The GENIUS Act fixes reserve-transparency risks for stablecoins but, the author argues, bakes in centralized oversight and control that resemble a central bank digital currency. By tightly defining reserves and issuer obligations, it enables policy levers over transactions and redemption that undercut the original decentralization pitch.
— This reframes crypto regulation as a backdoor path to CBDC-like control, raising broad questions about financial freedom, surveillance, and how the state governs private money.
Paul H. Kupiec
2025.10.13
62% relevant
Both analyze the GENIUS Act’s redesign of stablecoins; this article adds that Congress historically taxed private notes and could tax stablecoins 'out of existence,' highlighting sovereignty and funding angles that complement the existing argument about centralized control resembling a CBDC.
James Farquharson
2025.09.16
78% relevant
Chinese economists interpret the U.S. GENIUS Act as Washington asserting centralized control over crypto while formally barring a Fed CBDC—echoing the idea that stablecoin regimes can function like a CBDC‑adjacent control architecture.
Tyler Cowen
2025.09.07
62% relevant
Cowen’s observation—regulators doubt they can make fully reserved stablecoins 'safe' while insisting the fractional banking system is 'under control'—echoes the tendency to justify heavy oversight that makes stablecoins functionally resemble centralized CBDC-like systems.
Leonidas Zelmanovitz
2025.09.04
100% relevant
Senate Bill 1582 (GENIUS Act), signed July 18, 2025, which the author says 'incorporate[s] the most damaging economic attributes of a CBDC.'