For months, U.S. banks have been stuck in limbo over stablecoins. Congress laid out broad legal requirements, but lenders were left without a clear answer to a basic question: how, exactly, would issuing a stablecoin work inside the regulated banking system?
That uncertainty is beginning to ease. This week, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation quietly outlined how banks could start moving forward, marking one of the first concrete steps toward integrating payment stablecoins into traditional finance.
Key Takeaways
U.S. regulators are beginning to outline a practical path for banks to issue payment stablecoins.
The FDIC’s approach emphasizes tight oversight, reserve transparency, and risk containment rather than rapid adoption.
The move signals a shift from legislative uncertainty to hands-on regulatory integration of stablecoins into banking.
Rather than creating a blanket approval regime, the FDIC’s approach points to a controlled, case-by-case process. Banks would not issue stablecoins directly, but through subsidiaries designed specifically for that purpose.
Each application would be evaluated individually, with regulators focusing on whether the proposed activity fits within existing safety and soundness expectations. The emphasis is on containment – keeping stablecoin activity ring-fenced from core banking operations while still subjecting it to supervision.
The framework is still provisional and will undergo public consultation before any final rules take effect.
What Regulators Care About Most
The FDIC’s priorities are clear: reserves, transparency, and operational resilience. Any approved structure would need to demonstrate the ability to maintain strict reserve backing and publicly disclose what those reserves consist of.
Beyond that, regulators would examine capital planning, liquidity management, cybersecurity controls, compliance systems, and technology infrastructure. Management integrity is also a factor, with scrutiny on past criminal activity related to financial misconduct or cybercrime.
In short, stablecoins issued within banks are being treated less like crypto products and more like regulated payment instruments.
From Political Decision to Regulatory Reality
This shift follows the passage of the GENIUS Act earlier this year, which formally required stablecoin issuers to register and hold dollar-for-dollar reserves. With the political fight settled, the burden has now shifted to regulators to translate the law into workable oversight.
FDIC leadership has already hinted that this framework is only a starting point. Additional proposals, including prudential standards for certain issuers, are expected as agencies refine their approach and close remaining gaps.
A Separate Cleanup From the Banking Crisis Era
Alongside the stablecoin move, the FDIC also took action on an unrelated but symbolic issue: the cost of the 2023 banking rescues.
The agency voted to reduce future assessments tied to losses from the Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank failures, which had drained the Deposit Insurance Fund after regulators invoked a systemic-risk exception. Banks will see lower payments tied to that episode beginning in early 2026.
The adjustment signals a gradual return to normalcy after emergency-era interventions.
What This Really Signals
Taken together, the moves suggest that U.S. regulators are shifting from crisis response and legislative uncertainty toward long-term system design.
Stablecoins are no longer being treated as an external threat or a political talking point. Instead, they are being slowly absorbed into the existing banking framework – under rules that prioritize control, transparency, and institutional accountability.
For banks, the message is not that stablecoins are easy to issue. It is that, for the first time, there is a visible path forward.
