DeutschThe conflict between the traditional banking system and the crypto industry is intensifying further in the US. Once again, the central question is whether stablecoins will be allowed to pay out interest or rewards in the future. While policymakers are wrestling with a solution in the so-called Clarity Act, the banking lobby is now going on the offensive—with pointed criticism of Washington.
Bitvavo, one of the leading exchanges from Europe (Netherlands) with a large selection of cryptocurrencies. PayPal deposit possible. Limited time offer: €20 bonus when you sign up via CoinPro.ch
The American Bankers Association (ABA), one of the most influential lobbying organizations in the US financial industry, has recently pushed back against current assessments coming from the White House. Specifically, it concerns a report suggesting that a ban on stablecoin yields would have only limited effects on traditional bank lending.
Clarity Act stalled: This crypto dispute is dividing the US
Banks see it fundamentally differently. In its statement, the ABA warns against a misguided perspective in the political debate. In essence, it says the focus should not be on what banks would gain or lose from a ban, but rather on how much capital could shift if stablecoin yields are allowed.
The lobby group is particularly explicit about its concern over so-called “deposit outflows.” This refers to the risk that deposits could move from the traditional banking system into digital stablecoins if attractive yields are possible there. According to the ABA, this could hit smaller regional banks in particular, whose funding depends heavily on traditional deposits.
Related: CLARITY Act on ice: Is the US’s key crypto bill failing?
The statement notes that such a capital outflow would not only change banks’ cost structures. Local lending markets could also come under pressure. The argument is that if there are fewer stable deposits, banks could provide fewer loans to businesses and households.
Stablecoin debate heats up
In a report, the White House had previously suggested that a ban on stablecoin interest would have only a limited effect on lending volume. Specifically, it mentioned potential additional credit growth of around $2.1 billion. For banks, however, this assessment doesn’t go far enough.
The ABA criticizes such calculations for not adequately accounting for structural shifts in the financial system. It’s not just about absolute lending figures, but about the stability of the deposit base and the long-term functioning of regional credit markets. This leaves the political dispute over the Clarity Act still deadlocked. While the crypto industry is pushing for clear rules and more leeway for stablecoins, the banking lobby warns of a gradual erosion of the traditional financial system.
Also interesting: Grayscale drops 10 altcoins from its crypto list
The debate increasingly shows that it’s no longer just about technical details of stablecoins, but about a fundamental power struggle within the financial system. Who will control customer deposits in the future—banks or digital dollar alternatives? As long as this question remains unanswered, regulation will remain blocked as well. And it’s precisely this conflict that is keeping the US crypto market waiting for a political decision that seems long overdue—but is becoming ever more complex. (mck)
