Congress locks down stablecoin issuance—but leaves the door open for regulatory capture.

What it does

This bill creates a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins—digital assets pegged to national currencies. It requires that only approved issuers (banks, credit unions, or federally-chartered nonbank entities) may issue stablecoins, mandates 1-to-1 reserve backing, monthly public disclosure of reserves, and compliance with anti-money-laundering and sanctions laws. State regulators may also approve issuers under certified regimes. The bill bars unauthorized issuers and imposes civil and criminal penalties for violations, including up to $100,000 per day for unlicensed issuance and up to 20 years imprisonment for false certification of reserves.

Why we flagged it

The bill establishes a comprehensive federal licensing and prudential regime for payment stablecoin issuers, creating a new regulatory category and approval process. It is fundamentally a financial regulation bill, not a deregulation or subsidy measure.

What the text implies

• The 18-month transition period may force existing stablecoin users to migrate to approved issuers or abandon holdings, creating market disruption and potential consumer harm if approved alternatives are not ready.
• Federal preemption of State law for approved nonbank issuers (Section 5) may eliminate State consumer protections and create a regulatory race-to-the-bottom if Federal standards are weaker than State regimes.
• The 'deemed approved' provision (Section 5(3)) creates an incentive for regulators to delay decisions indefinitely to avoid approving applications they oppose, since silence = approval after 120 days.
• Nonbank stablecoin issuers regulated by the Comptroller are subject to less stringent capital and liquidity rules than banks, potentially creating competitive advantage for nonbank entrants and systemic risk concentration.
• The bill does not explicitly prohibit stablecoin issuers from engaging in lending or other financial activities beyond custody and issuance, creating potential for regulatory arbitrage and hidden leverage.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Citizens gain consumer protections through mandatory reserve backing, transparency requirements, and anti-fraud provisions that reduce systemic risk from stablecoin collapse. However, the framework restricts who may issue stablecoins, potentially limiting innovation and consumer choice, and the 18-month transition period may disrupt existing stablecoin users before alternatives are available.

Who stands to gain

• Federally-chartered banks and credit unions (existing regulatory relationships, lower compliance bur
• Nonbank fintech firms seeking stablecoin licenses (new market entry opportunity)
• Custody and settlement service providers (increased demand for compliant infrastructure)
• Compliance and audit firms (new regulatory requirements drive consulting demand)

Named in the bill

Federal Reserve Board, Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, Secretary of the Treasury, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Office of Foreign Assets Control, State payment stablecoin regulators, Insured depository institutions, Federal credit unions, Nonbank entities, Investment Company Act of 1940 — and 3 more

Where it stands

17 cosponsors: 13 Republicans, 4 Democrats.

• Mar 26, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Mar 26, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Financial Services · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services”
• Apr 2, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
• Apr 2, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 32 - 17”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

37 lobbying clients named this bill on 53 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $25,092,637 in lobbying spend. A filing names 3 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 98% of bills with at least one filing.

Bryan Steil, the sponsor, reported $1,735,700 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle. $19,000 of that came from 3 PACs tied to these lobbying clients.

• American Bankers Association — $5,210,000 on 2 filings
• Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association — $5,090,000 on 2 filings
• American Association for Justice — $3,610,000 on 2 filings
• Consumer Bankers Association — $2,000,000 on 2 filings
• Wells Fargo & Company — $1,390,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.