The post Global Crypto Rules for Banks Need Reworking, Says Basel Chair appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Basel Chair Erik Thedéen confirmed a rework of global crypto capital rules for banks. The move follows refusal by the US and UK to implement “punitive” stablecoin standards. Regulators aim to separate stablecoins from volatile assets to reflect market reality. Global banking regulators face rising pressure to update capital rules for cryptocurrency holdings as stablecoin adoption accelerates and major jurisdictions resist earlier proposals. The Basel Committee now sees an urgent need to redesign the framework because the existing plan does not match current market realities.  The shift reflects increasing concern that older assumptions about crypto risk fail to capture today’s landscape. Moreover, global regulators want a system that aligns with the rapid expansion of tokenized money and new payment models. Why the ‘High-Risk’ Classification Failed The 2021 Basel blueprint set strict capital demands for banks holding digital assets. The approach grouped volatile tokens and stablecoins under a single high-risk category. The committee built the framework during a period when attention centered on bitcoin and ether.  However, crypto markets changed dramatically this year. Stablecoins now drive significant transaction volumes across exchanges and payment channels. Hence, regulators want to reassess the risk profile of these assets. Besides that shift, central bankers also want clarity on permissionless blockchain systems. Some policymakers question whether earlier risk assumptions still apply.  They argue that these networks now support more predictable settlement activity. Consequently, the committee wants deeper analysis on how those features influence prudential standards. Resistance From Major Economies Triggers Rethink The United States and the United Kingdom declined to implement the original rules. Both jurisdictions said the earlier plan failed to reflect practical market conditions. Their decisions created a widening gap in global coordination.  Additionally, US officials raised concerns about disproportionate capital treatment, especially for regulated stablecoins. The Bank of England also sought more workable… The post Global Crypto Rules for Banks Need Reworking, Says Basel Chair appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Basel Chair Erik Thedéen confirmed a rework of global crypto capital rules for banks. The move follows refusal by the US and UK to implement “punitive” stablecoin standards. Regulators aim to separate stablecoins from volatile assets to reflect market reality. Global banking regulators face rising pressure to update capital rules for cryptocurrency holdings as stablecoin adoption accelerates and major jurisdictions resist earlier proposals. The Basel Committee now sees an urgent need to redesign the framework because the existing plan does not match current market realities.  The shift reflects increasing concern that older assumptions about crypto risk fail to capture today’s landscape. Moreover, global regulators want a system that aligns with the rapid expansion of tokenized money and new payment models. Why the ‘High-Risk’ Classification Failed The 2021 Basel blueprint set strict capital demands for banks holding digital assets. The approach grouped volatile tokens and stablecoins under a single high-risk category. The committee built the framework during a period when attention centered on bitcoin and ether.  However, crypto markets changed dramatically this year. Stablecoins now drive significant transaction volumes across exchanges and payment channels. Hence, regulators want to reassess the risk profile of these assets. Besides that shift, central bankers also want clarity on permissionless blockchain systems. Some policymakers question whether earlier risk assumptions still apply.  They argue that these networks now support more predictable settlement activity. Consequently, the committee wants deeper analysis on how those features influence prudential standards. Resistance From Major Economies Triggers Rethink The United States and the United Kingdom declined to implement the original rules. Both jurisdictions said the earlier plan failed to reflect practical market conditions. Their decisions created a widening gap in global coordination.  Additionally, US officials raised concerns about disproportionate capital treatment, especially for regulated stablecoins. The Bank of England also sought more workable…

Global Crypto Rules for Banks Need Reworking, Says Basel Chair

For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com
  • Basel Chair Erik Thedéen confirmed a rework of global crypto capital rules for banks.
  • The move follows refusal by the US and UK to implement “punitive” stablecoin standards.
  • Regulators aim to separate stablecoins from volatile assets to reflect market reality.

Global banking regulators face rising pressure to update capital rules for cryptocurrency holdings as stablecoin adoption accelerates and major jurisdictions resist earlier proposals. The Basel Committee now sees an urgent need to redesign the framework because the existing plan does not match current market realities. 

The shift reflects increasing concern that older assumptions about crypto risk fail to capture today’s landscape. Moreover, global regulators want a system that aligns with the rapid expansion of tokenized money and new payment models.

Why the ‘High-Risk’ Classification Failed

The 2021 Basel blueprint set strict capital demands for banks holding digital assets. The approach grouped volatile tokens and stablecoins under a single high-risk category. The committee built the framework during a period when attention centered on bitcoin and ether. 

However, crypto markets changed dramatically this year. Stablecoins now drive significant transaction volumes across exchanges and payment channels. Hence, regulators want to reassess the risk profile of these assets.

Besides that shift, central bankers also want clarity on permissionless blockchain systems. Some policymakers question whether earlier risk assumptions still apply. 

They argue that these networks now support more predictable settlement activity. Consequently, the committee wants deeper analysis on how those features influence prudential standards.

Resistance From Major Economies Triggers Rethink

The United States and the United Kingdom declined to implement the original rules. Both jurisdictions said the earlier plan failed to reflect practical market conditions. Their decisions created a widening gap in global coordination. 

Additionally, US officials raised concerns about disproportionate capital treatment, especially for regulated stablecoins. The Bank of England also sought more workable standards for domestic institutions.

Related: Hong Kong Goes All-In on Big Money Crypto with Strict Basel Rules From 2026

This resistance signaled a broader issue. Regulators need globally consistent buffers, yet they must also consider differences in adoption trends. 

Hence, the committee now plans a faster review cycle. It aims to introduce an updated structure that treats stablecoins and volatile tokens separately. It also wants clearer criteria for measuring operational and liquidity risks within blockchain systems.

Stablecoin Growth Forces a Faster Review Cycle

Stablecoin circulation grew significantly this year. This expansion increased pressure on regulators to update the framework without delay. 

Moreover, banks exploring tokenization partnerships want clarity before scaling new services. Industry executives say uncertainty limits long-term planning. Hence, policymakers intend to accelerate assessments and deliver a more flexible global standard.

Related: Basel Committee Tightens Crypto Rules, Favoring Centralized Stablecoins

Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.

Source: https://coinedition.com/global-crypto-rules-for-banks-need-reworking-says-basel-chair/

Market Opportunity
Movement Logo
Movement Price(MOVE)
$0.02077
$0.02077$0.02077
+1.21%
USD
Movement (MOVE) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
The Virtual Hospital: How IT Infrastructure is Powering the Next Wave of Remote Patient Monitoring

The Virtual Hospital: How IT Infrastructure is Powering the Next Wave of Remote Patient Monitoring

Introduction to the Virtual Hospital Revolution The healthcare industry is undergoing a transformative shift as virtual hospitals emerge at the forefront of patient
Share
Techbullion2026/03/20 14:45
People have their uses: Agentic Wallet and the next decade of wallets

People have their uses: Agentic Wallet and the next decade of wallets

Written by: Lacie Zhang, Bitget Wallet Researcher In 1984, Apple (Macintosh) killed the command line with a mouse. In 2026, Agent is killing the mouse. This is
Share
PANews2026/03/20 14:13