As stablecoins take center stage in U.S. crypto policy, two competing bills—the GENIUS Act and the STABLE Act—are making their way through Congress. Both bills aim to establish comprehensive federal regulations for stablecoin issuers, but they take very different approaches to oversight, innovation, and consumer protection. With momentum building toward a legislative breakthrough by the end of 2025, many are asking: Can both bills become law? And if so, what happens next?
Let’s break down the current state of play, the key differences between the bills, and what it would mean for the crypto industry if either, or both, are signed into law.
What Are the GENIUS and STABLE Acts?
The GENIUS Act (short for “Guaranteeing Emergency National Investment Using Stablecoins”) was introduced in the Senate and has already passed with broad bipartisan support. The act creates a dual-path regulatory framework, giving stablecoin issuers the choice to operate under either federal or certified state regulation—unless they exceed a $10 billion issuance threshold, at which point they must transition to federal oversight.
By contrast, the STABLE Act (Stablecoin Transparency and Accountability through Banking-Level Examination) was introduced in the House and emphasizes strict federal control. It prioritizes traditional financial structures and requires all major stablecoin issuers to be federally regulated, with mandates like FDIC insurance for reserve backing and a two-year moratorium on algorithmic stablecoins.
Where Are These Bills Now?
Right now, the GENIUS Act is ahead of the curve, having already passed in the Senate. However, it faces an uncertain path in the House. Some House lawmakers have expressed concerns over its flexible regulatory model and its more permissive stance on innovation, particularly algorithmic stablecoins.
Meanwhile, the STABLE Act is waiting for a full House vote. Despite not yet clearing the chamber, it has gained traction among lawmakers who prefer a more cautious approach to crypto regulation. President Donald Trump has expressed a preference for the Senate’s GENIUS Act, but a unified consensus in the House has yet to form.
Key Differences Between the Two Bills
Though both acts seek to regulate stablecoins, their approaches diverge on several critical points:
- Regulatory Approach
GENIUS allows dual oversight—federal or certified state regulation—while STABLE insists on strict federal control for all major issuers. - Issuer Eligibility
GENIUS opens the door to a wider array of entities, including public companies and nonbank institutions. STABLE largely limits eligibility to federally insured banks and closely regulated financial entities. - Reserve and Disclosure Requirements
Both require 1:1 reserve backing and monthly public disclosures. However, STABLE mandates FDIC insurance and stricter penalties for false reporting, while GENIUS favors robust audits without requiring FDIC coverage. - Algorithmic Stablecoins
The STABLE Act bans them for two years, while the GENIUS Act allows them with regulatory approval following further study. - State Oversight Thresholds
GENIUS mandates a shift to federal oversight once a $10 billion issuance threshold is crossed. STABLE allows state-regulated issuers to stay under state supervision indefinitely.
These philosophical differences—particularly around innovation versus strict oversight—will be at the heart of any legislative negotiations.
Can They Both Become Law?
In theory, yes, but not as standalone laws. Instead, a reconciled version of the two would likely be merged into one comprehensive piece of legislation. This process is common in Congress, particularly when the Senate and House versions of a bill reflect different political or regulatory priorities.
A conference committee would be responsible for blending the two approaches into a single compromise bill that could gain support in both chambers. Key figures in the House, like Financial Services Committee Chair French Hill, have already indicated a willingness to engage in discussions, even as disagreements remain over provisions like algorithmic stablecoin treatment and issuer eligibility.
If reconciliation succeeds and the bill is signed by the president, the next phase begins—one that will have a lasting impact on the crypto industry.
What Happens If They Are Signed Into Law?
Rulemaking Process Begins
Federal agencies like the Federal Reserve, OCC, FDIC, SEC, and CFTC will have around 180 days to issue detailed regulations. These rules will define capital requirements, reserve diversification, licensing conditions, operational risk standards, audit requirements, and enforcement procedures.
Licensing and Oversight
Issuers with more than $10 billion in stablecoins outstanding will be placed under federal oversight. Smaller issuers may opt for certified state regulation if the GENIUS framework prevails. State regulators must then apply to have their regulatory regimes recognized by the Treasury.
Enforcement Powers Kick In
Regulators will gain the authority to issue cease-and-desist orders, impose civil and criminal penalties, and take legal action against noncompliant issuers.
Transition Period for Industry Compliance
Stablecoin issuers will be given a grace period to align with the new regulations—updating reserve policies, obtaining licenses, and restructuring business models where necessary.
Public Feedback and Final Rules
Regulatory bodies will publish proposals for public comment. This will be followed by months or years of debate, adjustment, and finalization. If history is any guide, the rulemaking process could stretch well beyond 2026. For example, some regulations stemming from the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act weren’t finalized until 2023.
What Does This Mean for the Crypto Industry?
If passed, these bills would represent a turning point for stablecoins in the U.S., marking the first major federal effort to provide clear, enforceable guidelines.
For Stablecoin Issuers
Issuers will face increased compliance costs and operational changes, particularly regarding audits, public disclosures, and reserve management. However, the clarity could also unlock access to larger markets and institutional partnerships.
For Consumers
Greater transparency and stronger safeguards could boost consumer trust and adoption of stablecoins for everyday payments, remittances, and savings.
For Innovation
The GENIUS Act’s more flexible approach could encourage new entrants and novel stablecoin models. The STABLE Act’s caution may slow that innovation but enhance system stability.
For U.S. Global Leadership
A coherent, credible regulatory framework may position the U.S. as a global leader in stablecoin regulation, influencing how other jurisdictions approach the issue.
Conclusion
While the GENIUS and STABLE Acts offer different visions for stablecoin regulation, they are not mutually exclusive. With the right compromises, Congress could unify their strongest provisions into a single law that balances innovation with consumer protection and financial stability.
If passed and signed into law, the real work begins—turning legislation into enforceable rules through a complex regulatory process that could reshape the crypto landscape in the U.S. for years to come.
For now, all eyes are on Capitol Hill as lawmakers race to finalize crypto legislation by the end of the year. Whether it’s the GENIUS Act, the STABLE Act, or a merged version of both, one thing is clear: 2025 could be the year that stablecoins finally get the rules they’ve long needed.
Learn more about US crypto legislation here!
