VanEck analyst, Matthew Sigel, criticized the US Treasury Department’s stance on stablecoins, calling it outdated and based on old academic views. He argued that the Treasury’s reliance on a single study by Gary Gorton and Jeffery Zhang promotes a biased narrative against stablecoins, ignoring the success of private currencies in other countries with proper regulations in place.
While the Treasury document acknowledged the potential of tokenization and stablecoins to revolutionize the financial sector, it also highlighted stability risks and the need for regulation, particularly concerning the reliance on Treasuries. Sigel countered this argument by pointing out that stablecoins have proven to operate securely under appropriate regulatory frameworks globally.
He disagreed with the comparison between 19th-century banknotes and modern stablecoins, emphasizing that the advancements in technology and transparency make today’s digital currencies far more stable and reliable. Sigel called for a more comprehensive, global perspective on stablecoins, urging US regulators to consider international experiences and embrace the opportunities presented by private digital currencies.
In conclusion, Sigel emphasized the importance of understanding the potential of stablecoins in the context of a digital global economy. He urged regulators to adopt a more inclusive approach that reflects the realities of interconnected financial systems worldwide. By broadening their perspective beyond US-centric views, regulators can better grasp the benefits and challenges of stablecoins and ensure a balanced and effective regulatory framework for the future.
