The Battle Over Stablecoin Yield Is Reaching a Turning Point On Feb 19, 2026, the White House hosted its third closed-door meeting on stablecoin yields — bringing together: • Coinbase • Ripple • Major bank trade groups (ABA, ICBA) • Administration negotiators Sources describe the session as “productive” — but no final deal yet. The core issue remains explosive: 👉 Should Stablecoins Pay Yield? 💰 What’s at Stake? The stablecoin market now exceeds $300B, largely backed by U.S. Treasuries. If issuers like Circle (USDC) or Tether (USDT) offer 3–5% passive yield on idle balances, it changes everything. That moves stablecoins closer to bank deposits — without being regulated like banks. 🏦 Banks’ Position: “Protect the $18 Trillion Deposit System” Banks fear: • Deposit migration into higher-yielding stablecoins • Reduced lending capacity • Shadow banking expansion Their demand? ❌ Full prohibition on issuer-paid yield ❌ No loopholes They argue anything less risks destabilizing traditional credit markets. 🪙 Crypto’s Counterargument: Innovation & U.S. Leadership Crypto leaders respond: • Stablecoins are payment rails, not deposits • Yield increases adoption & liquidity • Bans push innovation offshore They warn that strict restrictions could weaken U.S. digital dollar dominance. 🏛️ Emerging Compromise: Activity-Based Rewards The White House appears to be steering toward a middle ground: ✅ Allow rewards tied to transactions, trading, DeFi activity ❌ Ban passive yield on idle balances Draft language reportedly focuses on rewards for “activities or transactions (not balances).” This could satisfy financial stability concerns while preserving user incentives. ⚖️ Legislative Pressure The debate is tied to two major bills: • GENIUS Act – restricts direct interest but leaves reward gray areas • CLARITY Act – defines SEC/CFTC roles; currently stalled Without compromise, broader crypto legislation could remain gridlocked. 📊 What This Means for Investors If Full Ban Wins: • No passive 4–5% yield on idle USDC • Exchanges end easy reward programs • Capital shifts into DeFi (higher risk) If Limited Rewards Pass: • Active users still earn • Platforms pivot toward engagement-based perks • Stablecoins remain growth-friendly If Pro-Yield Prevails: • Massive institutional inflows • Treasury-backed digital dollar expansion • Explosive adoption 🔥 Bottom Line (Feb 23, 2026) Three meetings complete. Progress made. Compromise increasingly likely. March 1 is shaping up as a key pressure point. This decision won’t just affect stablecoins — it could define U.S. crypto regulation for the next decade. Shadow banking risk… or fintech evolution? History is being negotiated behind closed doors. #Stablecoins #CryptoPolicy #DigitalDollar #USRegulation
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
#WhiteHouseTalksStablecoinYields 🇺🇸💵
The Battle Over Stablecoin Yield Is Reaching a Turning Point
On Feb 19, 2026, the White House hosted its third closed-door meeting on stablecoin yields — bringing together:
• Coinbase
• Ripple
• Major bank trade groups (ABA, ICBA)
• Administration negotiators
Sources describe the session as “productive” — but no final deal yet.
The core issue remains explosive:
👉 Should Stablecoins Pay Yield?
💰 What’s at Stake?
The stablecoin market now exceeds $300B, largely backed by U.S. Treasuries.
If issuers like Circle (USDC) or Tether (USDT) offer 3–5% passive yield on idle balances, it changes everything.
That moves stablecoins closer to bank deposits — without being regulated like banks.
🏦 Banks’ Position: “Protect the $18 Trillion Deposit System”
Banks fear:
• Deposit migration into higher-yielding stablecoins
• Reduced lending capacity
• Shadow banking expansion
Their demand?
❌ Full prohibition on issuer-paid yield
❌ No loopholes
They argue anything less risks destabilizing traditional credit markets.
🪙 Crypto’s Counterargument: Innovation & U.S. Leadership
Crypto leaders respond:
• Stablecoins are payment rails, not deposits
• Yield increases adoption & liquidity
• Bans push innovation offshore
They warn that strict restrictions could weaken U.S. digital dollar dominance.
🏛️ Emerging Compromise: Activity-Based Rewards
The White House appears to be steering toward a middle ground:
✅ Allow rewards tied to transactions, trading, DeFi activity
❌ Ban passive yield on idle balances
Draft language reportedly focuses on rewards for “activities or transactions (not balances).”
This could satisfy financial stability concerns while preserving user incentives.
⚖️ Legislative Pressure
The debate is tied to two major bills:
• GENIUS Act – restricts direct interest but leaves reward gray areas
• CLARITY Act – defines SEC/CFTC roles; currently stalled
Without compromise, broader crypto legislation could remain gridlocked.
📊 What This Means for Investors
If Full Ban Wins:
• No passive 4–5% yield on idle USDC
• Exchanges end easy reward programs
• Capital shifts into DeFi (higher risk)
If Limited Rewards Pass:
• Active users still earn
• Platforms pivot toward engagement-based perks
• Stablecoins remain growth-friendly
If Pro-Yield Prevails:
• Massive institutional inflows
• Treasury-backed digital dollar expansion
• Explosive adoption
🔥 Bottom Line (Feb 23, 2026)
Three meetings complete.
Progress made.
Compromise increasingly likely.
March 1 is shaping up as a key pressure point.
This decision won’t just affect stablecoins —
it could define U.S. crypto regulation for the next decade.
Shadow banking risk…
or fintech evolution?
History is being negotiated behind closed doors.
#Stablecoins #CryptoPolicy #DigitalDollar #USRegulation