperability, into novel methods for detecting Anti-Money Laundering violations, and into the effects of foreign issued Stablecoins could be some of these 'other purposes.' Definitions Continued This act clarifies the definition of a Digital Asset Service Provider. The definition explicitly excludes wallet providers, blockchain protocol vendors, DeFi protocols etc. The removal of confusion that surrounded earlier enforcement actions which made all such activities suspect is a huge relief for such actors. Whew! Exchanges are still in purview. Payment stablecoins must obey the law. Freezing, burning, seizure and blocking transfer must be enforceable by a 'lawful order'. These cannot be implemented by ERC-20 based stablecoins. This is of course anathema to the free souls of the decentralized universe. This is in the act, any non-compliance with a lawful order results in huge daily fines and imprisonment. Also to folks that say, technology does not matter, business use cases over technology seem unaware of the fact that basic capabilities baked into the technical underpinnings are needed BEFORE any business use cases can come to fruition. Look at what the ERC-20 standard and free implementations unleashed on the world. Payment stablecoin issuers have to be regulated by either a Federal Agency, primarily the OCC or other regulators on the Federal level. There is another tier for State Level Payment Stablecoins which are meant to be regulated by state regulators. The state level issuers limit is $10B and federal issuers are limited to $50B. There are some provisions in the bill for the migration of State Regulated stablecoin issuers to federally regulated issuers. Other details including breaches of these limits are punted to a Stablecoin Review Board, making for an open-ended set of rules. The act constantly invokes the Review Board and the Treasury Secretary who is the leader of the Stablecoin Review Board giving them tremendous leeway for rule setting. Neither USDT nor USDC qualify as US payment stablecoins yet according to this act. USDT because Tether is based offshore, USDC does not have a bank charter yet. However, a safe harbor provision may get Circle off the hook while their charter is pending. As soon as USDC is approved by the OCC, they will be instantly not in compliance to the act, as USDC is more than $50 Billion in issuance. As we can see, current stablecoins are not usually used for payments. Where Are Payment Stablecoins? Payment stablecoins means a digital asset that is designed to be used as a means of payment or settlement; and the issuer is obligated to convert, redeem, or repurchase for a fixed amount of monetary value. It also represents that the issuer will maintain, or create the reasonable expectation that it will maintain a stable value. In other words, the payment stablecoin has to be used for payment and has to be stable with respect to a currency. Such a stablecoin is NOT a fiat currency, nor a bank deposit, nor a tokenized stablecoin of a bank deposit such as JP Morgan's Kinexsys. It is not clear that the current use of USDT and USDC falls within the term 'payment stablecoins'. Such payment uses cannot be distinguished from their most frequent use, to hold stable USD instead of volatile home currencies or to use as a stable parking place and an anchor in swap based AMMs and other daily arbitrage trading of volatile crypto-currencies. Stable USD may be a misnomer as USD has fallen in value in the last few months against a basket of currencies. Stability Of Stablecoins Any stablecoin whose basic function is stability with respect to a single fiat currency can only be assured by holding liquid reserves denominated in that fiat. For USD based stablecoins the act explicitly enjoins this to be cash, treasuries maturing in 93 days or less and repos as well as reverse repos based on these instruments. The act also warns against concentration risk. Significant portions of these reserves cannot be in one single institution. We have already seen this scenario play out during the collapse of SVB, which custodied more than $3B of Circle's assets. Only a last minute expansion by the FDIC of the limit to 'unlimited' saved Circle and many other startups. A Stablecoin functions as one of the representations of fiat money that it is based on. In the United States that would be the United Stated Dollar. The other forms available to retail participants are bank deposits and bank notes. Par price, that is the price between the different representations ties all these forms into the singleness of money. Par is 1:1, that is one dollar of bank deposits is equal to one dollar of currency. Stablecoins must follow this. Professor Mehrling has discussed this in a money view of stablecoins. There is no discussion of par in the act. The reserves which are a touch point between stablecoins and traditional markets is where the risk of contagion can start. The restricted redemption of Money Market Funds by BNP Paribas (my previous employer) in 2007 foreshadowed the 2008 financial crisis. A run on a stablecoin issuer could initiate a rapid sell-off in the reserves, including short duration treasury bills. A negative feedback loop on this sort of act can cascade into multiple assets as treasuries are the basis of fixed income and credit markets. We have seen that only bazookas with tremendous firepower through the buying backstop of an institution like the Fed can stem this blood-letting. These are reasonable scenarios to assess the risk of any stablecoin issuer. Additionally stablecoins are not protected by the FDIC, which can cause the panic to spread through retail investors in a very short period of time, maybe even minutes. The Fed will have to ride to the rescue to prevent the larger financial system from collapsing. How Do Issuers Make Money? No big issuers of Stablecoins currently pay interest. Most of the money made by the issuers is based on the yield difference between issuing a zero interest stablecoin and the reserves that they hold. This is the classic example of other people's money making money for your enterprise. In the case of Tether, this payout is in the billions and makes the most money per employee of any enterprise, except for shadowy enterprises such as drug dealing or other illicit activities. If we had negative interest rates on Treasuries or other qualified digital assets, this source of yield farming by the issuers will dry up. Issuers will have to increase their fees, they might also slide into loss-making enterprises. The 48 pages of the act deals with the seniority of Stablecoin claims, guidelines on custody, commingling of assets and other ideas from traditional finance. The Genius Of The Act It is to convince the crypto-universe that it is beneficial to them while advancing traditional institutions for issuing, custodying and exchanging stablecoins. Traditional banking or non-banking institutions who already have bank charters, scale and know-how for customer on-boarding, AML and KYC are the winners. It is to allow a form of private money to come into being and shut out the issuance of CBDCs. It is to remain relatively mum on par price which is only implied. It is to convince the world that the velocity of money unleashed by the near instant settlement at low cost will not have monetary policy implications.


Business Wire
7 minutes ago
- Business Wire
AM Best Assigns Credit Ratings to Commercial Re Overseas Limited
BUSINESS WIRE)-- AM Best has assigned a Financial Strength Rating of A (Excellent) and a Long-Term Issuer Credit Rating (Long-Term ICR) of 'a' (Excellent) to Commercial Re Overseas Limited (CRe) (Road Town, British Virgin Islands). The outlook assigned to these Credit Ratings (ratings) is stable. The ratings reflect CRe's balance sheet strength, which AM Best assesses as strongest, as well as its strong operating performance, neutral business profile and appropriate enterprise risk management (ERM). CRe is the captive reinsurer of Banco General, S.A. (BG), one of the largest banks in Panama. The market scope of CRe is limited to accept business from General de Seguros, S.A. (GS), its sister company. GS has a Long-Term ICR of 'a' (Excellent) with a stable outlook and is an insurance subsidiary of BG. CRe and BG are ultimately owned by Grupo Financiero BG, S.A. (Panama), a publicly listed company with USD 3.7 billion in equity as of December 2024. CRe's business profile is considered neutral to the ratings due to the company being fully integrated into the group's operations. This interconnection allows CRe to leverage the group's resources, expertise and technological advances, enhancing operational efficiency. Concerns regarding concentration are mitigated by the fact that the company has served for 30 years as a captive to BG, and the importance of BG to Panama's financial system. AM Best assesses CRe's balance sheet strength at the strongest level due to its ample capital base with a clearly defined risk appetite. Somewhat limiting this assessment is the quality of capital concentrated in retained earnings rather than paid capital; nevertheless, dividend distribution has been prudent, historically. As of December 2024, the company reported sound underwriting ratios, due to a double screening on the underwriting side (by BG and GS) and to the operational efficiencies related to common processes with BG. The company has presented good profitability and quality of underwriting during the past years, rendering the operating performance strong. AM Best assesses CRe's ERM as appropriate, as the company has a clear risk management structure backed by the group's knowledge and aims to comply with its defined risk appetite according to its tolerances. The stable outlooks reflect AM Best's expectation that CRe will continue to develop its strategy in a profitable way, while maintaining its current level of risk-adjusted capitalization, as measured by Best's Capital Adequacy Ratio (BCAR), and prudent capital management practices. Factors that might lead to negative rating actions include any major changes in CRe's capital base, such as significant dividends or capital outflows, which diminish AM Best's view of the company's balance sheet strength. Negative rating actions could also take place if there are significant disruptions in business generation tied to its parent company that could impact either revenue or profitability. Although unlikely, positive rating actions could take place as a result of a change in AM Best's perception regarding the strategic importance of CRe to the group. This press release relates to Credit Ratings that have been published on AM Best's website. For all rating information relating to the release and pertinent disclosures, including details of the office responsible for issuing each of the individual ratings referenced in this release, please see AM Best's Recent Rating Activity web page. For additional information regarding the use and limitations of Credit Rating opinions, please view Guide to Best's Credit Ratings. For information on the proper use of Best's Credit Ratings, Best's Performance Assessments, Best's Preliminary Credit Assessments and AM Best press releases, please view Guide to Proper Use of Best's Ratings & Assessments.