This part sets the rules a coin maker must follow. It must hold safe assets worth at least as much as its coins. It must say how a holder gets money back. It must post what it holds each month. It may not pay interest on the coins. A state may run its own version of these rules if a federal panel signs off.
The document says “shall”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“maintain identifiable reserves backing the outstanding payment stablecoins of the permitted payment stablecoin issuer on an at least 1 to 1 basis, with reserves comprising-- (i) United States coins and currency (including Federal Reserve notes) or money standing to the credit of an account with a Federal Reserve Bank”
Subsection (a)(1)(A). The reserve must be identifiable and must at least equal the outstanding stablecoins. The subparagraph then lists eight categories the reserve may consist of, beginning with United States coins and currency or money at a Federal Reserve Bank, and running through insured deposits, short dated Treasury securities, certain repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, government money market fund shares, other similarly liquid Federal Government-issued assets approved by the regulator, and several of those categories held in tokenized form.
What the document actually says
“maintain identifiable reserves backing the outstanding payment stablecoins of the permitted payment stablecoin issuer on an at least 1 to 1 basis, with reserves comprising-- (i) United States coins and currency (including Federal Reserve notes) or money standing to the credit of an account with a Federal Reserve Bank”
That sentence, in plain words
The maker must set aside real assets to back its coins. It must be able to point to them. They must be worth at least as much as the coins.
What this is about
The law lists what the backing may be. Cash counts. Money at a Federal Reserve bank counts. So do some short term loans to the government.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“Treasury bills, notes, or bonds-- (I) with a remaining maturity of 93 days or less; or (II) issued with a maturity of 93 days or less”
Subsection (a)(1)(A)(iii). Treasury securities count as reserves only if they have a remaining maturity of 93 days or less, or were issued with a maturity of that length. The repurchase agreements allowed under clause (iv) are also tied to Treasury bills with a maturity of 93 days or less, and clause (v) requires reverse repurchase agreements to be overnight and collateralized by Treasury securities.
What the document actually says
“Treasury bills, notes, or bonds-- (I) with a remaining maturity of 93 days or less; or (II) issued with a maturity of 93 days or less”
That sentence, in plain words
The maker can hold loans to the government. They must be short. They must come due within 93 days.
What this is about
A long loan can lose value if rates move. A short one moves less. The law also caps how long some other deals may run.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“publicly, clearly, and conspicuously disclose in plain language all fees associated with purchasing or redeeming the payment stablecoins, provided that such fees can only be changed upon not less than 7 days' prior notice to consumers”
Subsection (a)(1)(B). The issuer must publicly disclose its redemption policy. The policy has to establish clear and conspicuous procedures for timely redemption, and any discretionary limitation on timely redemption may be imposed only by a State qualified payment stablecoin regulator, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Comptroller or the Federal Reserve Board, consistent with section 7. Fees must be disclosed in plain language and may be changed only on at least seven days' notice.
What the document actually says
“publicly, clearly, and conspicuously disclose in plain language all fees associated with purchasing or redeeming the payment stablecoins, provided that such fees can only be changed upon not less than 7 days' prior notice to consumers”
That sentence, in plain words
The maker must post every fee it charges. It must use plain words. It must give buyers at least seven days' notice before a fee changes.
What this is about
The maker must also post how to hand a coin back for money. Only a watchdog may put limits on that. The maker may not do it on its own.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“publish the monthly composition of the issuer's reserves on the website of the issuer, containing-- (i) the total number of outstanding payment stablecoins issued by the issuer; and (ii) the amount and composition of the reserves described in subparagraph (A), including the average tenor and geographic location of custody of each category of reserve instruments.”
Subsection (a)(1)(C). Two things go in the monthly posting: the total number of outstanding stablecoins, and the amount and composition of the reserves, including the average tenor of each category of reserve instrument and where each is held in custody.
What the document actually says
“publish the monthly composition of the issuer's reserves on the website of the issuer, containing-- (i) the total number of outstanding payment stablecoins issued by the issuer; and (ii) the amount and composition of the reserves described in subparagraph (A), including the average tenor and geographic location of custody of each category of reserve instruments.”
That sentence, in plain words
Each month the maker must post what it holds. It must give the number of coins out there. It must say what the backing is and where it is kept.
What this is about
Tenor means how long until an asset comes due. The posting goes on the maker's own website. Anyone can read it.
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.
The document says “may not”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“Reserves required under paragraph (1)(A) may not be pledged, rehypothecated, or reused by the permitted payment stablecoin issuer, either directly or indirectly, except for the purpose of-- (A) satisfying margin obligations in connection with investments in permitted reserves under clauses (iv) and (v) of paragraph (1)(A)”
Subsection (a)(2). The bar covers direct and indirect reuse. Three exceptions are named: margin obligations connected with the repurchase and reverse repurchase investments allowed as reserves, obligations associated with the use, receipt or provision of standard custodial services, and creating liquidity to meet reasonable expectations of redemption requests, where Treasury bills may be sold as purchased securities for repurchase agreements maturing within 93 days, either cleared by a registered clearing agency or with the prior approval of the issuer's regulator.
What the document actually says
“Reserves required under paragraph (1)(A) may not be pledged, rehypothecated, or reused by the permitted payment stablecoin issuer, either directly or indirectly, except for the purpose of-- (A) satisfying margin obligations in connection with investments in permitted reserves under clauses (iv) and (v) of paragraph (1)(A)”
That sentence, in plain words
The maker may not lend out the assets that back the coins. It may not put them up as cover for its own deals. It may not do so through another firm either.
What this is about
There are three ways out of this rule. One covers the cost of holding the assets. One covers the deals the law already allows. One lets the maker raise cash to pay people back.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer shall, each month, have the information disclosed in the previous month-end report required under paragraph (1)(D) examined by a registered public accounting firm.”
Subsection (a)(3)(A). The examination is monthly and is performed by a registered public accounting firm, a term section 2(26) takes from section 2 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 7201). The cross reference in the sentence is to paragraph (1)(D); paragraph (1) as enacted ends at subparagraph (C).
What the document actually says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer shall, each month, have the information disclosed in the previous month-end report required under paragraph (1)(D) examined by a registered public accounting firm.”
That sentence, in plain words
Each month an outside firm checks the maker's report. The firm must be one that is on a public register.
What this is about
The check is on the numbers the maker put out the month before. The law points to a part of itself that is not there. The site records the words as printed.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: chief executive officers of permitted payment stablecoin issuers, chief financial officers of permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“Each month, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of a permitted payment stablecoin issuer shall submit a certification as to the accuracy of the monthly report”
Subsection (a)(3)(B) and (C). The certification goes to the issuer's primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator, or to its State payment stablecoin regulator where that applies. A person who submits the certification knowing it is false is subject to the same criminal penalties as those set out in section 1350(c) of title 18, United States Code.
What the document actually says
“Each month, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of a permitted payment stablecoin issuer shall submit a certification as to the accuracy of the monthly report”
That sentence, in plain words
Two top officers must sign off on the report each month. They swear that what it says is right.
What this is about
The signed paper goes to the watchdog for that maker. Signing a false one is a crime. The law points to the penalty another law already sets.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators, State payment stablecoin regulatorsHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“The primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators shall, or in the case of a State qualified payment stablecoin issuer, the State payment stablecoin regulator shall, consistent with section 13, issue regulations implementing-- (i) capital requirements applicable to permitted payment stablecoin issuers that-- (I) are tailored to the business model and risk profile of permitted payment stablecoin issuers”
Subsection (a)(4)(A). Four subjects are named: capital requirements, the liquidity standard under paragraph (1)(A), reserve asset diversification and interest rate risk management, and operational, compliance and information technology risk management standards including Bank Secrecy Act and sanctions compliance. The capital and diversification standards are to be tailored to the business model and risk profile of issuers and are not to exceed what is sufficient to ensure their ongoing operations. A capital buffer may be included where the Federal regulators determine one is necessary for that purpose.
What the document actually says
“The primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators shall, or in the case of a State qualified payment stablecoin issuer, the State payment stablecoin regulator shall, consistent with section 13, issue regulations implementing-- (i) capital requirements applicable to permitted payment stablecoin issuers that-- (I) are tailored to the business model and risk profile of permitted payment stablecoin issuers”
That sentence, in plain words
The watchdogs must write rules on how much cash a maker keeps. The rules must fit the size and the risk of each maker. A state watchdog writes them for a state maker.
What this is about
Capital is the money a firm keeps to take a loss. The rules may not go past what keeps a maker running. Other rules cover risk and computer safety.
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.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“With respect to the promulgation of rules under subparagraph (A) and clauses (iii) and (iv) of this subparagraph, section 171 of the Financial Stability Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5371) shall not apply.”
Subsection (a)(4)(C)(ii). Clause (iii) provides that a rule imposing a consolidated leverage or risk-based capital requirement on an insured depository institution or a depository institution holding company must not require capital, with respect to a permitted payment stablecoin issuer within the group, in excess of what that issuer must hold under the capital rules issued under subparagraph (A)(i). Clause (iv) requires each appropriate Federal banking agency to amend or otherwise modify its regulations to comply, by the earlier of the section 13 rulemaking deadline or the date the Federal regulators issue rules under this section. What section 171 of the Financial Stability Act says is not recorded here, because that Act is not indexed on this site.
What the document actually says
“With respect to the promulgation of rules under subparagraph (A) and clauses (iii) and (iv) of this subparagraph, section 171 of the Financial Stability Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5371) shall not apply.”
That sentence, in plain words
One older rule is switched off for this work. It does not apply when these new rules are written.
What this is about
The older rule sets a floor for bank capital. That law is not part of this site. So what it says is not recorded here.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer shall be treated as a financial institution for purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act, and as such, shall be subject to all Federal laws applicable to a financial institution located in the United States relating to economic sanctions, prevention of money laundering, customer identification, and due diligence”
Subsection (a)(5)(A). Six things follow from the treatment: an effective anti-money laundering program with risk assessments and a designated officer, retention of appropriate records, monitoring and reporting of suspicious transactions, technical capabilities and procedures to block, freeze and reject impermissible transactions, an effective customer identification program including enhanced due diligence, and an effective economic sanctions compliance program. The Secretary of the Treasury is to adopt rules tailored to the size and complexity of issuers. Bank Secrecy Act is defined in section 2(2) by reference to three older laws.
What the document actually says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer shall be treated as a financial institution for purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act, and as such, shall be subject to all Federal laws applicable to a financial institution located in the United States relating to economic sanctions, prevention of money laundering, customer identification, and due diligence”
That sentence, in plain words
A coin maker counts as a financial firm under an older law. So the rules that banks follow apply to it. Those rules cover dirty money and blocked countries.
What this is about
The maker must know who its customers are. It must watch for odd trades and report them. It must be able to freeze coins. It must keep records.
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.
The document says “may not”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may issue payment stablecoins only if the issuer has the technological capability to comply, and will comply, with the terms of any lawful order.”
Subsection (a)(6)(B). Two conditions run together: the technical capability, and the commitment to comply. Under subparagraph (A) the Secretary of the Treasury is to coordinate, to the best of the Secretary's ability, with an issuer before blocking property of a foreign person so that the issuer can effectively block that person's stablecoins, but the Secretary is not required to give notice beforehand. Subparagraph (C) requires the Attorney General and the Secretary to report to two committees on that coordination within one year of enactment.
What the document actually says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may issue payment stablecoins only if the issuer has the technological capability to comply, and will comply, with the terms of any lawful order.”
That sentence, in plain words
A maker may put out coins only if it can obey a court order. It must have the tools to do it. It must also agree that it will.
What this is about
An order can tell a maker to freeze or destroy coins. The Treasury tries to warn a maker before it blocks someone. It does not have to.
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.
The document says “may not”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may only-- (i) issue payment stablecoins; (ii) redeem payment stablecoins; (iii) manage related reserves, including purchasing, selling, and holding reserve assets or providing custodial services for reserve assets, consistent with State and Federal law”
Subsection (a)(7)(A). Five activities are allowed: issuing, redeeming, managing reserves, providing custodial or safekeeping services for stablecoins, required reserves or private keys, and other activities that directly support those. Subparagraph (B) provides that nothing in subparagraph (A) limits an issuer from engaging in stablecoin or digital asset service provider activities specified by the Act, and activities incidental to them, that its regulator authorizes, provided that the claims of stablecoin holders rank senior to those of other creditors with respect to the reserve assets, consistent with section 11.
What the document actually says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may only-- (i) issue payment stablecoins; (ii) redeem payment stablecoins; (iii) manage related reserves, including purchasing, selling, and holding reserve assets or providing custodial services for reserve assets, consistent with State and Federal law”
That sentence, in plain words
A maker may do only a few things. It may put out coins. It may buy them back. It may look after the assets that back them.
What this is about
It may also hold coins and keys for other people. It may do work that directly supports those tasks. Its watchdog may clear a few more tasks.
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.
The document says “may not”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may not provide services to a customer on the condition that the customer obtain an additional paid product or service from the permitted payment stablecoin issuer, or any of its subsidiaries, or agree to not obtain an additional product or service from a competitor.”
Subsection (a)(8)(A). The Federal Reserve Board may issue regulations to carry out the paragraph and, in consultation with other relevant primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators, may permit exceptions by regulation or order where it considers they will not be contrary to the purpose of the Act.
What the document actually says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may not provide services to a customer on the condition that the customer obtain an additional paid product or service from the permitted payment stablecoin issuer, or any of its subsidiaries, or agree to not obtain an additional product or service from a competitor.”
That sentence, in plain words
A maker may not force a customer to buy more. It may not make a deal turn on that. It may not ask a customer to stay away from a rival.
What this is about
This is called tying. It joins one sale to another. The Fed can write rules here. It can also allow some cases.
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.
The document says “may not”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may not-- (i) use any combination of terms relating to the United States Government, including "United States", "United States Government", and "USG" in the name of a payment stablecoin”
Subsection (a)(9). The second half bars marketing a stablecoin in a way that would lead a reasonable person to perceive it as legal tender under section 5103 of title 31, United States Code, as issued by the United States, or as guaranteed or approved by the Government of the United States. Subparagraph (B) provides that abbreviations directly relating to the currency a stablecoin is pegged to, such as USD, are not covered.
What the document actually says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer may not-- (i) use any combination of terms relating to the United States Government, including "United States", "United States Government", and "USG" in the name of a payment stablecoin”
That sentence, in plain words
A maker may not put government words in a coin's name. It may not use United States. It may not use USG either.
What this is about
It also may not sell a coin as if the government stands behind it. Short forms for the currency are fine. USD is the example the law gives.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer with more than $50,000,000,000 in consolidated total outstanding issuance, that is not subject to the reporting requirements under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m, 78o(d)), shall prepare, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, an annual financial statement”
Subsection (a)(10). The statement must disclose any related party transactions and be audited by a registered public accounting firm, and the audit must follow the auditing standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, including those on auditor independence, internal controls and related party transactions. The issuer must post the audited statements on its website and submit them annually to its primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator. Nothing in the subparagraph is to be construed to limit, alter or expand the jurisdiction of that Board.
What the document actually says
“A permitted payment stablecoin issuer with more than $50,000,000,000 in consolidated total outstanding issuance, that is not subject to the reporting requirements under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m, 78o(d)), shall prepare, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, an annual financial statement”
That sentence, in plain words
A very large maker must draw up a yearly financial statement. This kicks in above fifty billion dollars of coins. Makers that already report to the SEC are left out.
What this is about
An outside firm must audit that statement. The maker must post it online. It must also send it to its watchdog once a year.
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.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: permitted payment stablecoin issuers, foreign payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“No permitted payment stablecoin issuer or foreign payment stablecoin issuer shall pay the holder of any payment stablecoin any form of interest or yield (whether in cash, tokens, or other consideration) solely in connection with the holding, use, or retention of such payment stablecoin.”
Subsection (a)(11). The bar reaches both permitted issuers and foreign issuers, and it covers any form of interest or yield, whether paid in cash, tokens or other consideration. It applies to payments made solely in connection with holding, using or retaining the stablecoin.
What the document actually says
“No permitted payment stablecoin issuer or foreign payment stablecoin issuer shall pay the holder of any payment stablecoin any form of interest or yield (whether in cash, tokens, or other consideration) solely in connection with the holding, use, or retention of such payment stablecoin.”
That sentence, in plain words
A maker may not pay a holder for keeping a coin. It may not pay in cash. It may not pay in more coins or in anything else.
What this is about
A bank pays interest on savings. This bars that here. The rule covers makers abroad as well as makers at home.
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.
The document says “may not”Who acts: Stablecoin Certification Review CommitteeHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A public company that is not predominantly engaged in 1 or more financial activities, and its wholly or majority owned subsidiaries or affiliates, may not issue a payment stablecoin unless the public company obtains a unanimous vote of the Stablecoin Certification Review Committee”
Subsection (a)(12)(B)(i). The committee must find three things: that issuance will not pose a material risk to the safety and soundness of the United States banking system, to the financial stability of the United States or to the Deposit Insurance Fund; that the company will comply with data use limitations under which nonpublic personal information from stablecoin transaction data may not be used to target, personalize or rank advertising or other content, sold to a third party, or shared with non-affiliates without the consumer's consent; and that the company and its affiliates will comply with the tying prohibitions. Sharing to comply with law, with an authorized investigation, or in response to judicial process is excepted. Subparagraph (C) extends the bar to a company not domiciled in the United States or its territories that is not predominantly engaged in financial activities. Under subparagraph (D) the committee is to issue an interpretive rule within one year of enactment.
What the document actually says
“A public company that is not predominantly engaged in 1 or more financial activities, and its wholly or majority owned subsidiaries or affiliates, may not issue a payment stablecoin unless the public company obtains a unanimous vote of the Stablecoin Certification Review Committee”
That sentence, in plain words
A listed firm whose main work is not finance faces a bar. It may not put out one of these coins. It needs a yes from all three members of the panel.
What this is about
The panel weighs risk to banks and to the wider system. It also looks at how the firm would use customer data. The firm may not sell that data or use it for ads.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Office of the Comptroller of the CurrencyHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“a Federal qualified payment stablecoin issuer approved by the Comptroller pursuant to section 5 of this Act shall be licensed, regulated, examined, and supervised exclusively by the Comptroller”
Subsection (b)(1). The sentence opens notwithstanding section 5136C of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 25b), section 6 of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1465), or any applicable State law relating to licensing and supervision, and gives the Comptroller authority, in coordination with other relevant Federal and State regulators, to issue such regulations and orders as necessary to ensure financial stability and implement subsection (a). Subsection (b)(2) writes a matching duty into section 324(b) of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 1(b)).
What the document actually says
“a Federal qualified payment stablecoin issuer approved by the Comptroller pursuant to section 5 of this Act shall be licensed, regulated, examined, and supervised exclusively by the Comptroller”
That sentence, in plain words
One office alone watches a federal maker. It grants the license. It writes the rules. It runs the checks.
What this is about
That office is the Comptroller of the Currency. States do not license these makers. The law also adds this duty to an older law.
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.
The document says “can”Who acts: State qualified payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“a State qualified payment stablecoin issuer with a consolidated total outstanding issuance of not more than $10,000,000,000 may opt for regulation under a State-level regulatory regime, provided that the State-level regulatory regime is substantially similar to the Federal regulatory framework under this Act.”
Subsection (c)(1). The Secretary of the Treasury is to establish broad-based principles, through notice and comment rulemaking, for determining whether a State-level regime is substantially similar to the Federal framework. State payment stablecoin regulators are to review their regimes against those principles and for the purpose of establishing any cooperative agreements needed to implement section 7(f).
What the document actually says
“a State qualified payment stablecoin issuer with a consolidated total outstanding issuance of not more than $10,000,000,000 may opt for regulation under a State-level regulatory regime, provided that the State-level regulatory regime is substantially similar to the Federal regulatory framework under this Act.”
That sentence, in plain words
A smaller state maker may follow its state's rules instead. This works up to ten billion dollars of coins. The state rules must be much like the federal ones.
What this is about
The Treasury sets out how close is close enough. It must ask the public first. Each state then checks its own rules against that test.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: State payment stablecoin regulatorsHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“not later than 1 year after the effective date of this Act, a State payment stablecoin regulator shall submit to the Stablecoin Certification Review Committee an initial certification that the State-level regulatory regime meets the criteria for substantial similarity established pursuant to paragraph (2).”
Subsection (c)(4). The certification takes a form prescribed by the committee and contains an attestation that the regime meets the criteria. A recertification confirming the accuracy of the initial certification is due each year by a date the Secretary of the Treasury sets. Section 20 sets the effective date of the Act from which the one year runs.
What the document actually says
“not later than 1 year after the effective date of this Act, a State payment stablecoin regulator shall submit to the Stablecoin Certification Review Committee an initial certification that the State-level regulatory regime meets the criteria for substantial similarity established pursuant to paragraph (2).”
That sentence, in plain words
A state watchdog must send in a paper within a year. It says the state's rules meet the test. The clock starts when the law takes effect.
What this is about
The panel sets the form the paper takes. The state must send a fresh one each year. That one says the first is still true.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Stablecoin Certification Review CommitteeHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“approve such certification if the Committee unanimously determines that the State-level regulatory regime meets or exceeds the standards and requirements described in subsection (a)”
Subsection (c)(5). The committee acts within 30 days of a certification or recertification. Approval requires a unanimous determination that the regime meets or exceeds the standards in subsection (a). A denial must come with a written explanation describing the reasoned basis in enough detail for the State to make the changes needed. A recertification may be denied only where the regime has materially changed or circumstances have significantly changed, and that change means the regime will not promote the safe and sound operation of the issuers under its supervision. A State gets at least 180 days to cure and resubmit.
What the document actually says
“approve such certification if the Committee unanimously determines that the State-level regulatory regime meets or exceeds the standards and requirements described in subsection (a)”
That sentence, in plain words
The panel says yes if all three members agree. They must find the state rules meet the federal ones. The rules may also go further.
What this is about
The panel has 30 days to decide. A no must come with reasons in writing. The state then gets at least 180 days to fix things.
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.
The document says “can”Who acts: State payment stablecoin regulatorsHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A State payment stablecoin regulator in receipt of a denial under subparagraph (C)(ii) may appeal the denial to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.”
Subsection (c)(5)(D). The appeal lies from a second denial, after the State has been given the chance to cure and has resubmitted. Under subparagraph (E) a denial does not stop the State from submitting a new certification.
What the document actually says
“A State payment stablecoin regulator in receipt of a denial under subparagraph (C)(ii) may appeal the denial to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.”
That sentence, in plain words
A state told no may take the case to court. The court is the one that sits in Washington, D.C.
What this is about
This right comes after a second no. The state can also just start over. It may send in a new paper at any time.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of the TreasuryHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“The Secretary of the Treasury shall publish and maintain in the Federal Register and on the website of the Department of the Treasury a list of States that have submitted initial certifications and recertifications under paragraph (4).”
Subsection (c)(6). The list goes in two places: the Federal Register and the Treasury Department's website. It names the States that have submitted certifications, and it is to be maintained rather than published once.
What the document actually says
“The Secretary of the Treasury shall publish and maintain in the Federal Register and on the website of the Department of the Treasury a list of States that have submitted initial certifications and recertifications under paragraph (4).”
That sentence, in plain words
The Treasury must put out a list of states. The list names those that have sent in the paper. It goes on a government site and in the daily record.
What this is about
The Federal Register is where agencies print notices. The list must be kept up to date. Anyone can look up where a state stands.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: State qualified payment stablecoin issuersHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“not later than 360 days after the payment stablecoin reaches such threshold, transition to the Federal regulatory framework of the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator of the State chartered depository institution, which shall be administered by the State payment stablecoin regulator of the State chartered depository institution and the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator acting jointly”
Subsection (d)(1) and (2). The threshold is a consolidated total outstanding issuance of more than $10,000,000,000. A State chartered depository institution that crosses it either transitions within 360 days to the Federal framework, administered jointly with its State regulator, or stops issuing new stablecoins until it falls back below the threshold. Any other State qualified issuer that crosses it either transitions within 360 days to the framework under subsection (a), administered by its State regulator and the Comptroller in coordination, or stops issuing.
What the document actually says
“not later than 360 days after the payment stablecoin reaches such threshold, transition to the Federal regulatory framework of the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator of the State chartered depository institution, which shall be administered by the State payment stablecoin regulator of the State chartered depository institution and the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator acting jointly”
That sentence, in plain words
Once a maker passes the line it has 360 days. It must move to the federal rules. Its state watchdog and a federal one then work as a pair.
What this is about
The line is ten billion dollars of coins. A maker that does not move must stop making new coins. It may start again once it drops back under.
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.
The document says “can”Who acts: primary Federal payment stablecoin regulatorsHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“the applicable primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator may permit a State qualified payment stablecoin issuer with a payment stablecoin with a consolidated total outstanding issuance of more than $10,000,000,000 to remain solely supervised by a State payment stablecoin regulator.”
Subsection (d)(3). Four exclusive criteria govern the decision: the capital the issuer maintains, its past operations and examination history, the State regulator's experience in supervising stablecoin and digital asset activities, and the State's supervisory framework. An issuer supervised by a State that had a prudential regime in place before the 90 day period ending on the date of enactment, has been certified under subsection (c), and has approved one or more issuers, is presumptively approved for a waiver unless the Federal regulator finds by clear and convincing evidence that the criteria are not substantially met or that the issuer poses significant safety and soundness risks. An issuer that does not get a waiver is still supervised by its State regulator jointly with the Federal one, and nothing requires it to convert to a Federal charter.
What the document actually says
“the applicable primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator may permit a State qualified payment stablecoin issuer with a payment stablecoin with a consolidated total outstanding issuance of more than $10,000,000,000 to remain solely supervised by a State payment stablecoin regulator.”
That sentence, in plain words
A federal watchdog can let a big maker stay with its state. The maker keeps just the one watchdog. This holds even above the ten billion dollar line.
What this is about
Four things decide it. They are the maker's capital, its record, the state's know how, and the state's rule book. Some states get a yes unless there is strong proof against.
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.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“Payment stablecoins shall not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, guaranteed by the United States Government, subject to deposit insurance by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or subject to share insurance by the National Credit Union Administration.”
Subsection (e)(1) and (2). It is unlawful to represent that payment stablecoins are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, guaranteed by the Government, or subject to Federal deposit or share insurance. A violation counts as a violation of section 18(a)(4) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1828(a)(4)) or section 709 of title 18, United States Code, as applicable.
What the document actually says
“Payment stablecoins shall not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, guaranteed by the United States Government, subject to deposit insurance by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or subject to share insurance by the National Credit Union Administration.”
That sentence, in plain words
The government does not stand behind these coins. They are not covered like money in a bank. They are not covered like money in a credit union.
What this is about
Bank savings are insured up to a limit. These coins are not. Saying that they are breaks the law.
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.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: Department of the TreasuryHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“It shall be unlawful to market a product in the United States as a payment stablecoin unless the product is issued pursuant to this Act.”
Subsection (e)(3). A person who knowingly and willfully participates in a violation may be fined by the Department of the Treasury not more than $500,000 for each violation. Separate acts of noncompliance count as a single violation where they result from a common or substantially overlapping originating cause, or from the same statement or publication. A Federal payment stablecoin regulator that has reason to believe a person knowingly and willfully violated the ban must refer the matter to the Secretary of the Treasury.
What the document actually says
“It shall be unlawful to market a product in the United States as a payment stablecoin unless the product is issued pursuant to this Act.”
That sentence, in plain words
A product may not be sold here under this name. It may use the name only if it was made under this law.
What this is about
The fine can reach five hundred thousand dollars each time. Acts from one cause count as one. So do acts from a single ad.
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.
The document says “may not”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“No individual who has been convicted of a felony offense involving insider trading, embezzlement, cybercrime, money laundering, financing of terrorism, or financial fraud may serve as-- (A) an officer of a payment stablecoin issuer; or (B) a director of a payment stablecoin issuer.”
Subsection (f). Six kinds of felony are named. A person who knowingly participates in a violation may be fined not more than $1,000,000 for each violation, imprisoned for not more than five years, or both, and a Federal payment stablecoin regulator with reason to believe a person knowingly violated the bar must refer the matter to the Attorney General. Section 5(c)(2) makes the same question a factor in deciding an application.
What the document actually says
“No individual who has been convicted of a felony offense involving insider trading, embezzlement, cybercrime, money laundering, financing of terrorism, or financial fraud may serve as-- (A) an officer of a payment stablecoin issuer; or (B) a director of a payment stablecoin issuer.”
That sentence, in plain words
Some crimes shut a person out of the top jobs at a coin maker. They may not be an officer. They may not sit on the board.
What this is about
Six kinds of crime are named. They include fraud and dirty money. Helping break this rule on purpose can mean prison.
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.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“A Federal savings association established under the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 et seq.) that holds a reserve that satisfies the requirements of section 4(a)(1) shall not be required to satisfy the qualified thrift lender test under section 10(m) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1467a(m)) with respect to such reserve assets.”
Subsection (g). The relief is limited to the reserve assets themselves. What the qualified thrift lender test requires is not recorded here, because the Home Owners' Loan Act is not indexed on this site.
What the document actually says
“A Federal savings association established under the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 et seq.) that holds a reserve that satisfies the requirements of section 4(a)(1) shall not be required to satisfy the qualified thrift lender test under section 10(m) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1467a(m)) with respect to such reserve assets.”
That sentence, in plain words
A federal savings bank may hold backing for these coins. It does not have to meet one older test on those assets.
What this is about
The older test is in a law from the 1930s. That law is not part of this site. So what the test asks for is not recorded here.
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.
The document says “shall”Who acts: primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators, State payment stablecoin regulatorsHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“Consistent with section 13, the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators shall, and State payment stablecoin regulators may, issue such regulations relating to permitted payment stablecoin issuers as may be necessary to establish a payment stablecoin regulatory framework necessary to administer and carry out the requirements of this section, including to establish conditions, and to prevent evasion thereof.”
Subsection (h). The Federal regulators must issue the regulations and the State regulators may. Under paragraph (2), all regulations issued to carry out the section are to be issued in coordination by the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators, if they are not issued by a State payment stablecoin regulator. Section 13 sets the one year deadline.
What the document actually says
“Consistent with section 13, the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators shall, and State payment stablecoin regulators may, issue such regulations relating to permitted payment stablecoin issuers as may be necessary to establish a payment stablecoin regulatory framework necessary to administer and carry out the requirements of this section, including to establish conditions, and to prevent evasion thereof.”
That sentence, in plain words
The federal watchdogs must write rules for this part. State watchdogs are allowed to write their own. The rules may set terms and close gaps.
What this is about
Part 13 gives them one year from the day the law passed. The federal bodies must work as a group. A state rule stands on its own.
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.
The document says “may not be construed”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 4 in the PDF
What the document says
“existing Office of Government Ethics laws and the ethics rules of the Senate and the House of Representatives prohibit any member of Congress or senior executive branch official from issuing a payment stablecoin during their time in public service.”
Subsection (i)(2). The sentence is stated for the avoidance of doubt inside a rule of construction: nothing in the Act limits or prevents the continued application of the ethics statutes and regulations administered by the Office of Government Ethics, or the ethics rules of the Senate and the House, including section 208 of title 18, United States Code, and sections 2635.702 and 2635.802 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. An employee described in section 202 of title 18 is deemed an executive branch employee for the purposes of complying with section 208. What those rules say is not recorded here, because they are not indexed on this site.
What the document actually says
“existing Office of Government Ethics laws and the ethics rules of the Senate and the House of Representatives prohibit any member of Congress or senior executive branch official from issuing a payment stablecoin during their time in public service.”
That sentence, in plain words
Ethics rules already bar some people from making these coins. They cover members of Congress. They also cover top officials while in office.
What this is about
This law does not change those rules. Subsection (i)(1) also says the Act does not widen what the Fed may offer the public.
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.
The standards a permitted payment stablecoin issuer must meet: the one to one reserve, what the reserve may consist of, the redemption policy, the monthly reserve disclosure, the bar on reusing reserves, the monthly examination and the officer certification, the capital and liquidity rulemaking, treatment as a financial institution under the Bank Secrecy Act, the lawful order capability, the limit on what an issuer may do, the tying ban, the ban on deceptive names, the audit duty above fifty billion dollars, the ban on paying interest, the bar on a non-financial public company issuing without a unanimous vote, the Comptroller's exclusive authority, the State-level option and its certification, the transition above ten billion dollars, the insured status and marketing bans, the bar on convicted felons serving as officers or directors, the thrift lender clarification, the rulemaking duty, and the ethics rule of construction.
The conforming amendment in subsection (b)(2), which adds a paragraph to section 324(b) of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 1(b)), is recorded with the Comptroller's authority rather than as a separate requirement, because the words it inserts repeat the duty the subsection already states. The rules of construction that only preserve an existing authority are named in the summaries rather than recorded one by one.
The section works in part by amending older statutes, and those statutes are not indexed here, so what they said before this Act is not recorded. Subsection (a)(3)(A) requires the examination of a report 'required under paragraph (1)(D)', and paragraph (1) as enacted runs from subparagraph (A) to subparagraph (C). The site records the cross reference as printed and does not resolve it.
