What Happens if All Stablecoin Users Have to Be Identified?

What Happens if All Stablecoin Users Have to Be Identified?

Imagine the following scenario: Sometime in 2021, financial regulators declare that all stablecoin owners must be verified. What would happen to the cryptocurrency ecosystem?

Right now, a large chunk of stablecoin usage is pseudonymous. That is, you or I can hold $20,000 worth of tether or USD coin stablecoins in an unhosted wallet (i.e., not on an exchange) without having to provide our identities to either Tether or Circle, the managers of these stablecoin platforms. We can send this $20,000 along to other users, who can transfer the coins on, who in turn can transfer them on, and no one along this chain needs to unveil themselves.

J.P. Koning, a CoinDesk columnist, worked as an equity researcher at a Canadian brokerage firm and a financial writer at a large Canadian bank. He runs the popular Moneyness blog.

The only point at which stablecoin users have to submit to a Tether or Circle know-your-customer (KYC) process is to redeem stablecoins directly for traditional bank dollars. Or vice versa, to deposit dollars with Tether or Circle and get freshly minted stablecoins.

Subscribe to , By signing up, you will receive emails about CoinDesk products and you agree to our terms & conditions and privacy policy

In a world where traditional non-blockchain based financial institutions like PayPal, Chase, and Zelle link all payments to names and addresses, stablecoin networks have become a rare moat of digital payments privacy. This has led to some fairly exotic uses for stablecoins.

In Moscow, Chinese gray market clothes vendors trade cash for tether to repatriate profits, writes CoinDesk’s Anna Baydakova. Ukrainian companies that import from Turkey use tether to skirt foreign exchange controls, and a multi-million Ponzi scheme relied on Paxos standard (PAX) for payments. Meanwhile, in the world of decentralized finance (DeFi), unidentifiable computer programs are conducting billions of dollars in unregulated financial transactions using USD coin and other stablecoins.

But will regulators allow this privacy moat to continue to exist? What if, at this very moment, officials working for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the U.S. Treasury’s money laundering watchdog, are plotting how to rein in stablecoin pseudonymity?

Let me speculate about how a potential unveiling might look.

FinCEN could rule that henceforth, if anyone wants to access tether, USD coin, or any other official stablecoin (TrueUSD, Paxos standard, Gemini dollar, Binance USD, HUSD) they will need to apply for a verified stablecoin account. That would mean providing photo ID, proof of address and other information to Tether, Circle or other issuers.

For many existing stablecoin owners, this won’t be a big deal. Professional arbitrageurs who use stablecoins to move value from one centralized exchange to another are probably already KYC’d. And retail clients who keep their stablecoins on an exchange like Binance wouldn’t see any changes because the exchange already verifies their identities anyways.

But given that every transfer would need to have names and addresses associated with it, an unveiling would certainly weigh on gray market uses such as the Chinese traders in Moscow.

With stablecoins getting bigger by the day, regulators probably can’t ignore the issue of pseudonymity forever.

The issuers themselves would be inconvenienced, too. Building infrastructure to collect and verify the identity of all users, and not just the few who redeem or deposit, is expensive. To recoup their costs, issuers like Tether and Circle may consider introducing fees. All of this could render stablecoins less accessible for people who only want to use them for casual remittances.

It is in the world of DeFi that the fallout of a stablecoin unveiling could be felt the most. Real people who own stablecoins can be easily identified. But in DeFi, stablecoins are often deposited into accounts controlled by bits of autonomous code, or smart contracts, which don’t have any underlying owner. It’s not evident how a stablecoin issuer can conduct KYC on a smart contract.

Maker, one of the most popular decentralized tools, contains $350 million USD coins in various user-created vaults. This hoard of stablecoins serves as collateral backing for dai, Maker’s decentralized stablecoin. Another $130 million USD coin is held in a Maker’s peg stability module smart contract. If all stablecoin owners must be identified, it’s not apparent who or what entity would have to undergo a KYC check for this $130 million.

Compound, another popular DeFi tool, currently holds $1.6 billion USD coin and $350 million tether. Lenders can deposit their stablecoins into Compound smart contracts and collect interest from borrowers who draw from the contracts.

Liquidity pools, smart contracts underpinning decentralized exchanges like Uniswap and Curve, also hold large amounts of stablecoins. Curve liquidity pools currently contain $1.25 billion worth USD coin and $450 million worth of tether.

See also: JP Koning – What Tether Means When It Says It’s ‘Regulated’

Under the strictest scenario, stablecoin issuers could be required to cut off any entity that can’t provide a verified name or address. Which means Curve, Maker, and Compound smart contracts would all be prevented from receiving stablecoins.

Given the ecosystem’s reliance on stablecoins, this would come close to breaking it. Compound, Curve and Uniswap might try to adapt by substituting FinCEN compliant stablecoins like USD coin with decentralized ones, say like Maker’s dai stablecoin. Because decentralized stablecoins don’t rely on traditional banks, they are less beholden to FinCEN dictat.

But remember, Maker relies on USD coin collateral to imbue dai with stability. If Maker, like Compound and Curve, can no longer hold USD coin, then dai itself would become less stable. And so the usability of Compound and other protocols relying on dai would suffer.

If we imagine a more dovish scenario, FinCEN might allow for a smart contract exemption. As long as stablecoins are held in a smart contract rather than an externally controlled account, then FinCEN would allow the stablecoin issuer to provide financial services to the smart contract. Much of DeFi could continue on as before.

This option provides a pretty big loophole for bad actors, though. The whole reason for requiring platforms to verify accounts is to prevent them moving illicit funds. If stablecoins held in smart contracts are exempt from KYC obligations, then enterprising individuals will move stablecoins to the smart contract layer and thus stimie FinCEN controls.

A middle-of-the-road scenario is that FinCEN exempts smart contracts from stablecoin KYC, but only if the smart contract itself verifies the identities of all addresses that interact with the contract. So Curve, in this case, would have to set up a customer due diligence program if it wanted to qualify to use stablecoins. Maker would have to vet all vault owners.

Under this scenario, we could imagine DeFi splitting into two. Purely decentralized protocols would avoid stablecoins altogether to avoid subjecting their users to KYC. Not-so-decentralized finance would start to verify users to maintain access to stablecoins.

There are many other potential scenarios. As you can see, this is a complex problem. If FinCEN is indeed exploring the question of stablecoin pseudonymity, I wouldn’t want to be the official tasked with trying to design an appropriate response. Too strict and DeFi may no longer function. Too light and DeFi will continue to pose a money laundering threat.

Canadian bank plans to launch CAD stablecoin

Today, Canada’s VersaBank announced plans to issue a Canadian dollar stablecoin VCAD, one-to-one backed by a Canadian dollar deposit at the bank. If you haven’t heard of the chartered bank before, it’s because it’s not Canada’s biggest, with a market capitalization of CAD 288 million ($229 million). The bank also wants to leverage its own “digital bank vault” technology created by its subsidiary DRT Cyber.

To issue the stablecoin, it has partnered with Stablecorp, a joint venture between crypto asset manager 3iQ and Mavennet. The latter is known for developing blockchain applications for enterprises such as steel and oil traceability for the Canadian and U.S. governments.

VersaBank doesn’t intend to deal with end-users directly. Instead, it will issue stablecoins to “financial intermediary partners” in exchange for Canadian dollar deposits. In turn, those intermediaries can offer the redeemable stablecoin to consumers and businesses.

“As North America’s first bank-issued “stablecoin”, VCAD offers consumers and businesses the ability to adopt and leverage the benefits of digital currency and blockchain-based assets without the volatility of traditional currencies, alongside the security of a value-backed asset that the cryptocurrency world has long demanded,” said David Taylor, President of both VersaBank and its cyber security subsidiary, DRT Cyber.

VersaBank and StableCorp also plan to offer VUS and VEuro stablecoins in future.

StabeCorp’s CEO Jean Desgagne is an accountant and Vice Chair of Ontario’s accounting body. He also chairs the internal audit committee for the IT Sector of the Province of Ontario. StableCorp already has its own stablecoin, the QCAD.

Meanwhile, JP Morgan is looking to ramp up its JPM Coin activities. To date, the JPM Coin would be classed more as a settlement token than a pure stablecoin in that it is used to convert part of a company’s bank balance into a coin for the purposes of payments, and converted back to a bank balance by the recipient. JPM Coin is also being used in an interbank multi-currency payments network being developed in Singapore.

xSigma Passes Security Audit and Prepares to Launch Stablecoin DEX With LP Rewards – Press release Bitcoin News

xSigma Passes Security Audit and Prepares to Launch Stablecoin DEX With LP Rewards

press release

PRESS RELEASE. February 24, 2021 – xSigma, a decentralized exchange for stablecoin swaps, has announced details of its launch program. The DEX, which supports liquid swaps between stablecoin pairs, will go live on February 24, having passed a third-party security audit.

Blockchain security company Hacken audited the xSigma smart contracts and found no critical errors in the code, green-lighting the Ethereum-based exchange to launch as scheduled. A second security audit is underway to give the xSigma community additional confidence in the code powering the AMM.

Backed by a NASDAQ-listed company, and developed by an experienced team that includes former Google engineers, xSigma has secured the support of several high profile backers. These include NBA star Dwight Howard, who has committed to participating in the xSigma launch as an early liquidity provider (LP).

LPs will earn double rewards for the first fortnight to incentivize adoption and ensure a liquid environment for executing stablecoin swaps with minimal slippage. Ahead of its launch, xSigma has created a detailed guide for liquidity providers, walking them through the process of LP’ing and staking their pool share tokens to earn SIG, the protocol’s native governance token.

In addition to providing LP rewards for pooled USDT, USDC, and DAI, xSigma will incentivize a Uniswap liquidity pool for ETH/SIG. The xSigma DEX is scheduled to launch on February 24 at 13:00 EST (18:00 UTC), ushering in a new era for efficient stablecoin swaps.

About xSigma

xSigma is a stablecoin DEX powered by a governance token that gives holders the right to determine how the protocol should be managed. Token-holders receive a percentage of all DEX fees, with team and LP tokens vested gradually for two years to align incentives between the platform and its community. xSigma is backed by its parent company ZK International Group, a NASDAQ-listed corporation.

This is a press release. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the promoted company or any of its affiliates or services. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in the press release.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons