At the recent Jackson Hole summit, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) expressed firm opposition to stablecoins as a universal payment method. Pablo Hernández de Cos, its General Manager, subjected these digital assets to a rigorous examination based on four pillars: unity of value, liquidity elasticity, cross-network interoperability, and financial integrity. According to the institution, stablecoins consistently fail to meet these requirements, creating systemic risks primarily due to their volatility on secondary markets and their lack of direct connection to central bank mechanisms.
In direct contrast to this assessment, the BIS highlights tokenized deposits as the ideal institutional alternative. This model relies on recording traditional bank funds on distributed ledgers, ensuring final settlement in central bank money. The major advantage emphasized by the organization is the preservation of the existing financial structure, thereby avoiding the short-term interest rate pressures that could be triggered by massive Treasury bond redemptions by stablecoin issuers. However, this technology remains theoretical for now, as no large-scale interoperable ecosystem is yet operational.
While the international authority refines its doctrine, Wall Street giants like JPMorgan are adopting a hybrid strategy. Rather than choosing between decentralized innovation and a traditional banking framework, these institutions are actively working on deploying their own solutions. Entities such as Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Santander are exploring the creation of shared digital assets to facilitate cross-border transactions, illustrating a determination not to surrender the stablecoin space to independent private issuers.
The stakes of this opposition highlight a deep geographical divide regarding the management of the financial future. While the United States appears to favor a private-sector-led approach — supported by legislation like the GENIUS Act — Europe, driven by the European Central Bank, is betting on the development of public on-chain infrastructures. This divergence illustrates the desire of regulators to take control of the technological "plumbing" of cryptocurrencies to modernize the current monetary system, while neutralizing the risks associated with private tokens that have historically escaped their direct oversight.