A major policy showdown is unfolding in the United States as The White House hosts high-level discussions between traditional banking leaders and crypto industry giants. At the center of the debate is one crucial question: should users be allowed to earn yields on their stablecoins, or should these rewards be restricted to protect the traditional banking system? On one side, major Wall Street banks are pushing for strict limits — or even a complete ban — on stablecoin interest programs. Their concern is that attractive crypto yields could trigger massive capital movement away from banks, potentially leading to what some estimate as a multi-trillion-dollar deposit outflow. From their perspective, stablecoin rewards threaten financial stability and weaken the traditional lending system. On the other side, leading crypto companies such as Coinbase and Ripple are strongly defending yield-bearing stablecoins. They argue that offering 3.5% to 5% returns empowers users, promotes financial inclusion, and represents healthy innovation. According to the industry, banning these rewards would slow Web3 development and push innovation offshore. The urgency is increasing, as the U.S. administration has reportedly set a March 1 deadline to reach common ground under the proposed CLARITY Act framework. This timeline puts pressure on lawmakers, regulators, banks, and crypto firms to find a balanced solution that protects consumers without killing innovation. This decision could redefine how passive income works in the digital economy. If stablecoin yields are restricted, many users may lose access to one of crypto’s safest earning tools. If they are allowed, banks may be forced to compete more aggressively by improving their own savings products. Either way, the outcome will reshape the future of digital finance. At its core, this debate is about control versus innovation. Should governments prioritize protecting legacy financial institutions, or should they support builders who are creating new financial systems? The answer will influence how millions of people save, invest, and earn in Web3. 💬 Your Turn: Do you think people should be allowed to earn interest on stablecoins? Should governments protect banks — or empower users and innovators? Let’s discuss below 👇
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
2 Likes
Reward
2
2
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
repanzal
· 6h ago
thanks for sharing information with us .great work
#WhiteHouseTalksStablecoinYields 🏛️ The Battle Over Stablecoin Rewards in Washington 💰⚖️
A major policy showdown is unfolding in the United States as The White House hosts high-level discussions between traditional banking leaders and crypto industry giants. At the center of the debate is one crucial question: should users be allowed to earn yields on their stablecoins, or should these rewards be restricted to protect the traditional banking system?
On one side, major Wall Street banks are pushing for strict limits — or even a complete ban — on stablecoin interest programs. Their concern is that attractive crypto yields could trigger massive capital movement away from banks, potentially leading to what some estimate as a multi-trillion-dollar deposit outflow. From their perspective, stablecoin rewards threaten financial stability and weaken the traditional lending system.
On the other side, leading crypto companies such as Coinbase and Ripple are strongly defending yield-bearing stablecoins. They argue that offering 3.5% to 5% returns empowers users, promotes financial inclusion, and represents healthy innovation. According to the industry, banning these rewards would slow Web3 development and push innovation offshore.
The urgency is increasing, as the U.S. administration has reportedly set a March 1 deadline to reach common ground under the proposed CLARITY Act framework. This timeline puts pressure on lawmakers, regulators, banks, and crypto firms to find a balanced solution that protects consumers without killing innovation.
This decision could redefine how passive income works in the digital economy. If stablecoin yields are restricted, many users may lose access to one of crypto’s safest earning tools. If they are allowed, banks may be forced to compete more aggressively by improving their own savings products. Either way, the outcome will reshape the future of digital finance.
At its core, this debate is about control versus innovation. Should governments prioritize protecting legacy financial institutions, or should they support builders who are creating new financial systems? The answer will influence how millions of people save, invest, and earn in Web3.
💬 Your Turn:
Do you think people should be allowed to earn interest on stablecoins?
Should governments protect banks — or empower users and innovators?
Let’s discuss below 👇