Summarise the article with your AI
Here you can read:
Digital dollars (or euros, pounds, etc.) that live on blockchain networks instead of bank ledgers are what we call ‘Stablecoins’. They are typically backed 1:1 by cash and short-term government securities, which separates them from volatile cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. With stablecoins for treasury operations, what matters most: cross-border payments in USD or other currencies that often need two or more days for settlement, can now settle in minutes and run 24/7.
Stablecoins for corporate payments cut out correspondent banks that take fees at every hop or the payment chain. Yet there are some important considerations with Stablecoins in corporate treasury: ERPs mostly can't handle stablecoins yet, the regulatory frameworks are still evolving, and most treasury teams haven't dealt with private key management and other blockchain technicalities before.
What are stablecoins? A definition for finance teams
A stablecoin is a digital currency designed to maintain a 1:1 peg with a government-backed fiat currency like the US dollar or euro. It is quasi a digital representation of cash that lives on a blockchain rather than in a bank account or in a traditional electronic ledger.
There are also other shapes and forms of stablecoins, such as algorithmic stablecoins, which carry significantly higher risks, because they are not backed by cash equivalents. For corporate treasury operations, only fiat-backed stablecoins are relevant. Companies that issue these coins typicailly hold reserves of cash- or cash-like assets such as cash deposits with banks, government Treasury bills, and other cash equivalents that match or exceed the total value of stablecoins in circulation. In the US, there is now regulatory certainty around this matter; The GENIUS Act requires stablecoins to be backed one-for-one by US dollars or other low-risk assets.
The major issuers of US-denominated stablecoins are USDC (Circle) and USDT (Tether), which make up around 80% of the market.
So why use stablecoins instead of just holding dollars in a bank account? They blend the stability of fiat currency with blockchain's programmability and instant settlement. This means you can run near-instant payment flows that may take a few days with traditional banking infrastructure.
Why stablecoins aren't the same as crypto (and why that matters for treasury)
The word "crypto" quickly triggers anxious thoughts of Bitcoin's wild price swings, cybercriminals and speculative trading. But stablecoins are built for a different job.
They are moving under formal regulatory oversight that distinguishes them from speculative crypto tokens. Here’s the current status of regulation, that keeps evolving rapidly:
- United States: The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act signed July 2025 sets up federal oversight requiring payment stablecoins to be backed one-to-one by high-quality reserves, primarily US dollar cash deposits, Treasury bills, or cash equivalents.
- European Union: The MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation) forces stablecoin issuers to hold at least 30% of reserves as bank deposits, with full 100% (1-to-1) backing of issued value and to pass comprehensive licensing checks.
- United Kingdom: The FCA and Bank of England are building a regulatory framework for systemic stablecoins in UK payments, with rules expected later in 2026
| Feature | Traditional Crypto (Bitcoin, Ethereum etc.) | Fiat-Backed Stablecoins (USDC, USDT, etc.) |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Various like privacy, but most frequently a speculative investment | Payments and settlement |
| Volatility | High (10%+ daily swings not uncommon) | Minimal to none (designed for a 1:1 peg) |
| Backing | None (market-driven value) | 1:1 reserves in cash/Treasury bills and other cash equivalents |
| Regulatory status | Varies by jurisdiction | Increasingly regulated with bespoke regulation (GENIUS Act, MiCA) |
| Treasury use case | Not suitable for corporate treasury operations | Payment rails and settlement |
For treasury teams getting exposed to stablecoins, this regulatory shift matters. Stablecoins are not speculative crypto tokens. They are a novel payment rail that is increasingly getting the same regulatory oversight as traditional payment systems.
The real problem stablecoins solve in B2B payments
Stablecoins in treasury are really early, but use cases are emerging where they are increasingly adding real value, speed and cost savings to treasury operations, as cross-border payments are generally still slow, expensive, and not necessarily very transparent to end-users relative to domestic payments. Settlement, for example of sending USD to an APAC country, can take two or more days, with fees piling up through multiple intermediaries.
1. The correspondent banking fee problem
When sending money internationally, it rarely goes directly from a bank to the recipient's bank. Instead, it hops through a chain of so-called correspondent banks, each one adding fees and settlement delays.
These lengthy payment chains are ultimately passed along as additional costs to end users. Each hop with another correspondent bank in this chain adds cost, delays settlement, and requires pre-funding of nostro accounts.
Stablecoins, on the flipside, bypass this correspondent bank chain entirely. Funds move directly between sender and recipient on blockchain networks, settling in minutes with lower costs due to fewer intermediaries and real-time visibility into payment status.
2. The liquidity timing problem
Traditional banking runs on fixed schedules and doesn’t operate 24/7. Cut-off times force treasury teams to always hold liquidity buffers to ensure funds are available when needed.
Stablecoins run continuously and settlement doesn't stop for banking hours. Practically speaking, provided everything is timed precisely and you have real-time data access, this lets you run more efficient cash flow management by reducing trapped cash and rebalancing positions in real-time rather than waiting for the next banking window.
Where stablecoins are already working for corporate treasury
Research by EY-Parthenon found that 77% of respondents using stablecoins cite cross-border payments as their primary application. The benefits show up in the data: 41% of corporate users report cost savings of more than 10%, and settlement times drop from days to minutes.
Fast, low-cost cross-border supplier payments
The use case works particularly well in corridors with volatile currencies, limited banking infrastructure, or high remittance costs. Rather than routing payments through multiple correspondent banks, treasury teams can settle directly via global banking infrastructure that runs on stablecoin rails.
International payroll across multiple jurisdictions
Remote-first companies hiring global contractors face real friction paying across borders. Traditional payroll providers charge substantial fees for international disbursements, and settlement delays create cash flow problems for recipients.
Stablecoins let you pay contractors almost instantly across jurisdictions, with strong adoption in regions with high digital wallet penetration like Latin America, Eastern Europe, and Southeast Asia.
Instant inter-entity liquidity transfers
Multinational corporations often can't move cash efficiently between subsidiaries. Intraday liquidity needs sometimes can’t be met immediately. That waiting until the next banking day traps cash in local accounts when it's needed elsewhere. But with blockchain technology and stablecoins, near instant transfers are possible, cross-border.
This can improve working capital optimisation and reduce the need to hold excess liquidity buffers across the corporate group.
Rapid treasury position rebalancing
Treasury teams managing multiple currency positions can use stablecoins to rebalance exposures rapidly. The 24/7 operating model means you can respond to market conditions or urgent liquidity needs without waiting for payment systems to open.
Modern bank connectivity platforms are beginning to incorporate stablecoin rails alongside traditional bank connections, giving treasury teams more choice in how they route different payment types.
The assessment: stablecoin advantages and disadvantages for finance teams
Advantages: speed, always-on operation, lower costs
The benefits that actually matter for treasury teams:
- Speed: Settlement in minutes compared to 2 or more days for some traditional cross-border wires.
- 24/7 operation: No banking hours or cut-off time problems.
- Cost reduction: The average cost of traditional remittance fees (including bank fees, foreign exchange markups, and intermediaries) is can total multiple per cent per transaction, whilst stablecoin transfers typically cost a few pence in network fees.
- Transparent audit trails: On-chain transaction records give you real-time tracking.
- Programmability: Smart contract capabilities allow automated settlement logic.
J.P. Morgan Global Research projects the stablecoin market could hit $500 to $750 billion in the coming years, something that should not be negated.
Disadvantages and risks: clunky ERP integration, internal knowledge gaps, counterparty risks, changing regulation
The challenges that haven't been perfectly solved with Stablecoins yet:
ERP integration is immature: most ERPs weren't built to talk to blockchain networks and neither for stablecoin treasury management. Modern reconciliation platforms are beginning to bridge this gap, but native integration remains limited.
Internal knowledge gaps: Operating in digital assets requires new skills. Important technical skills like private key management, smart contract interactions, and blockchain transaction monitoring are unfamiliar territory for most treasury teams.
Counterparty risks: Reserve quality and transparency differ hugely between issuers. Some issuers maintain full 1:1 backing with high-quality liquid assets; others have faced scrutiny over reserve composition. Treasury teams need to run vendor due diligence just like they'd evaluate any financial counterparty.
Regulatory frameworks are still evolving: While the GENIUS Act, MiCA, and probably soon a UK frameworks give growing clarity, cross-jurisdiction compliance remains complex. Regulatory uncertainty is a major concern in many regions, and the rules continue to change as regulators work through the technology.
Modern treasury management platforms are starting to build the infrastructure to integrate stablecoin rails alongside traditional bank connectivity, setting themselves up as the natural integration layer for future payment infrastructure. The question isn't whether stablecoins will play some role in corporate payments, but when and how.
