Will the cap on UK stablecoins impact its status as a financial hub? Brian Armstrong warns that tightening regulations and soaring profits may create a hedge.

On February 25, the CEO of the United States’ largest compliant CEX, Brian Armstrong, publicly opposed the Bank of England’s proposed stablecoin holding limit policy, stating that the related rules could weaken the UK’s competitiveness in the global digital asset and stablecoin markets and suppress the development of the crypto innovation ecosystem. He said on social media that if current regulatory directions restrict stablecoin size and use cases, capital and blockchain companies may migrate to more friendly jurisdictions.

Under the proposed framework, the Bank of England plans to set a limit of approximately £20,000 for individual stablecoin holdings, impose higher limits for businesses, and require 40% of reserves to be held in non-interest-bearing central bank accounts. Some industry insiders interpret this design as a direct constraint on stablecoin liquidity and yield models, which could impact core applications such as stablecoin payments, tokenized assets, and on-chain settlements. Several UK lawmakers also warned that excessive restrictions could weaken fintech innovation and reduce institutional participation.

Meanwhile, the stablecoin-related revenue of this CEX is rapidly growing. The company expects stablecoin business revenue to reach $1.35 billion in 2025, significantly higher than $911 million in the previous year, with particularly strong contributions in the fourth quarter. Analysts note that as stablecoin revenue sharing, on-chain settlement demand, and USD stablecoin adoption increase, stablecoins are gradually shifting toward a role as “basic financial infrastructure” rather than just a single crypto product.

Bloomberg industry research suggests that if the US GENIUS Act establishes a federal stablecoin regulatory framework and allows offering yield incentives to holders, related revenue could multiply several times. However, banking lobbies are concerned that interest-bearing stablecoins could divert traditional deposits, leading to efforts to limit stablecoin yields in the CLARITY Act, which could also impact the platform’s interest-sharing model with Circle.

Notably, Brian Armstrong has previously withdrawn support for some regulatory drafts, believing that unreasonable stablecoin regulations could be more destructive than a lack of legislation. Currently, US regulators, banking representatives, and the crypto industry are still negotiating on stablecoin yields, risk management, and market structure. The policy direction will directly influence the stablecoin regulatory framework, the competition landscape of USD stablecoins, and the development path of global crypto compliance markets.