- Coinbase disputed the BIS assessment, saying stablecoins already enhance payments and cross-border transactions.
- The company argued fully reserved stablecoins differ from banks and operate under growing regulatory frameworks.
- Coinbase urged policymakers to focus on effective stablecoin regulation rather than questioning their role as money.
Coinbase publicly challenged the Bank for International Settlements’ latest assessment of stablecoins, arguing the institution mischaracterized their role and risks. In a policy blog published after the BIS Annual Economic Report, Coinbase Chief Policy Officer Faryar Shirzad said the BIS measured stablecoins against an ideal standard while comparing traditional finance against real-world performance. The response came as policymakers in the U.S., UK, and Europe continue developing digital asset frameworks.
Coinbase Challenges BIS Findings
According to Coinbase, the BIS report argued that stablecoins fail key monetary functions and could threaten financial stability if adoption grows. However, Coinbase disputed those conclusions point by point.
The company argued that stablecoins already address payment inefficiencies, particularly in cross-border transfers. To support its position, Coinbase cited adoption by major payment firms. The company noted that Visa and Mastercard now support stablecoin settlement initiatives.
It also highlighted Stripe’s acquisition of Bridge and Shopify’s rollout of USDC payments. As the discussion moved to usage, Coinbase challenged BIS estimates that described stablecoin activity as modest.
The company pointed to data showing approximately $390 billion in stablecoin payments during 2025. Coinbase added that business-to-business payments accounted for roughly $226 billion and grew 733% year over year.
Debate Centers On Regulation And Risk
Beyond adoption, Coinbase also rejected the BIS claim that stablecoins fail the “singleness of money” principle. The company argued that costs and pricing differences already exist throughout traditional payment systems.
According to Coinbase, those frictions do not prevent bank deposits from functioning as money. Attention then shifted to financial stability concerns. The BIS argued that stablecoins could create risks similar to those associated with banks.
Coinbase responded that fully reserved stablecoins differ from banks because they do not engage in maturity transformation, leverage, or credit creation. The company also disputed suggestions that stablecoins remain outside regulatory oversight.
Policy Differences Remain In Focus
According to Coinbase, regulatory frameworks now exist across several major jurisdictions. The company cited the U.S. GENIUS framework, the European Union’s MiCA rules, and the UK’s developing regime. Coinbase said these systems require reserve backing, asset segregation, supervision, and regular reporting.
Coinbase also challenged concerns that stablecoins could significantly reduce bank deposits or lending activity. The company referenced analyses from the White House Council of Economic Advisers, Charles River Associates, and economist Will Cong.
Faryar Shirzad said the disagreement reflects broader differences over the future of digital money. Meanwhile, Coinbase maintained that policymakers should focus on regulating stablecoins rather than questioning whether they can function as money.
