BIS Chief Douses Stablecoin Hype: Not a Scalable Payment Tool, Reigniting Regulatory vs. Market Tensions

Agustín Carstens, General Manager of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), recently stated that stablecoins are not a credible means of scalable payment. According to Reuters, Carstens argued in a speech that stablecoins lack the trust and governance frameworks needed to support everyday payments in large economies, raising doubts about their scalability and reliability. The remarks directly counter the optimistic expectations held by the crypto market and payment industry, and draw a regulatory red line for practitioners seeking to embed stablecoins into emerging scenarios such as machine-to-machine payments and AI-agent settlements.

Carstens' comments are not an isolated case. The BIS, often described as the central bank for central banks, has long leaned toward a prudent, even conservative, stance. As early as 2023, the BIS published a report warning that stablecoin issuers could face run risks and that their operations depend heavily on the stability of the underlying blockchain networks. In his latest remarks, Carstens further emphasized that for stablecoins to become a mainstream payment tool, they must meet the same standards of safety, efficiency, and inclusivity as traditional payment systems—conditions that, in his view, are far from being met.

From the perspective of payment infrastructure, Carstens' skepticism zeroes in on stablecoins' governance deficiencies. Traditional payment systems, such as real-time gross settlement (RTGS) systems, rely on central bank credit backing and clear final settlement mechanisms. Stablecoin issuers, by contrast, are mostly private entities with varying levels of reserve transparency, audit standards, and redemption mechanisms. For cross-border settlements, especially those involving large sums, such uncertainty is fatal. The BIS's position effectively reminds the market that stablecoins' advantages in programmability and instant settlement cannot carry real-economy payment flows unless built on a credible governance foundation.

This stance is particularly relevant to the currently hot AI-agent payment sector. As payment giants like Stripe and PayPal begin to open stablecoin settlement capabilities to AI agents, the industry is actively exploring automated machine-to-machine payment processes. However, the BIS's cold water serves as a reminder: technical feasibility does not equal regulatory feasibility. When AI agents autonomously initiate payments, compliance judgments—who is paying, to whom, and whether the payment should occur—become far more complex. Without a credible governance framework for stablecoins, compliance infrastructure such as pre-settlement firewalls, Know Your Agent (KYA) identity verification, and Risk and Permission (RAP) standards for agent payments would lack a reliable anchor.

Carstens' remarks may also influence the pace of regulatory sandboxes. Jurisdictions including Singapore, Hong Kong, and the EU are currently exploring stablecoin regulatory frameworks, but the BIS's public rejection could prompt some central banks to proceed more cautiously, especially regarding allowing stablecoins into retail payment or large-value clearing systems. For payment service providers (PSPs) and stablecoin issuers, this could mean higher compliance costs and a longer market education cycle.

Despite this, market enthusiasm for stablecoins has not waned. Issuers like Circle (USDC) and Tether continue to expand their businesses and partner with traditional financial institutions to enhance reserve transparency. Circle, for instance, has announced collaborations with several global banks to improve USDC's liquidity and audit visibility. This tug-of-war between regulatory arbitrage and compliance catch-up is precisely the current reality of the stablecoin ecosystem.

For OceanAlt's focus on agent payment compliance and security, the BIS's stance provides an important external perspective: no matter how technology evolves, the ultimate anchor of trust in payment systems remains governance and legal frameworks. If stablecoins are to become truly scalable payment tools, they must deliver verifiable solutions in reserve audits, final settlement, and cross-border regulatory coordination. Otherwise, even if AI agents can settle transactions in a second, the underlying compliance risks could bring down the entire transaction chain in an instant.

---

Source: Reuters · https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMisgFBVV95cUxPRnRMdWlYZ3VXdTdSS0NWWi04QjVRbkpmSG5STFd1dUgtNl9tUWVkcVVGd0xOMU9oRHdlVnNDa2ZFWHdJSXIzQUpkSmNiZnpDTW5wbktodk52Ukprd3cyMDlfMmRvdlVJVDFNdFFWS2UyTGFjdUVKMWVoVmVlVEZHVHplZjYybHM4Q1NaVXlmcHh3VjBqSVVoZDhpZGdiN2xiRnd4QUFMWnNGZGtzaXhOU1N3?oc=5