Core Points - The article discusses the recently enacted U.S. Stablecoin Act of 2025, which aims to regulate stablecoins and provide a framework for their development and integration into the financial system [2][3][10]. Summary by Sections Act Overview - The U.S. Stablecoin Act, also known as the GENIUS Act, consists of 16 articles that define key terms related to stablecoins and outline the regulatory framework for their issuance and management [3][4]. Definitions and Regulatory Bodies - Key definitions include digital assets, currency value, national currency, and payment stablecoins, clarifying that payment stablecoins are not considered national currency [3][4]. - The act designates regulatory bodies such as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve Board, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to oversee stablecoin activities [4]. Issuance and Compliance Requirements - Only licensed payment stablecoin issuers are permitted to issue stablecoins, with strict requirements for maintaining reserves at a minimum ratio of 1:1 [5][6]. - Monthly audits by registered public accounting firms are mandated to ensure compliance with disclosure and reserve requirements [5]. Consumer Protection and Bankruptcy Provisions - The act includes provisions for consumer protection, ensuring that holders of stablecoins have priority claims in the event of issuer bankruptcy [6][8]. Research and Reporting - The act mandates research on endogenous collateralized stablecoins and requires annual reports on the development of the stablecoin industry [7][8]. Legal Clarifications and International Cooperation - The act clarifies that payment stablecoins are neither securities nor commodities, amending several existing laws to reflect this [8][9]. - It encourages international cooperation by establishing reciprocal arrangements with jurisdictions that have similar stablecoin regulations [9]. Implications for Financial Innovation - The act highlights the importance of embracing financial technology innovations, particularly in the context of decentralized finance (DeFi) and Web 3.0 applications [10]. - It raises concerns about the risks associated with stablecoins and emphasizes the need for trust in central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) as a more stable alternative [10][11]. Call for International Monetary Reform - The article advocates for reforms in the international monetary system, suggesting that the stablecoin market could drive changes towards a more equitable global financial framework [11].

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. government is pushing for a regulatory framework for stablecoins, exemplified by the proposed "Genius Act," which aims to diminish the Federal Reserve's influence and establish a digital payment system independent of it [1][3][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Framework - The "Genius Act" defines stablecoins as "payment stablecoins," which must be pegged to a fixed currency value and require issuers to hold compliant reserves equivalent to the amount of stablecoins issued [1]. - Issuers of stablecoins are obligated to redeem or repurchase at a fixed amount, ensuring that stablecoins function as digital tokens of legal tender [1]. Group 2: Comparison with China - The U.S. approach contrasts with China's strategy, which integrates the government, central bank, fiat currency, and stablecoins into a unified system, while the U.S. seeks to marginalize the Federal Reserve and empower the government [3]. - The U.S. aims to create a digital payment system that is not constrained by the Federal Reserve, reflecting a significant shift in power dynamics between the government and the central bank [3]. Group 3: Implications for Dollar Dominance - The initiative is perceived as an attempt to accelerate the digitization of the dollar and reinforce its dominance in the global payment system [2]. - Experts express concerns that this move could help the U.S. secure a leading position in the digital payment landscape, although there are counterarguments suggesting that it will not alter the fundamental dynamics of dollar hegemony [3].