A regulator may bar an issuer from issuing for willful or reckless violations
What the document says“may prohibit the permitted payment stablecoin issuer from issuing payment stablecoins, if the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator determines that such permitted payment stablecoin issuer, or an institution-affiliated party of the permitted payment stablecoin issuer is willfully or recklessly violating or has willfully or recklessly violated-- (A) this Act or any regulation or order issued under this Act”
Subsection (b)(1). The second ground is a violation of any condition imposed in writing by the regulator in connection with a written agreement between it and the issuer. Institution-affiliated party is defined in section 2(13) as any director, officer, employee or controlling stockholder of a permitted payment stablecoin issuer. Under paragraph (6), the whole enforcement subsection does not apply to a State qualified payment stablecoin issuer.
What the document actually says“may prohibit the permitted payment stablecoin issuer from issuing payment stablecoins, if the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator determines that such permitted payment stablecoin issuer, or an institution-affiliated party of the permitted payment stablecoin issuer is willfully or recklessly violating or has willfully or recklessly violated-- (A) this Act or any regulation or order issued under this Act”
The watchdog can stop a maker from putting out new coins. It must find the maker broke this law on purpose. A reckless breach counts too.
The breach can be by the firm or by one of its people. That covers officers, staff and big owners. A broken written deal is a second ground.
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.