A regulator may order an issuer to cease a violation and correct it
What the document says“the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator may, by provisions that are mandatory or otherwise, order the permitted payment stablecoin issuer or institution-affiliated party of the permitted payment stablecoin issuer to-- (A) cease and desist from such violation or practice; or (B) take affirmative action to correct the conditions resulting from any such violation or practice.”
Subsection (b)(2). The power turns on reasonable cause to believe that the issuer or an institution-affiliated party is violating, has violated, or is attempting to violate the Act, a regulation or order issued under it, a written agreement with the regulator, or a condition imposed in writing in connection with an application or other request.
What the document actually says“the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator may, by provisions that are mandatory or otherwise, order the permitted payment stablecoin issuer or institution-affiliated party of the permitted payment stablecoin issuer to-- (A) cease and desist from such violation or practice; or (B) take affirmative action to correct the conditions resulting from any such violation or practice.”
The watchdog can order a firm to stop. It can also order the firm to put things right. The order can bind the firm or one of its people.
The watchdog needs fair cause to believe a rule was broken. A try counts as well as a breach. So does breaking a written deal.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.