Cryptocurrency developers should produce a white paper with all the relevant information about the issuer, the token or the trading platform to enable potential buyers to make an informed purchase decision and understand the risks relating to the offering, the proposal says.
National and European regulators must approve these documents before issuers can start operating.
A faceless Tor user who calls himself Satoshi Nakamoto will seek approval from self-entitled bureaucrats before releasing bitcoin.pdf and a bunch of source code, because... because.
Everybody is a bank-loving masochist with a regulatory fetish! Confirmed by strongest science.
"Because they are tied to national currencies, supporters of stablecoins claim they can avoid the bubble-and-burst evolution seen with Bitcoin."
Because they are tied to national currencies which are already digital, they have no fucking point...except pointless redundancy, I guess? They continue to miss the point of Bitcoin's reason for existence in the first place.
Bitcoin is bitcoin. There's no "issuer", there's no backing, it is what it is. You want some? Mine it or buy it.
The EU tentative regulation that Biodom mentioned, as I understand it, is aimed at tokens issued by corporate actors (libra is explicitly mentioned, and tether would qualify as well). My previous post simply states that I personally agree that such corporate entities should be held liable, and any failure to comply with redemption requests immediately should have civil and criminal consequences.
The last thing we need is more fractional reserve scams springing up like mushrooms everywhere.
Requests for immediate redemption of BTC only works if the individual contract with the institutional custodial entity does not exclude the ability to redeem immediately. Some services are written in such a way that redemption is not part of the arrangement, and there continue to be a decent number of normies who use those kinds of services (out of convenience, etc) (robinhood, GBTC and likely some other similar services).
Of course, if anyone is getting exposure to BTC through such custodial services that do not allow immediate redemption, then surely they are more likely buying some sort of voucher rather than actual BTC.
So, in that regard, hopefully investors in BTC are mostly using custodial services that allow them to redeem their BTC at any time, and if they use other kinds of services that do not allow for immediate redemption of BTC, such usage is very limited in nature and ONLY a fraction (perhaps less than 20%) of their actual BTC exposure.