Stablecoins: Depegging, fraudsters and decentralization
Opinion by: Merav Ozair, PhD
Lately, stablecoins are everywhere — this time around, headed by “traditional” financial institutions. Bank of America and Standard Chartered are considering launching their own stablecoin, joining JPMorgan, which launched its stablecoin, JPM Coin — rebranded as Kinexys Digital Payments — to facilitate transactions with their institutional clients on their blockchain platform, Kinexys (formerly Onyx).
Mastercard plans to bring stablecoins to the mainstream, joining Bleap Finance, a crypto startup. The aim is to enable stablecoins to be spent directly onchain — without conversions or intermediaries — seamlessly integrating blockchain assets with Mastercard’s global payment rails.
In early April 2025, Visa joined the Global Dollar Network (USDG) stablecoin consortium. The company will become the first traditional finance player to join the consortium. In late March 2025, NYSE parent Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) announced that it is investigating applications for using USDC (USDC) stablecoin and US Yield Coin within its derivatives exchanges, clearinghouses, data services and other markets.
Why the renewed interest in stablecoins?
Regulatory clarity and acceptance
Recent moves by regulatory bodies in the United States and Europe have created more straightforward guidelines for cryptocurrency use. In the US, Congress is considering legislation to establish formal standards for stablecoins, bolstering confidence among banks and fintech companies.
The European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation requires that stablecoin issuers operating within the EU adhere to specific financial standards, including special reserve requirements and risk mitigation. In the UK, financial authorities plan to conduct consultations to draft rules governing stablecoin use, further facilitating their acceptance and adoption.
The Trump administration executive order 14067, “Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology,” supports and “promotes the development and growth of lawful and legitimate dollar-backed stablecoins worldwide” while “prohibiting the establishment, issuance, circulation, and use of a CBDC within the jurisdiction of the United States.”
This executive order, followed by Trump’s World Liberty Financial company launching a stablecoin called USD1, signals that this is the era of stablecoins, particularly those pegged to the USD.
Do we need more stablecoins?
The stablecoin landscape
There are over 200 stablecoins, most pegged to the US dollar. Two established stablecoins dominate the stablecoin landscape. Tether’s USDt (USDT), the oldest stablecoin, launched in 2014 and USDC, launched in 2018, capturing 65% and 28% of stablecoins market cap, respectively — both are centralized fiat collateralized.
Recent: Crypto wanted to overthrow banks, now it’s becoming them in stablecoin fight
In third place, a relatively new one, USDe, launched in February 2024, holds about 2% of the stablecoin market cap and has an unconventional mechanism based on derivatives in the crypto market. Although it runs on a DeFi protocol on Ethereum, it incorporates centralized features since centralized exchanges hold the derivatives positions.
There are three primary mechanisms of stablecoins:
-
Centralized, fiat-collateralized: A centralized company maintains reserves of the assets in a bank or trust (e.g., for currency) or a vault (e.g., for gold) and issues tokens (i.e., stablecoins) that represent a claim on the underlying asset.
-
Decentralized, cryptocurrency-collateralized: A stablecoin is backed by other decentralized crypto assets. One example can be found in the MakerDAO stablecoin Dai (DAI), which is pegged to the US dollar and encapsulates the features of decentralization. While a central organization controls centralized stablecoins, no one entity controls the issuance of DAI.
-
Decentralized, uncollateralized: This mechanism ensures the stability of the coin’s value by controlling its supply through an algorithm executed by a smart contract. In some ways, this is no different from central banks, which also don’t rely on reserve assets to keep the value of their currency stable. The difference is that central banks, like the Federal Reserve, set a monetary policy publicly based on well-understood parameters, and its status as the issuer of legal tender provides the credibility of that policy.
Depegging, risk and fraudsters
Stablecoins are supposed to be stable. They were created to overcome the inherent volatility of cryptocurrencies. To maintain their stability, stablecoins should (1) be pegged to a stable asset and (2) follow a mechanism that sustains the peg.
If stablecoins are pegged to gold or electricity, they will reflect the volatility of these assets and thus may not be the best choice if you are seeking a no-risk (or close to no-risk) asset.
USDe maintains a peg to the USD through delta hedging. It uses short and long positions in futures, which generates a 27% yield annually — significantly higher than the 12% annual yield of other stablecoins pegged to the USD. Derivative positions are considered risky — the higher the risk, the higher the return. Therefore, it encapsulates an inherited risk due to its reliance on derivatives, which runs counter to the purpose of stablecoins.
Stablecoins have been around for more than a decade. During this time, there were no major depegging fiascos other than the case of Terra. The collapse of Terra was not the result of a reserve problem or mechanism but rather the act of fraudsters and manipulators.
TerraUSD (UST) had a built-in arbitrage mechanism between UST and the Terra blockchain native coin, LUNA. To create UST, you needed to burn LUNA.
To entice traders to burn LUNA and create UST, the creators of the Terra blockchain offered a 19.5% yield on staking, which is crypto terminology for earning 19.5% interest on a deposit, through what they called the Anchor protocol.
Such a high interest rate is simply not sustainable. Someone has to borrow at such a rate or above for the lender to receive 19.5% interest. This is how banks make their profit — they charge high interest on borrowing (such as mortgages or loans) and provide low interest on savings (such as a traditional savings account or a certificate of deposit account). Analysis of the Anchor protocol in January 2022 showed it was at a loss.
One of the allegations in the lawsuits against Terraform Labs’ founders is that the Anchor protocol was a Ponzi scheme.
In March 2025, Galaxy Digital reached a $200-million settlement with the New York Attorney General over claims the crypto investing company promoted the LUNA digital asset without disclosing its interest in the token.
In January 2025, Do Kwon, founder of Terra, was found liable for securities fraud and is facing multiple charges in the US, including fraud, wire fraud and commodities fraud. If regulators are interested in preventing future cases like Terra, they should focus on how to deter fraudsters and manipulators from issuing or engaging with stablecoins.
Decentralization: Rekindling the premise of Bitcoin
Most stablecoins are centralized assets collateralized. They are controlled by a company that could conduct unauthorized use of customers’ funds or falsely claim that reserves fully back a stablecoin.
To prevent companies’ misconduct, regulators should closely monitor these companies and set rules similar to securities laws.
Centralized stablecoins run counter to the notion of blockchain and the premise of Bitcoin. When Bitcoin was launched, it was supposed to be a payment platform free of intermediaries, not controlled by any company, bank or government — a decentralized mechanism — run by the people for the people.
If a stablecoin is centralized, it should follow the regulations of any other centralized asset.
Maybe it’s time to rekindle the premise of Bitcoin but in a more “stable” fashion. Developing an algorithmic, decentralized stablecoin that is free of any control of a company, bank or government and reviving the core notion of blockchain.
Opinion by: Merav Ozair, PhD.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
The “White Whale” increased his social media pressure campaign to $2.5 million after claiming that MEXC requested an in-person KYC verification in Malaysia.
Prosecutors appealed the sentences given to HashFlare founders Sergei Potapenko and Ivan Turõgin, after arguing the pair should get 10 years in prison.
Politics
Nigel Farage has a new ‘leave’ campaign – here’s how it could work and how it might impact you
Nigel Farage has said he would take the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) if Reform win the next election.
The party’s leader also reaffirmed his pledge to repeal the Human Rights Act and disapply three other international treaties acting as “roadblocks” to deporting anyone entering the UK illegally.
In a speech about tackling illegal migration, he said a Reform government would detain and deport any migrants arriving illegally, including women and children, and they would “never, ever be allowed to stay”.
Sky News looks at what the ECHR is, how the UK could leave, and what could happen to human rights protections if it does.
What is the ECHR?
On 4 November 1950, the 12 member states of the newly formed Council of Europe (different to the EU) signed the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – otherwise known as the ECHR.
It came into force on 3 September 1953 and has since been signed by an additional 34 Council of Europe members who have joined, bringing the total to 46 signatories.
The treaty was drafted in the aftermath of the Second World War and the Holocaust to protect people from the most serious human rights violations. It was also in response to the growth of Stalinism in central and Eastern Europe to protect members from communist subversion.
The treaty was the first time fundamental human rights were guaranteed in law.
Sir Winston Churchill helped establish the Council of Europe and was a driving force behind the ECHR, which came from the Charter of Human Rights that he championed and was drafted by British lawyers.
Sir Winston Churchill was a driving force behind the ECHR
To be a signatory of the ECHR, a state has to be a member of the Council of Europe – and they must “respect pluralist democracy, the rule of law and human rights”.
There are 18 sections, including the most well-known: Article 1 (the right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (right to private and family life) and Article 10 (right to freedom of expression).
The ECHR has been used to halt the deportation of migrants in 13 out of 29 UK cases since 1980.
ECHR protections are enforced in the UK through the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates most ECHR rights into domestic law. This means individuals can bring cases to UK courts to argue their ECHR rights have been violated, instead of having to take their case to the European Court of Human Rights.
Article 8 is the main section that has been used to stop illegal migrant deportations, but Article 3 has also been successfully used.
Read more:
Why Farage’s small boats plan is not actually about policy
Legal expert explains if Farage deportation plan would work
The ECHR is interpreted by judges at this court in Strasbourg, France. File pic: AP
How is it actually used?
The ECHR is interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) – you’ll have to bear with us on the confusingly similar acronyms.
The convention is interpreted under the “living instrument doctrine”, meaning it must be considered in the light of present-day conditions.
The number of full-time judges corresponds to the number of ECHR signatories, so there are currently 46 – each nominated by their state for a non-renewable nine-year term. But they are prohibited from having any institutional ties with the state they come from.
An individual, group of individuals, or one or more of the signatory states can lodge an application alleging one of the signatory states has breached their human rights. Anyone who have exhausted their human rights case in UK courts can apply to the ECtHR to have their case heard in Strasbourg.
All ECtHR hearings must be heard in public, unless there are exceptional circumstances to be heard in private, which happens most of the time following written pleadings.
The court may award damages, typically no more than £1,000 plus legal costs, but it lacks enforcement powers, so some states have ignored verdicts and continued practices judged to be human rights violations.
Read more: Asylum seekers in charts and numbers
Inside the European Court of Human Rights. File pic: AP
How could the UK leave?
A country can leave the convention by formally denouncing it, but it would likely have to also leave the Council of Europe as the two are dependent on each other.
At the international level, a state must formally notify the Council of Europe of its intention to withdraw with six months’ notice, when the UK would still have to implement any ECtHR rulings and abide by ECHR laws.
The UK government would have to seek parliament’s approval before notifying the ECtHR, and would have to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 – which would also require parliamentary approval.
Would the UK leaving breach any other agreements?
Leaving the ECHR would breach the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, a deal between the British and Irish governments on how Northern Ireland should be governed, which could threaten the peace settlement.
It would also put the UK’s relationship with the EU under pressure as the Brexit deal commits both to the ECHR.
The EU has said if the UK leaves the ECHR it would terminate part of the agreement, halting the extradition of criminal suspects from the EU to face trial in the UK.
Keir Starmer has previously ruled out taking Britain out of the ECHR
How would the UK’s human rights protections change?
Certain rights under the ECHR are also recognised in British common law, but the ECHR has a more extensive protection of human rights.
For example, it was the ECHR that offered redress to victims of the Hillsborough disaster and the victims of “black cab rapist” John Worboys after state investigations failed.
Before cases were taken to the ECtHR and the Human Rights Act came into force, the common law did not prevent teachers from hitting children or protect gay people from being banned from serving in the armed forces.
Repealing the ECHR would also mean people in the UK would no longer be able to take their case to the ECtHR if the UK courts do not remedy a violation of their rights.
The UK’s human rights record would then not be subject to the same scrutiny as it is under the ECHR, where states review each other’s actions.
Two victims of John Worboys sued the Met Police for failing to effectively investigate his crimes using Article 3 of the ECHR. Pic: PA
How human rights in the UK would be impacted depends partly on what would replace the Human Rights Act.
Mr Farage has said he would introduce a British Bill of Rights, which would apply only to UK citizens and lawful British citizens.
He has said it would not mention “human rights” but would include “the freedom to do everything, unless there’s a law that says you can’t” – which is how common law works.
Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg said this would simply confirm the rights to which people are already entitled, but would also remove rights enjoyed by people visiting the UK.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024