Financial Stability Board warns stablecoins pose untested cross-border risks

The Financial Stability Board has identified critical gaps in global stablecoin regulation that could amplify financial stress during a market crisis. The FSB’s call for cross-border coordination comes as the sector has nearly doubled in size since the start of 2025, yet remains untested under severe conditions.

• Stablecoin market capitalization grew from $206 billion at the start of 2025 to $306 billion today.
• Multi-issuer stablecoins can trap reserves in one jurisdiction while redemption demands concentrate in another, complicating crisis response.
• The FSB warns that national regulations develop at different speeds, leaving holders’ recovery uncertain if an issuer becomes insolvent.

• $306B Current stablecoin market capitalization, up 49 percent since start of 2025
• 24/7 Stablecoin trading frequency versus limited hours for underlying asset markets

CoinDesk reported that the Financial Stability Board, the G20’s primary financial watchdog, has warned that stablecoins and their national regulatory regimes remain untested in severe market crises and pose cross-border risks that existing financial rules may not address. In a report released as markets prepare for the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors’ October 15 (Thursday) meeting, the FSB identified structural vulnerabilities in how stablecoins operate globally while their regulatory frameworks develop unevenly across jurisdictions. The watchdog called for enhanced cross-border information sharing, monitoring protocols, and contingency planning for stablecoin distress or failure scenarios.

Multi-issuer structures create concentration risk during redemptions

The FSB highlighted particular dangers in multi-issuer stablecoin models, where affiliated companies issue the same token and share liability while maintaining reserve assets in separate jurisdictions. If stablecoin holders can redeem from any issuer within the group, redemption demand could accumulate at a single entity while the reserves needed to meet those demands sit in another jurisdiction, the report warned. During a crisis, moving those reserves across borders may become impossible or prohibitively costly, leaving an issuer unable to satisfy redemptions even if the group collectively holds sufficient assets.

The jurisdictional fragmentation also creates legal uncertainty. If an issuer becomes insolvent, it may be unclear which country’s insolvency rules apply, potentially leaving creditors competing across multiple legal systems.

24/7 trading creates timing mismatches with traditional asset markets

Stablecoins trade continuously while the markets for assets backing them operate on fixed schedules, a structural mismatch that could amplify instability during runs. If redemption demand accelerates faster than an issuer can liquidate backing assets during market closures, the stablecoin may lose its peg to its intended reference currency. When that happens, forced sales of reserves could cascade into traditional financial markets as investors scramble to recover liquidity, potentially spreading the shock beyond the crypto sector.

The FSB acknowledged that deep and liquid secondary markets could theoretically arrest a depeg through arbitrage, pulling the token back toward its intended value.

Weak data on stablecoin holders impedes coordinated crisis response

The pseudonymous nature of cryptocurrency transactions prevents regulators from identifying where stablecoin holders are based and which jurisdictions should apply their rules, the FSB said. This data gap makes cross-border coordination during a crisis harder to execute and leaves uncertainty over which authority bears responsibility for protecting which holders. Andrew Bailey, FSB Chair and Governor of the Bank of England, wrote in an accompanying letter that “global stablecoin arrangements are inherently cross-border, yet national regulations are taking shape at different speeds and cross-border cooperation in this area is still in its infancy.”

Global stablecoin arrangements are inherently cross-border, yet national regulations are taking shape at different speeds and cross-border cooperation in this area is still in its infancy.

Andrew Bailey, Chair of the Financial Stability Board and Governor of the Bank of England

The FSB’s recommendations are not legally binding, though FSB members typically commit to implementing agreed standards within their national frameworks. Bailey has previously warned that international stablecoin rulemaking has stalled, and the latest report signals renewed pressure from the financial establishment to establish coordinated rules before the sector encounters a stress event.

The BlockWest read. The FSB’s framing treats stablecoin crises as inevitable rather than hypothetical, yet offers no timeline for binding rules. Institutions holding stablecoins or exposed to their reserve assets should treat the current regulatory vacuum as a material risk rather than awaiting formal standards that may take years to harmonize across jurisdictions.

The FSB report precedes the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors’ October 15 meeting, where stablecoin coordination is expected to feature on the agenda. Watch whether the G20 commits to a deadline for national regulators to implement cross-border information-sharing protocols and whether Bailey’s Bank of England issues guidance on how UK-domiciled stablecoin issuers should report holder locations and reserve custody arrangements.

BlockWest is a news publication. Nothing here is investment advice. Read our disclaimer and editorial policy.