Markets
BTC— —
ETH— —
SOL— —
XRP— —
BNB— —
ADA— —
DOGE— —
MCap— —
BTC— —
ETH— —
SOL— —
XRP— —
BNB— —
ADA— —
DOGE— —
MCap— —
Policy

The Treasury Just Told Stablecoin Issuers They're Banks — FinCEN and OFAC Lay Out the AML and Sanctions Rules Under the GENIUS Act

A joint proposed rule from FinCEN and OFAC would require permitted stablecoin issuers to run full AML programmes, screen every transaction against the SDN list, and face strict-liability penalties for failing to freeze sanctioned funds. Comments are due by 9 June.

By James Gray··3 min read
The Treasury Just Told Stablecoin Issuers They're Banks — FinCEN and OFAC Lay Out the AML and Sanctions Rules Under the GENIUS Act

Key Points

  • A joint proposed rule from FinCEN and OFAC would require permitted stablecoin issuers to run full AML programmes, screen every transaction against the SDN list, and face strict-liability penalties for failing to freeze sanctioned funds.
  • Comments are due by 9 June.

FinCEN and the Office of Foreign Assets Control published a joint notice of proposed rulemaking on 8 April that would, for the first time, impose bank-grade anti-money-laundering and sanctions compliance obligations on stablecoin issuers operating under the GENIUS Act — the federal framework Congress enacted in July 2025 to regulate payment stablecoins and the companies that issue them.

The proposed rule is dense — 87 pages in the Federal Register — but its core message is simple: if you issue a permitted payment stablecoin, you are a financial institution for the purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act, and you will be regulated as one. That means written AML and counter-terrorism-financing programmes, a designated compliance officer, independent testing, ongoing training and — the part that will concentrate minds — a binding obligation to screen every transaction against OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals list and take action when sanctioned persons hold or trade your tokens.

The sanctions component is where the rule's teeth are sharpest. Permitted payment stablecoin issuers would be required to maintain technical capabilities to block, freeze and reject transactions involving sanctioned persons or jurisdictions. They would need the ability to seize, freeze, burn or prevent the transfer of stablecoins when necessary to comply with a lawful order. And the enforcement standard is strict liability — meaning the Treasury doesn't need to prove the issuer knew about the sanctioned transaction, only that it happened. Criminal and civil penalties both apply.

Advertisement

728×90

For an industry that has spent years arguing stablecoins are just software and their issuers are not banks, the proposed rule is a blunt rebuttal. FinCEN's position is that the moment you issue a token pegged to the dollar and redeemable on demand, you have created a payment instrument, and the entity that created it bears responsibility for how it circulates — including on secondary markets where the issuer is not a direct party to the transaction.

That secondary-market obligation is the most novel and contentious element. The rule distinguishes between primary market activities — issuing, redeeming, burning and converting stablecoins — and secondary market activities, which encompass every transfer that doesn't directly involve the issuer. Under the proposal, issuers would be responsible for monitoring and screening secondary-market transactions to the extent they have the technical capability to do so. Given that most major stablecoins run on public blockchains where every transaction is visible, 'technical capability' is likely to be interpreted broadly.

Circle and Tether — which together account for more than 90 per cent of stablecoin market capitalisation — will feel the rule's weight differently. Circle has positioned itself as the compliance-first issuer, obtaining licences and building infrastructure that anticipates exactly this kind of regulation. Tether, headquartered in the British Virgin Islands with reserves held across multiple jurisdictions, faces a more complex path. The GENIUS Act already requires non-US issuers to meet comparable standards if their stablecoins circulate within the United States, and the FinCEN rule adds operational specificity to that requirement.

The CLARITY Act, which is still working its way through the Senate, addresses market structure — defining which tokens are securities and which are commodities, delineating SEC and CFTC oversight. The GENIUS Act addresses stablecoins specifically. Together, they form the two pillars of what would be the first comprehensive federal framework for digital assets in the US. The FinCEN rule is the first major piece of implementation guidance under the GENIUS Act, and it sets the tone for everything that follows.

Morgan Stanley's recent launch of a money-market fund designed specifically for stablecoin issuers begins to make more sense in this context. If issuers are going to be regulated as financial institutions, they'll need institutional-grade reserve management — and Wall Street is positioning to provide it before the rules are even finalised.

Comments on the proposed rule are due by 9 June 2026. FinCEN and OFAC have proposed a 12-month implementation period after the final rule is published, giving issuers roughly until mid-2027 to build or upgrade their compliance infrastructure. For the large issuers, that's tight but manageable. For the dozens of smaller issuers that have launched or announced stablecoins in the past year — many of them operating on the assumption that lighter regulation was coming — the clock just started, and it's running faster than they expected.

MiningPool content is intended for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice.

Advertisement

728×90

Related Stories

Sixth Circuit Ruled Kalshi's Sports Contracts Are Not Swaps
Policy

A unanimous panel held that Kalshi's sports event contracts are not swaps because a game result carries no financial consequence of its own, affirming Ohio's refusal of an injunction and vacating Tennessee's. Three appeals courts have now ruled and Kalshi has won one of them, with New Jersey's petition already waiting at the Supreme Court.

·MiningPool Staff
SEC Staff Made a Working Network the Test for Buybacks and Upgrades
Policy

The Division of Corporation Finance's updated crypto FAQs answer buyback, maintenance and marketing questions the same way: once a system is functional, none of it counts as the essential managerial effort that makes a token an investment contract. The staff attached the reverse warning to networks that do not yet work, and noted the answers have no legal force.

·MiningPool Staff
Kalshi Has Until November 9 to Answer New Jersey at the Supreme Court
Policy

New Jersey's petition asking whether Dodd-Frank preempts state sports betting law reached the Supreme Court on September 2, and the first amicus brief was docketed three weeks later. The clerk has since pushed the deadline for a response to November 9, which keeps the petition off the justices' conference list until late November at the earliest.

·MiningPool Staff
The SEC Gave Tokenized Stock Venues Five Years and Tight Caps
Policy

Venues can trade tokenized National Market System stock without registering as exchanges, on notice rather than approval. A venue may list at most 75 Tier 1 names, a tier that takes in S&P 500 and Russell 1000 stocks, and trade no more than 0.25 percent of a name's average daily volume in the prior month.

·MiningPool Staff
Bitdeer Mined 1,310 Bitcoin in August and Ended the Month With 61
Business

The miner's self-mining hashrate rose to 79.9 EH/s and production was up about 249 percent from a year earlier, but its bitcoin balance ended the month at 61 coins, against 257 a month earlier and 1,934 a year ago. The company's own footnote says the figure counts coins pledged as collateral, which rules out one explanation for the drop.

·MiningPool Staff
Korean Police Referred 18 Polymarket Users to Prosecutors
Policy

The Gangwon Provincial Police registered 26 domestic users as criminal suspects and referred 18 of them, a month after Korea's communications regulator blocked the platform. Police argue that staking crypto on an outcome the buyer cannot control meets the elements of gambling under Article 246.

·MiningPool Staff

Stay informed

Verifiable crypto journalism, delivered to your inbox.

Weekday mornings. No hype. No financial advice. Just what happened and why it matters.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. Read our privacy policy.