#GENIUS稳定币法案

1. Core Background: Cryptographic Technology Restructures Global Debt and Currency Circulation Logic
In July 2025, the United States (Guiding and Establishing the National Innovation Act for U.S. Stablecoins) (GENIUS Act) officially takes effect, marking the transition of stablecoins from the 'gray area' to a new phase of 'sovereign credit binding.' At the same time, Hong Kong, China, launches a (stablecoin regulatory framework), allowing companies like JD.com to issue RMB stablecoins, entering a deep water zone of global digital currency competition characterized by 'scene binding + sovereign endorsement.'

The core market controversy lies in whether the United States can 'decentralize and transfer' U.S. Treasury risks through stablecoins. Can China's counter-strategy break through the hegemony of dollar payments? This report dissects this global monetary reshuffle from the perspectives of financial mechanisms, technical characteristics, and geopolitical games.

2. The Substance of the GENIUS Act: Limited Binding of Stablecoins and U.S. Treasuries
1. The Truth of the Reserve Mechanism: The Issuer Holds, Not the User Directly
- The act requires stablecoin issuers (such as Circle, Tether) to hold 100% reserve assets, of which short-term U.S. Treasuries account for about 60%-70% (80% of USDC reserves are U.S. Treasuries and cash).
- Legal Relationship: Holding stablecoins by users ≠ holding U.S. Treasuries, users only enjoy a 'fiat currency redemption request right' against the issuer, while ownership of U.S. Treasuries belongs to the issuer. If U.S. Treasuries default, user risk is limited to the stablecoin losing its peg (for example, in 2022, USDC briefly lost its peg to $0.87 due to the Silicon Valley Bank incident), rather than directly bearing the loss of U.S. Treasuries.

2. The Core Purpose of U.S. Treasury Binding: Strengthening Dollar Credit Rather Than Transferring Debt
- The U.S. attempts to convert U.S. Treasuries into 'reserve assets of the crypto world' through stablecoins. In Q2 2025, data shows that the scale of U.S. Treasuries in stablecoin reserves reached $420 billion, accounting for 3.2% of the short-term U.S. Treasury market, alleviating liquidity pressure on U.S. Treasuries (total scale of $36.2 trillion).
- However, this mechanism cannot solve the structural crisis of U.S. Treasuries: the core risk of U.S. Treasuries is the repayment capacity issue of 'debt/GDP ratio at 130%', not short-term liquidity. The scale of stablecoin holdings ($420 billion) is a drop in the bucket compared to the $36 trillion total debt.

3. No Direct Connection Between Bitcoin and U.S. Treasuries
- The act classifies Bitcoin as a 'commodity,' its price volatility (currently $106,000) is driven by market speculation, and it shows a negative correlation with U.S. Treasury yields (when U.S. Treasury yields rise, Bitcoin often falls).
- The logic of 'Bitcoin rising to $1 million to resolve U.S. Treasury issues' is untenable: if Bitcoin's market cap reaches $2.1 trillion ($1 million × 21 million coins), it would only amount to 5.8% of the U.S. Treasury scale, and the high volatility of crypto assets makes it impossible to serve as a 'stable anchor' for debt repayment.


3. China's Response: The RMB Stablecoin Strategy with Scene Binding
1. The Core of Hong Kong's Stablecoin Act: A Closed Loop for Physical Economy Payments
- Allows companies like JD.com to issue RMB stablecoins (such as JD-HK), pegged to offshore RMB, primarily used for cross-border e-commerce transactions (for example, purchasing JD.com products from Brazil requires exchanging for JD-HK).
- Mechanism Differences: Unlike U.S. dollar stablecoins bound to U.S. Treasuries, RMB stablecoin reserves are in RMB cash and government bonds, directly serving the 'China Goods - RMB Payments' cycle of the real economy. In Q2 2025, the cross-border e-commerce transaction volume through this channel has reached 87 billion yuan.

2. The Strategic Value of E-commerce Scenarios: Replacing Debt Dependence with Trade Stickiness
- China's e-commerce global market share reaches 35% (Amazon + Alibaba + JD.com). If cross-border transactions are mandated to use RMB stablecoins, a 'payment-settlement-RMB return' closed loop can be formed, with a target of covering 15% of cross-border e-commerce payments (about 320 billion yuan) by 2025.
- This path avoids the trap of 'debt transfer,' promoting the internationalization of the RMB through the scene stickiness of 'you must use my currency to buy my goods,' contrasting sharply with the U.S. 'debt-driven' approach.

3. Challenges and Breakthrough Points
- Cross-border regulatory coordination: Need to reach 'stablecoin mutual recognition' agreements with regions like Southeast Asia and the Middle East. Currently, Hong Kong has established regulatory connectivity with Dubai, covering 30% of Middle Eastern trade with China.
- Technical Adaptation: Need to be compatible with international payment standards (like ISO 20022), while ensuring that the regulation of sovereign currencies is controllable. The 'dual-layer operation system' of the digital RMB (central bank - commercial banks) serves as a balanced solution.


4. The Core of Global Monetary Competition: The Struggle for Credit Anchors
| Dimension | U.S. Path (GENIUS Act) | China Path (Hong Kong Stablecoin Act) |
|--------------|--------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| Credit Anchor | Sovereign Credit of U.S. Treasuries (Debt Driven) | Chinese Real Economy (Trade Driven) |
| Technical Means | Stablecoins + Decentralized Public Chain Circulation | Compliant Stablecoins + E-commerce Scene Closed Loop |
| Goal | Consolidate Dollar Payment Hegemony, Alleviate U.S. Treasury Liquidity | Promote Digital RMB Going Abroad, Serve Real Economy |
| Risk | High Debt Leading to Stablecoin Credit Collapse | Insufficient Penetration of Cross-border Scenarios, Reliance on E-commerce Ecosystem |


5. Risks and Challenges
1. The United States' 'Debt-Stablecoin' Vicious Cycle
- If U.S. Treasury yields soar (e.g., exceeding 5%), stablecoin issuers may sell off U.S. Treasuries, leading to a price collapse and triggering a chain reaction of 'U.S. Treasury decline → stablecoin losing peg → market panic.'

2. China's 'Scene Barriers' and 'Regulatory Coordination'
- E-commerce stablecoins rely on the ecological stickiness of JD.com and Alibaba. If international e-commerce platforms (such as Amazon) launch U.S. dollar stablecoins, it may divert market share; cross-border regulatory differences may lead to 'compliance arbitrage' (e.g., different reserve requirements in different regions).

3. The Fragmentation of Global Crypto Regulation
- The standards of the EU MiCA, U.S. GENIUS, and Hong Kong legislation are inconsistent, which may lead to the fragmentation of the stablecoin market and increase cross-border payment costs (e.g., exchange fees rising by 15%-20%).


6. Conclusion: The Ultimate Battlefield of Digital Currency is the 'Integration of Credit and Reality'
The competition between the GENIUS Act and the Hong Kong stablecoin legislation essentially reflects the transformation of the global monetary system from 'sovereign credit dominance' to 'technical credit assistance':
- The U.S. attempts to decentralize and permeate U.S. Treasury credit through stablecoins, but the essence of high debt makes it difficult to sustain;
- China constructs a 'trade-driven' digital currency system through 'e-commerce scenarios + RMB stablecoins,' a path more aligned with the real economy, but needs to overcome international scene barriers.

For investors, it is necessary to be aware of the cognitive bias that 'stablecoins = holding U.S. Treasuries' and focus on two types of opportunities:
1. Compliant stablecoins deeply bound to the real economy (such as RMB e-commerce stablecoins);
2. Infrastructure benefiting from cross-border regulatory coordination (such as Hong Kong's digital asset settlement platform).

Ultimately, the outcome of digital currency does not rest on whether technology is decentralized, but on whether it can establish 'stable credit anchors + efficient real service capabilities' — this is the true essence of the 'GENIUS Act.'