An Uncertain Future For U.S. Banks Amid The Rise Of Paid Stablecoins
What if the next threat to traditional banks did not come from an economic crisis, but from a simple innovation in stablecoins ? Brian Moynihan, CEO of Bank of America, warns that the rise of yield-bearing stablecoins could trigger a massive outflow of bank deposits, thus disrupting the balance of the American financial system. This worrying scenario for traditional institutions could see their role as lenders severely affected by this new form of digital competition.
In brief
- Brian Moynihan, CEO of Bank of America, warns about the risk of deposit outflows to rewarded stablecoins.
- The rise of rewarded stablecoins could lead to a massive withdrawal of American bank deposits.
- The loss of liquidity could reduce banks’ lending capacity, thus increasing borrowing costs.
- Legislation under debate in the Senate could influence the future of rewarded stablecoins.
A deposit outflow : warning from Bank of America’s CEO
During a recent earnings call, Brian Moynihan, CEO of Bank of America, issued a straightforward warning: allowing issuers of stablecoins to offer interest could cause a massive withdrawal of deposits from the American banking system.
“These products would more closely resemble money market funds”, he stated, referring to instruments backed by cash or Treasury bills, but not used for loan financing.
Moynihan, based on studies cited by the U.S. Treasury, estimated that up to $6 trillion of deposits could migrate to these rewarded stablecoins, directly endangering the stability of bank financing.
This scenario would have several direct and profound consequences on the American economy, notably :
- A significant decrease in banks’ lending capacity, especially those heavily reliant on deposits to finance their activities ;
- An increase in borrowing costs for households and businesses, linked to the scarcity of liquidity available in the banking system ;
- A disproportionate impact on SMEs, which have limited access to capital markets and primarily rely on traditional bank lending ;
- An increased systemic risk if deposit flows accelerate without a regulatory framework to govern these new financial products.
All these effects reflect a concern shared by traditional banking institutions, which fear the emergence, via stablecoins, of direct competition to their deposit activities, a field until now largely protected.
Regulatory tensions and sector rivalries around stablecoins
Beyond economic considerations, political deadlocks around the CLARITY Act have revived tensions.
This bill, designed to provide a regulatory framework for cryptos, had its vote postponed again by the Senate Banking Committee, officially to allow for new bipartisan exchanges. However, the lines of fracture are deep, especially regarding the possibility for stablecoin issuers or platforms to offer yields.
The division is also evident within the crypto industry itself. Coinbase’s CEO, Brian Armstrong, stated that the platform might withdraw its support for the bill, considering that the current version would favor banks by allowing them to “kill rewards on stablecoins”.
In a post on X, Armstrong claimed that the bill, as currently drafted, would give banks the power to block any form of competition, adding that “it’s better to have no law at all than a bad law”. In contrast, Chris Dixon, managing partner at a16z Crypto, calls to support the CLARITY Act despite its imperfections, emphasizing that regulatory progress is essential for the United States to remain a land of crypto innovation.
While Bank of America warns about the risks associated with yield-bearing stablecoins, JPMorgan calls to regulate them to protect the integrity of the banking system. This debate on crypto regulation could redefine the future of finance, where the line between innovation and security becomes increasingly blurred.
Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
Jensen Huang: Nvidia chip sales will double next year compared to this year, AI cannot be regulated like social media
Jensen Huang opposes applying social media regulations directly to AI, arguing that social media is a product, while AI is an underlying technology that supports other technologies and products. He believes regulation should target products, not the technology itself. He emphasizes rigorous testing and states that products should be withheld from release if they are not safe enough. "AI safety is of utmost importance."
What to buy after the Federal Reserve raises interest rates? Historically, US energy and technology stocks outperform while real estate lags. Goldman Sachs: The pace of rate hikes determines the US stock market.
U.S. stock performance in the 12 months after the first Federal Reserve rate hike: According to Jefferies, the energy sector led with an average return of 22.4%, followed by information technology at 15.4%. According to Charles Schwab, real estate underperformed the S&P 500 by 4.3%, making it the worst of the 11 sectors. Goldman Sachs states that the pace of rate hikes is the core variable affecting U.S. stocks; currently, if the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rises by 50 basis points within a month, it will create "rapid rate hike" pressure.
Bank of America Ripple Report Fuels XRP Debate
Gold surges over 2%, US dollar retraces gains after Federal Reserve decision
