If it’s the same stablecoin, why do the books have to be recalculated across regions?
The same dollar price doesn’t mean funds can move between markets without friction.
On October 1, Circle published its comments on the EU’s MiCA review, recommending that the “multiple issuer” structure be retained: the same globally circulating stablecoin would be issued jointly by an EU-licensed entity and regulated entities outside the EU, alongside dynamic rebalancing between global and EU reserves. This is the company’s recommendation in a consultation, not a new rule already approved by the EU.
The issue is how liquidity is connected. If trading and redemption channels are separated by region, market makers may need to keep funds available in different locations, and transfer routes and quoted costs could change. A dollar peg shown on screen doesn’t answer these operational questions.
For people using USDC or researching ETH and SOL settlement scenarios, I’d rather verify which channels are available, which entity is responsible for fulfilling transactions, and whether funds can be moved smoothly across regions. You can’t assume every user gets the same service conditions just because the coin has the same name.
These comments don’t prove that liquidity has already been cut off, nor are they a redemption guarantee for any holder. My view: look beyond global scale and consider the portion that can actually be accessed in your market. The second image is a stock photo of US dollar banknotes, not proof of reserve assets.
$USDC $ETH $SOL #Stablecoin
Tap my profile picture to view my live trading signals
The same dollar price doesn’t mean funds can move between markets without friction.
On October 1, Circle published its comments on the EU’s MiCA review, recommending that the “multiple issuer” structure be retained: the same globally circulating stablecoin would be issued jointly by an EU-licensed entity and regulated entities outside the EU, alongside dynamic rebalancing between global and EU reserves. This is the company’s recommendation in a consultation, not a new rule already approved by the EU.
The issue is how liquidity is connected. If trading and redemption channels are separated by region, market makers may need to keep funds available in different locations, and transfer routes and quoted costs could change. A dollar peg shown on screen doesn’t answer these operational questions.
For people using USDC or researching ETH and SOL settlement scenarios, I’d rather verify which channels are available, which entity is responsible for fulfilling transactions, and whether funds can be moved smoothly across regions. You can’t assume every user gets the same service conditions just because the coin has the same name.
These comments don’t prove that liquidity has already been cut off, nor are they a redemption guarantee for any holder. My view: look beyond global scale and consider the portion that can actually be accessed in your market. The second image is a stock photo of US dollar banknotes, not proof of reserve assets.
$USDC $ETH $SOL #Stablecoin
Tap my profile picture to view my live trading signals
