The Bank of England’s proposal to cap stablecoin holdings has ignited fierce opposition from cryptocurrency industry leaders, who warn that restrictive limits would harm UK savers, undermine the City’s competitiveness, and stall financial innovation. As global stablecoin market capitalization reaches $293 billion, this regulatory clash highlights a fundamental divergence in how major economies are approaching the integration of digital assets into mainstream finance.
- Proposed caps would limit individual stablecoin holdings to £10,000-£20,000 and business holdings to £10 million in the UK
- US banking groups warn yield-bearing stablecoins could potentially siphon $6.6 trillion from traditional deposits under current proposals
- Industry experts argue stablecoins are already being integrated by traditional banks like BBVA into their trading services
The BoE's Controversial Proposal
The Bank of England’s consultation paper, first introduced in 2023 and now moving toward implementation, proposes strict limits on stablecoin holdings that would cap individual users at £10,000-£20,000 and businesses at approximately £10 million. These restrictions specifically target ‘systemic stablecoins’—those widely used for payments in the UK or likely to achieve that status. Central bankers argue these measures are necessary to prevent massive outflows from traditional bank deposits, which could potentially threaten credit supply and overall financial stability.
According to BoE officials, the caps represent a precautionary approach to emerging financial technologies that could disrupt the existing banking ecosystem. The concern stems from the possibility that savers might move significant portions of their deposits into stablecoins, particularly those offering yield, thereby reducing the capital available for traditional lending. This conservative stance reflects deeper anxieties about maintaining control over monetary policy and financial stability in an increasingly digital economy.
Industry Backlash and Competitive Concerns
The crypto industry has responded with vehement opposition, led by major players like Coinbase. Tom Duff Gordon, vice-president of international policy at the exchange, told the Financial Times that ‘imposing caps on stablecoins is bad for UK savers, bad for the City and bad for sterling.’ Industry leaders emphasize that no other major jurisdiction has implemented similar restrictions, putting the UK at a competitive disadvantage precisely when digital asset innovation is accelerating globally.
Will Beeson, Founder and CEO of Uniform Labs, reinforced this perspective, noting that ‘the genie is out of the bottle—stablecoins are already being used by millions globally, with hundreds of billions in circulation.’ He warned that artificial limits risk pushing users toward self-custody or offshore options rather than keeping activity within the UK’s regulated financial system. For many users, stablecoins represent not just a payments innovation but in some markets a superior savings product, making restrictive measures particularly damaging to consumer choice and financial inclusion.
Behrin Naidoo, founder of Neutrl Labs, characterized the proposal as ‘reflexive regulation in response to the rapid growth of stablecoins and synthetic dollars.’ He cautioned that such limits would ‘dampen stablecoin development and stall financial innovation in the UK,’ potentially pushing capital to other financial centers at a pivotal moment in the evolution of digital finance.
Global Regulatory Divergence
The UK’s approach stands in stark contrast to recent developments in the United States, where Congress passed the GENIUS Act in July, creating a comprehensive licensing and reserve framework for stablecoin issuers without imposing holding limits. This regulatory divergence highlights fundamentally different philosophies about how to manage the integration of digital assets into traditional financial systems.
However, even in jurisdictions without caps, concerns about stability risks persist. U.S. banking groups warned Congress that the GENIUS Act contained potential loopholes that could allow yield-bearing stablecoins to siphon trillions from traditional deposits. A Treasury report from April estimated potential outflows could reach $6.6 trillion if stablecoins were permitted to offer interest, representing a significant threat to credit markets and traditional banking operations.
Integration vs. Restriction: The Path Forward
Industry experts argue that rather than imposing restrictive caps, regulators should focus on integrating stablecoins into the existing financial framework. Naidoo pointed to institutions like BBVA that have already found ways to incorporate stablecoins such as USDC into their trading services, suggesting that ‘rather than undermining banks, these instruments will be integrated into their business models.’
The debate occurs against the backdrop of remarkable growth in the stablecoin sector, with global market capitalization reaching $293 billion according to CoinGecko, and analysts projecting the sector could eventually scale into the trillions. This growth trajectory mirrors earlier projections for other crypto innovations like NFTs and the metaverse, though stablecoins’ utility as payment and settlement instruments suggests more fundamental staying power.
As the Bank of England moves forward with its consultation process, the outcome will likely set a precedent for how other jurisdictions approach stablecoin regulation. The decision represents a balancing act between financial stability concerns and the competitive imperative to embrace financial innovation, with significant implications for the future of sterling in an increasingly digital global economy.
📎 Related coverage from: decrypt.co