Blue background with stablecoins

getty

After a turbulent stretch in the crypto markets, one trend has held steady through the pullback: demand for dollar-backed stablecoins. As traders de-risk, capital has flowed back into assets perceived as safer and more predictable, even as volatility has pushed many altcoins to new cycle lows. The timing is noteworthy because it coincides with the most significant policy shift the United States has ever made on stablecoins. For the first time, the rules governing how dollar-backed digital assets must operate are becoming clear.

With the GENIUS Act advancing through Congress, the CLARITY Act defining regulatory boundaries, and the rescission of SAB 121 removing a major barrier for banks holding digital assets, the United States is finally stepping into the role of a primary architect of stablecoin policy. A new policy analysis from security firm CertiK outlines why this moment represents a turning point. The era of broad principles is ending. The era of detailed requirements, enforceable oversight, and institutional expectations has begun.

The U.S. Rulebook Arrives

And SAB 121, a controversial accounting bulletin that effectively prevented U.S. banks from offering digital asset custody, has now been rescinded by congressional vote.

Combined, these actions create the most favorable environment stablecoin issuers have ever had in the United States. For the first time, the rules of the game are not implied but written down.

“The new U.S. stablecoin framework moves the sector past broad principles and into bank-level expectations,” says CertiK CEO Prof. Ronghui Gu. “The issuers that thrive will be the ones already operating with mature, institutional-grade infrastructure, particularly around reserves and transparency.”

Gu points out that the requirements shift the model toward safety over yield. One hundred percent backing with highly liquid assets and strict limits on how reserves can be used will challenge issuers relying on riskier instruments or thin operational controls. Monthly independent audits and continuous reconciliation further raise that bar. These are the kinds of obligations that mirror traditional financial institutions rather than crypto-native companies.

The U.S.–EU Split Will Reshape Liquidity

As the United States builds a federal framework, Europe is charting its own path under MiCA, which imposes caps on stablecoin issuance and strict rules on e-money tokens intended to protect euro monetary sovereignty.

The CertiK report argues that this divergence will create a structural split in global liquidity. The United States is positioning USD stablecoins as a strategic export, while Europe is prioritizing containment and domestic oversight. Gu describes the emerging picture clearly: “We are entering a phase where U.S. and EU frameworks are taking distinctly different paths. The U.S. federal regime positions USD-backed stablecoins as a strategic asset. Meanwhile, MiCA is built around protecting Euro monetary sovereignty.”

The result is a two-track world. Global issuers will need separate reserve models, custody arrangements, and operational playbooks to comply with both regimes simultaneously. Only the most well-capitalized issuers will be able to scale across jurisdictions without sacrificing liquidity or operational resilience. Smaller issuers may find themselves constrained geographically or forced into partnerships with licensed entities.

This is one of the main competitive shifts the report identifies: regulation will not merely define who can issue stablecoins. It will define who can issue them globally.

The Next Frontier: Operational and Security Maturity

Regulatory clarity removes the uncertainty that has held back institutions from deeper participation. But in CertiK’s analysis, the disappearance of regulatory ambiguity reveals a different bottleneck that many issuers have underestimated: operational maturity.

“As regulatory uncertainty recedes, the competitive frontier becomes operational,” Gu says. “The most underestimated challenges sit at the infrastructure layer.”

One example highlighted in the report is the GENIUS Act’s requirement for on-chain role-based access controls. Issuers must implement a lawful “freezer” role, backed by hardware security modules, multi-signature governance, and continuous monitoring. The challenge is not adding a freezer function. The challenge is securing it. A compromised operator cannot be allowed to freeze or drain assets.

Issuers entering a federally supervised environment must be prepared for SOC-level controls, audited incident response plans, and standardized service-level agreements. Add to this the AML layer, which increasingly requires automated sanctions screening, clustering analytics, and cross-chain tracking for suspicious behavior.

This kind of infrastructure is no longer optional. It is the cost of competing in a regulated market where institutions will allocate billions through the most compliant issuers.

The Competition Begins

For years, regulators were viewed as the main obstacle to stablecoin adoption. That is no longer the case. The United States now has a functional rulebook. Europe has MiCA. Many Asian jurisdictions are modernizing their own frameworks. The question is no longer whether stablecoins will be regulated but how issuers will compete under regulation.

Stablecoins have moved into an era where trust is earned the same way it is in traditional finance: by demonstrating that operational, cybersecurity, and compliance systems can withstand institutional scrutiny. This is the shift the CertiK report captures. Regulatory clarity does not level the playing field. It tilts it toward the issuers most prepared for oversight.

The boom is coming, but not for everyone. The winners will be the issuers that treat stablecoins not as crypto products but as financial instruments. And in the new regulated environment, that is exactly what they are.