Merz and Macron Are Right. The Internet of Value Needs Global Stablecoin Alignment
The post Merz and Macron Are Right. The Internet of Value Needs Global Stablecoin Alignment appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. When French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently unveiled their joint economic agenda at the Franco-German Council of Ministers, one proposal stood out: pursuing collaboration and equivalence regimes with third countries in the field of crypto-asset regulation. It was a recognition that digital money, like data, does not stop at borders. And it was a timely reminder that stablecoins — the fastest-growing part of digital finance and crypto — will only fully succeed if regulators match their borderless design with cross-border collaboration. Stablecoins: A Payments Upgrade, Not Just a Crypto Tool Stablecoins are internet-native money: always on, borderless, programmable and available to anyone with a smartphone. Unlike traditional payment rails, they don’t close on weekends, don’t rely on complex correspondent banking networks and can move value between Bangkok and Boston in seconds. In many ways, they are the first serious upgrade to cross-border payments since SWIFT in the 1970s. Where SWIFT was a messaging network innovation to connect counterparty banks, stablecoins marry messaging with settlement to create a payments innovation breakthrough. But their value proposition depends on being global. A patchwork of divergent national rulebooks would turn the “internet of value” into fragmented payment intranets — undermining the very efficiency and accessibility that make stablecoins transformative. Converging Principles, Different Paths The good news: the world’s leading regulatory frameworks for stablecoins — Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) and America’s GENIUS Act — already share the same foundation. Both require full 1:1 reserves in high-quality liquid assets, redemption at par, regular public reporting and strict governance, risk and anti-money laundering (AML) standards. Both allow issuance by banks and non-banks alike. There are, of course, differences. GENIUS imposes tighter reserve rules (limited to short-dated Treasuries and reverse repos), while MiCA allows a broader mix, including longer-duration government bonds or…
The post Merz and Macron Are Right. The Internet of Value Needs Global Stablecoin Alignment appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com.
When French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently unveiled their joint economic agenda at the Franco-German Council of Ministers, one proposal stood out: pursuing collaboration and equivalence regimes with third countries in the field of crypto-asset regulation. It was a recognition that digital money, like data, does not stop at borders. And it was a timely reminder that stablecoins — the fastest-growing part of digital finance and crypto — will only fully succeed if regulators match their borderless design with cross-border collaboration. Stablecoins: A Payments Upgrade, Not Just a Crypto Tool Stablecoins are internet-native money: always on, borderless, programmable and available to anyone with a smartphone. Unlike traditional payment rails, they don’t close on weekends, don’t rely on complex correspondent banking networks and can move value between Bangkok and Boston in seconds. In many ways, they are the first serious upgrade to cross-border payments since SWIFT in the 1970s. Where SWIFT was a messaging network innovation to connect counterparty banks, stablecoins marry messaging with settlement to create a payments innovation breakthrough. But their value proposition depends on being global. A patchwork of divergent national rulebooks would turn the “internet of value” into fragmented payment intranets — undermining the very efficiency and accessibility that make stablecoins transformative. Converging Principles, Different Paths The good news: the world’s leading regulatory frameworks for stablecoins — Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) and America’s GENIUS Act — already share the same foundation. Both require full 1:1 reserves in high-quality liquid assets, redemption at par, regular public reporting and strict governance, risk and anti-money laundering (AML) standards. Both allow issuance by banks and non-banks alike. There are, of course, differences. GENIUS imposes tighter reserve rules (limited to short-dated Treasuries and reverse repos), while MiCA allows a broader mix, including longer-duration government bonds or…
What's Your Reaction?
