Treasury tightens stablecoin rules
The U.S. Treasury proposed a principles-based rule for when a state stablecoin regime can count as “substantially similar” to federal standards, centring on reserve quality, supervision and compliance. In parallel it pushed an AML framework that would force permitted payment stablecoin issuers to maintain anti‑money‑laundering and sanctions controls, tightening the compliance perimeter for stablecoin infrastructure. (natlawreview.com)
Washington is drawing a line around dollar-backed crypto without banning it. On April 1, the U.S. Treasury proposed a rule saying a state can supervise a stablecoin issuer only if its regime is “substantially similar” to the federal one, and comments run until June 2, 2026. (federalregister.gov) A stablecoin is a digital token that promises a fixed value, usually $1, and the whole system works only if users believe they can redeem that token on demand. The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act of 2025 created the basic federal rulebook for those issuers. (congress.gov 1) (congress.gov 2) That law kept a dual system instead of forcing every issuer into Washington. Under the statute, a state-qualified issuer with less than $10 billion in total outstanding stablecoins can stay under state supervision if Treasury decides the state’s rules match the federal framework closely enough. (congress.gov) (federalregister.gov) Treasury did not publish a checklist with 50 boxes to tick. It proposed broad principles instead, focused on reserve assets, capital and liquidity, redemption rights, risk management, supervision, and enforcement. (federalregister.gov) (govinfo.gov) The reserve piece is the core of it. If a stablecoin says one token equals one dollar, regulators want the backing assets to be high quality and easy to sell fast, so an issuer is not trying to meet redemptions with long-dated or risky bets. (govinfo.gov) (congress.gov) The supervision piece is about who can walk into the books. Treasury’s proposal says a state regime has to give regulators real examination, reporting, and enforcement powers, not just a license on day one and trust after that. (federalregister.gov) (natlawreview.com) Then Treasury added a second rule on April 10 aimed at crime controls. That proposal would treat permitted payment stablecoin issuers as financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy Act and would require anti-money-laundering and sanctions compliance programs, with comments due by June 9, 2026. (federalregister.gov) The Bank Secrecy Act is the U.S. law that makes banks build systems to spot suspicious transfers, keep records, and report certain activity to the government. Treasury is now proposing to bolt that same basic machinery onto stablecoin issuers instead of leaving them in a lighter-touch crypto category. (federalregister.gov) (congress.gov) This reaches past the token itself and into the plumbing around it. Treasury said the proposal would require issuers to maintain effective sanctions compliance programs as well, which means screening customers, blocking prohibited dealings, and building controls that can satisfy the Office of Foreign Assets Control. (federalregister.gov) (msn.com) Put together, the two proposals tell issuers they need two things at once: cash-like backing for redemptions and bank-like compliance for law enforcement. The first rule decides when a state can be trusted to police that standard, and the second rule says even approved issuers must run anti-crime controls as part of the cost of being a digital dollar business. (federalregister.gov 1) (federalregister.gov 2)
