Treasury’s first proposed rule under the GENIUS Act does more than outline stablecoin supervision, as it shows where control sits as the market scales: states mayTreasury’s first proposed rule under the GENIUS Act does more than outline stablecoin supervision, as it shows where control sits as the market scales: states may

Treasury’s first GENIUS rule tightens Washington’s grip on who can scale stablecoins

2026/04/02 19:10
10 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com

Treasury’s first proposed rule under the GENIUS Act does more than outline stablecoin supervision, as it shows where control sits as the market scales: states may license issuers early, but Washington sets the terms that matter once stablecoins become large enough to matter to the dollar system.

Treasury's first proposed GENIUS rule landed on April 1 as a notice of proposed rulemaking.

The text inside it builds the operational architecture for US stablecoin governance, addressing which institutions may issue payment stablecoins, under what conditions, and at what scale before federal oversight becomes mandatory.

Why this matters: Treasury is drawing a harder line between small issuers and systemically relevant ones. That matters because stablecoins are no longer a niche crypto product. They are becoming part of dollar payments, liquidity, and treasury infrastructure, which means the rules now shape who can scale, who gets squeezed, and how concentrated the market may become.

By defining when a state licensing regime qualifies as “substantially similar” to the federal framework, Treasury is now defining those terms.

The stablecoin market already holds roughly $316 billion, with USDT accounting for about 58% of the supply, per DeFiLlama.

Retail-sized volume for USDC, USDT, and PYUSD grew from $500 million to $69.8 billion between 2019 and 2025. FSOC's 2025 annual report described the GENIUS framework as a federal prudential system designed to onshore stablecoin innovation, protect holders in the event of insolvency, and support the US dollar's international role.

Treasury's NPRM now shows how that prudential vision operates on the ground.

Related Reading

Trump signs GENIUS Act into law, activating America's first regulatory framework for stablecoins

In addition to sign the stablecoin framework into law, Trump vowed to approve the market structure bill next.

Jul 18, 2025 · Gino Matos

The hidden fight over who governs

The Treasury chairs the interagency review committee that certifies state stablecoin regimes, which includes leadership from the Fed and the FDIC.

That committee's judgment rests on the “substantially similar” test, and Treasury's proposal defines that test to include the GENIUS Act itself, as well as the implementing regulations and interpretations issued by federal agencies over time.

Treasury says that substantial similarity would be hard to administer, and state and federal standards could “starkly deviate.”

As OCC, Treasury, the Fed, FinCEN, and OFAC add implementing rules, the standard Washington uses to measure states shifts with them. State regimes approved today must track a benchmark that Washington keeps building.

Treasury organizes the rule around two categories. The first, called uniform, covers the parts that establish trust in the instrument itself: reserve assets, redemption, monthly reserve publication, limits on rehypothecation, accountant examinations, BSA/sanctions compliance, lawful-order capability, and core activity limits.

State implementation of each uniform requirement must be consistent with the federal framework “in all substantive respects,” with no material deviations in definitions or scope. For BSA and sanctions specifically, states must cross-reference federal rules directly, with no room for state-drafted substitutes.

The second category allows calibration around some capital, liquidity, reserve diversification, risk management, applications, licensing, and certain redemption mechanics. Treasury still constrains that room, and state choices in the flexible bucket must produce outcomes “at least as stringent and protective” as the federal framework.

For example, a state may allow additional reserve assets only if the OCC has already approved them as similarly liquid federal government-issued assets. That is federal pre-clearance administered through state paperwork.

Category Requirement area Treasury standard State discretion Why it matters
Uniform Reserve assets Must align with the federal framework in all substantive respects No material deviation Defines trust in the stablecoin itself
Uniform Redemption Must track the federal baseline closely No narrower state substitute Protects holders’ ability to redeem
Uniform Monthly reserve publication Must match federal expectations Very limited room to vary Supports transparency and market confidence
Uniform Limits on rehypothecation Must conform to the federal framework No meaningful carve-out Prevents riskier use of backing assets
Uniform Accountant examinations Must be consistent with federal requirements Little to no variation Standardizes verification of reserves
Uniform BSA / AML / sanctions States must cross-reference federal rules directly No state-drafted alternative Keeps compliance under national control
Uniform Lawful-order capability Must track federal expectations Minimal discretion Preserves enforcement and legal access
Uniform Core activity limits Must align with the federal framework No material divergence Keeps issuers inside a nationally defined model
Flexible / calibrated Capital Outcomes must be at least as stringent and protective as the federal framework Some calibration allowed Lets states tune prudential standards without weakening them
Flexible / calibrated Liquidity Must be at least as protective as the federal baseline Some calibration allowed Gives limited room for state tailoring
Flexible / calibrated Reserve diversification May vary, but only within outcomes at least as protective as the federal framework Narrow flexibility States can adjust, but not create a looser reserve regime
Flexible / calibrated Risk management State framework can differ in form Must still meet protective federal-equivalent outcomes Allows administrative variation, not a different philosophy
Flexible / calibrated Applications / licensing State administration is allowed Cannot create a genuinely different regime Keeps the state lane administrative, not alternative
Flexible / calibrated Certain redemption mechanics Some room to calibrate Must remain at least as protective as the federal system States can adjust process, not weaken substance
Flexible / calibrated Additional reserve assets Allowed only if the OCC has already approved comparable assets Federal pre-clearance still governs Shows state flexibility is still bounded by Washington

This is the core shift in plain terms: the state path exists, but only inside a federal design that gets tighter as stablecoins grow. The real question is no longer whether stablecoins will be regulated, but who will still be able to issue them once compliance costs and scale thresholds start to bite.

The $10 billion ceiling and what it produces

The GENIUS Act caps the state option at issuers with no more than $10 billion in consolidated outstanding payment stablecoins.

Treasury adds that state transition rules cannot impede a move to federal oversight once an issuer crosses that line, and issuers in a state that fails certification must either stop issuing payment stablecoins or move into the federal licensing framework.

The $10 billion ceiling is the structural tell, since the state lane functions as an entry point for smaller issuers. At scale, the federal framework becomes the only durable home.

Citi's updated 2026 forecast puts its base-case estimate for the 2030 stablecoin market at $1.9 trillion. Standard Chartered projected the market could reach $2 trillion by the end of 2028.

Related Reading

Treasury’s $2 trillion stablecoin vision meets a reality check as USD1 depegs

Binance controls most USD1 liquidity, so a rumor there could turn minutes of pain into something far uglier.

Feb 24, 2026 · Gino Matos

A market at that scale runs on uniform reserve, redemption, and compliance standards and rewards issuers capable of absorbing national-style regulatory overhead.

Visa's concentration data already reflects the current destination: as of October 2025, more than 97% of the stablecoin supply had converged on USDT and USDC. Treasury's design standardizes the conditions that large, compliant issuers are already built to meet.

Standard Chartered estimated stablecoins could pull roughly $500 billion in deposits out of US banks by the end of 2028.

The number frames the context correctly: stablecoins are becoming claims on dollar liquidity that sit alongside traditional bank deposits, and the institution that governs the terms of stablecoin issuance governs an expanding piece of dollar infrastructure.

Treasury's proposal positions Washington as that institution.

Scale marker Amount What it represents Regulatory implication Why it matters
State-lane ceiling $10 billion Maximum consolidated outstanding payment stablecoins for an issuer to remain in the state option Above this line, the issuer must transition to federal oversight or stop issuing new payment stablecoins Shows the state path is a limited entry lane, not the durable home for large issuers
Current stablecoin market ~$316 billion Approximate current total stablecoin market size The market is already far larger than the state-lane threshold Suggests Treasury is designing rules for a systemically meaningful market, not a niche one
Citi base case (2030) $1.9 trillion Citi’s updated 2026 base-case estimate for the stablecoin market by 2030 A market at this scale would likely rely on uniform national standards rather than fragmented state variation Reinforces the article’s argument that scale points toward federalization
Standard Chartered forecast (end-2028) $2 trillion Standard Chartered’s projection for stablecoin market size by the end of 2028 Implies that if growth continues, large issuers will almost inevitably end up in the federal framework Supports the view that the state lane functions more like a launch ramp than a long-term alternative
Bank deposit migration estimate ~$500 billion Standard Chartered estimate of deposits stablecoins could pull from U.S. banks by end-2028 Stablecoin issuance becomes a question of dollar-system governance, not just crypto regulation Helps mainstream readers see this as a financial-architecture story, not a niche policy update

Two paths through the same architecture

The bull case runs from clarity to scale. Uniform national rules on reserves, redemption, and compliance remove the uncertainty that has kept banks, card networks, and enterprise treasury teams cautious about deep integration with stablecoins.

Along that path, supply tracks toward the Citi and Standard Chartered forecasts, Visa's 130-plus card programs are overlaid on stablecoin wallets, and the state lane serves as a launch ramp for smaller issuers before they graduate to federal supervision.

Treasury's tight architecture then reads as the operating manual for US digital dollar expansion, which is a framework that made the market credible enough to absorb institutional demand at scale.

The bear case runs the same architecture in reverse. The forthcoming BSA/AML and lawful order rules, which both Treasury and the OCC have flagged as still pending in separate rulemakings, could entail heavy operational requirements.

If certification proves slow, costly, or politically fraught, smaller issuers may find the state lane functionally inaccessible even before they approach the $10 billion threshold.

The result would be a market that is legally cleaner but structurally oligopolistic, with innovation relocating to distribution and infrastructure, away from issuance.

Treasury frames a different goal. The predictable market response to high uniform compliance floors and a hard ceiling on state-lane scale is concentration, and Visa's existing market data shows the market was already moving in that direction before the rule arrived.

One architecture and two outcomes for the stablecoins ruleA dual-path diagram shows how Treasury's uniform federal stablecoin baseline could drive either broader adoption or market concentration depending on compliance outcomes.

Washington holds the baseline

This NPRM is part of a larger regulatory framework. OCC's February proposal covered the required GENIUS regulations, except those tied to BSA, AML, and OFAC sanctions, which will be addressed in a separate rulemaking coordinated with Treasury.

Treasury's own NPRM flags that rules on lawful-order compliance are forthcoming as well. The full compliance map for stablecoin issuers awaits completion.

The $316 billion market and $10 trillion transaction volume settled the question of stablecoins belonging in the US finance. Treasury is deciding who gets to shape them as they enter it.

The next test is not whether Washington wants stablecoins inside the financial system. That question is already settled. The next test is whether the remaining GENIUS rulemakings leave room for more issuers to survive inside that system, or whether the market exits this process cleaner, larger, and far more concentrated than it entered.

The post Treasury’s first GENIUS rule tightens Washington’s grip on who can scale stablecoins appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Market Opportunity
The AI Prophecy Logo
The AI Prophecy Price(ACT)
$0.0124
$0.0124$0.0124
-2.59%
USD
The AI Prophecy (ACT) Live Price Chart

AI Strategy: Powered 24/7

AI Strategy: Powered 24/7AI Strategy: Powered 24/7

Generate automated strategies using natural language

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Chainlink Whale Activity Rises While Price Bleeds for 7 Straight Months

Chainlink Whale Activity Rises While Price Bleeds for 7 Straight Months

The post Chainlink Whale Activity Rises While Price Bleeds for 7 Straight Months appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Chainlink (LINK) is seeing an increase in
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/04/02 18:51
Revolutionary: CME SOL XRP Futures Options Set to Transform Crypto Trading

Revolutionary: CME SOL XRP Futures Options Set to Transform Crypto Trading

BitcoinWorld Revolutionary: CME SOL XRP Futures Options Set to Transform Crypto Trading Exciting news is rippling through the cryptocurrency world! The U.S. Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME), a titan in traditional finance, is reportedly planning to launch CME SOL XRP futures options. This significant development, initially reported by Walter Bloomberg, marks a pivotal moment for institutional involvement in the altcoin market. It signals a new era for how Solana (SOL) and Ripple (XRP) might be traded, potentially opening doors to broader adoption and increased market maturity. What Does the Launch of CME SOL XRP Futures Mean for Crypto? When an institution like CME, known for its rigorous standards and vast trading volume, enters a new market, it brings a wave of legitimacy. The introduction of CME SOL XRP futures options indicates a growing acceptance of these digital assets within mainstream finance. This move could fundamentally change how investors perceive and interact with SOL and XRP. Futures options are financial derivatives that give traders the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell an underlying asset at a specific price on or before a certain date. For SOL and XRP, this means: Enhanced Price Discovery: More participants and trading volume can lead to more efficient and accurate pricing. Institutional Access: It provides regulated avenues for large institutional investors to gain exposure to SOL and XRP without directly owning the underlying assets. Risk Management: Traders can use these options to hedge against potential price fluctuations in their existing SOL and XRP holdings. Why Are SOL and XRP Chosen for CME SOL XRP Futures? The selection of Solana (SOL) and Ripple (XRP) for these new futures options is not arbitrary. Both cryptocurrencies hold significant positions in the market and offer distinct value propositions: Solana (SOL): Known for its high-performance blockchain, offering fast transaction speeds and low costs. Its robust ecosystem supports numerous decentralized applications (dApps), NFTs, and DeFi projects, attracting considerable developer and user interest. Ripple (XRP): Primarily focused on facilitating fast, low-cost international payments for financial institutions. Despite ongoing regulatory discussions, XRP maintains a strong market presence and a dedicated community, highlighting its potential for cross-border transactions. Their substantial market capitalization and existing liquidity make them attractive candidates for institutional-grade derivative products. This choice reflects a strategic assessment by CME of assets that can sustain significant trading interest and volume. Navigating the Landscape: Opportunities and Considerations for CME SOL XRP Futures The introduction of CME SOL XRP futures options presents a wealth of opportunities, yet it also comes with important considerations. On the opportunity front, we can expect increased liquidity, which benefits all market participants by making it easier to buy and sell without significant price impact. Moreover, it could attract new capital from traditional financial players who prefer regulated products. However, traders and investors should also consider the implications: Market Volatility: While derivatives can offer hedging, they can also amplify market movements. Regulatory Clarity: The regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies, particularly for XRP, continues to evolve. CME’s move might encourage further clarity but also means ongoing scrutiny. Learning Curve: Understanding futures options requires a certain level of financial literacy, which new entrants to the crypto market may need to develop. These products offer sophisticated tools for managing exposure and speculating on price movements, but they demand a careful approach. What’s Next for the Crypto Market with CME SOL XRP Futures? The reported launch of CME SOL XRP futures options is more than just a new product offering; it represents a significant milestone in the ongoing convergence of traditional finance and the digital asset space. It underscores the growing maturity of the cryptocurrency market and its increasing integration into global financial systems. As institutional interest continues to surge, we can anticipate further innovation and a broader range of regulated products for other altcoins. This development is poised to offer sophisticated tools for investors and traders, potentially stabilizing market dynamics while simultaneously introducing new avenues for growth and investment. The crypto market is evolving rapidly, and CME’s latest initiative is a clear indicator of this exciting trajectory. To learn more about the latest crypto market trends, explore our article on key developments shaping the cryptocurrency market institutional adoption. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) What is the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME)? The CME is one of the world’s largest and most diverse derivatives marketplaces, offering a wide range of futures and options products across various asset classes, including equities, commodities, and now, expanding into specific cryptocurrencies. What are futures options in the context of SOL and XRP? Futures options for SOL and XRP are financial contracts that give the holder the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell SOL or XRP futures contracts at a predetermined price on or before a specific date. They allow for hedging and speculation on price movements. Why are Solana (SOL) and Ripple (XRP) chosen for these new options? SOL and XRP were likely chosen due to their significant market capitalization, established liquidity, and distinct use cases within the crypto ecosystem, making them attractive for institutional-grade derivative products. How might CME SOL XRP futures options affect the prices of SOL and XRP? The introduction of these options could lead to increased liquidity and institutional participation, potentially influencing price discovery and stability. However, like all derivatives, they can also contribute to market volatility. When are these CME SOL XRP futures options expected to launch? While Walter Bloomberg reported CME’s plans, an official launch date has not yet been publicly announced by CME. Market participants should monitor official CME channels for updates. If you found this article insightful, please consider sharing it with your network! Help us spread the word about the exciting developments in the crypto space by sharing this article on your social media platforms. This post Revolutionary: CME SOL XRP Futures Options Set to Transform Crypto Trading first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 00:45
Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC

Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC

The post Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Franklin Templeton CEO Jenny Johnson has weighed in on whether the Federal Reserve should make a 25 basis points (bps) Fed rate cut or 50 bps cut. This comes ahead of the Fed decision today at today’s FOMC meeting, with the market pricing in a 25 bps cut. Bitcoin and the broader crypto market are currently trading flat ahead of the rate cut decision. Franklin Templeton CEO Weighs In On Potential FOMC Decision In a CNBC interview, Jenny Johnson said that she expects the Fed to make a 25 bps cut today instead of a 50 bps cut. She acknowledged the jobs data, which suggested that the labor market is weakening. However, she noted that this data is backward-looking, indicating that it doesn’t show the current state of the economy. She alluded to the wage growth, which she remarked is an indication of a robust labor market. She added that retail sales are up and that consumers are still spending, despite inflation being sticky at 3%, which makes a case for why the FOMC should opt against a 50-basis-point Fed rate cut. In line with this, the Franklin Templeton CEO said that she would go with a 25 bps rate cut if she were Jerome Powell. She remarked that the Fed still has the October and December FOMC meetings to make further cuts if the incoming data warrants it. Johnson also asserted that the data show a robust economy. However, she noted that there can’t be an argument for no Fed rate cut since Powell already signaled at Jackson Hole that they were likely to lower interest rates at this meeting due to concerns over a weakening labor market. Notably, her comment comes as experts argue for both sides on why the Fed should make a 25 bps cut or…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:36

No Chart Skills? Still Profit

No Chart Skills? Still ProfitNo Chart Skills? Still Profit

Copy top traders in 3s with auto trading!