Europe's most valuable fintech just launched a stablecoin.

Yesterday, Revolut announced that they’re about to roll out EURR, a MiCA-regulated euro stablecoin. First stops: Denmark, Poland, and Portugal, with wider EEA access to follow this year.

While it makes Revolut the sixth EU bank with a live euro stablecoin (hat tip to Société Générale, Banking Circle, ODDO BHF, Crédit Agricole, and Bison Bank), Revolut gets there by a different route. Rather than issue the stablecoin itself, it hands the regulatory and operational weight to Bridge Building S.A., the Luxembourg arm of Stripe-owned Bridge, and likely still keeps most of the reserve interest.

Interestingly, Revolut emphasizes that EURR is “the first step in our vision for a full suite of Revolut stablecoins, denominated in several additional currencies.”

That sounds exciting, but it also raises the question: what is the actual use for a euro stablecoin in a Revolut user's hands?

98% of global stablecoin activity runs on dollars, and no one has really figured out yet how to make the euro compete. The seemingly obvious answer, “plug it into lending markets for yield,” needs borrowers who want euros, not just holders who own them, and that side barely exists today.

But this is where Revolut is different from every euro issuer. With 80 million customers and $67.5 billion in deposits, it's the first to arrive with its own demand already in the building. Chances are, they’re looking to build out an onchain ecosystem around its own user base and follow the path of Robinhood and Coinbase.

Ergo: Expect more onchain announcements to follow.

IN TODAY’S BRIEFING:

  • Three thousand U.S. banks to go onchain

  • Stablecoins soon to be considered cash equivalents in the U.S.?

WITH INSIGHTS FROM

Nik
Fahrer
Forvis Mazars US

Antoine
Scalia
Cryptio

HIGH SIGNAL NEWS

  • Thirty-nine U.S. banking associations launch BankChain Alliance. Representing more than 3,000 banks, the initiative aims to launch an industry-owned and governed blockchain network in 2027, enabling participating banks to offer tokenized deposits, bank-issued stablecoins, and programmable payments. BankChain is the latest in a growing wave of bank-led blockchain initiatives, following the launch of the Cari Network earlier this year. Find all the details about Cari and its architecture in our article here. 🇺🇸

  • ECB names first Pontes operators and Appia working group. Axiology, Cashlink, Clearstream, and SWIAT will be the first to connect their infrastructure to Pontes, the Eurosystem’s short-term solution for deploying the European wholesale CBDC. Meanwhile, around 60 financial institutions, start-ups, and associations, including Santander, BNP Paribas, and JPMorgan, have been selected to work on Appia, the long-term solution designed to deliver a fully integrated DLT infrastructure by 2028. 🇪🇺

  • Standard Chartered starts distributing Hong Kong’s first regulated HKD stablecoin. The bank has become the first authorized distributor of HKDAP, issued by Anchorpoint, a joint venture backed by Standard Chartered, HKT, and Animoca Brands. Initial use cases include subscriptions and settlements for tokenized money market funds, intragroup treasury settlements, and cross-border payments, with the first fund applications planned for Q4. 🇭🇰

TOP STORY

FASB Proposes Guidance on Treating Stablecoins as Cash Equivalents

Clarification on the horizon: On August 18, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), which sets U.S. accounting standards, proposed guidance clarifying when certain stablecoins could meet the existing definition of cash equivalents. The proposal is open for public comment until November 19.

Why it matters: The clarification could remove a significant barrier to the use of stablecoins in corporate treasury, where blockchain-based infrastructure enables 24/7, near-instant transfers. To date, adoption has remained largely confined to the crypto firms and companies outside the U.S., partly because accounting treatment has been inconsistent across companies and auditors.

A test to pass: Under the proposed guidance, a stablecoin would need to meet three conditions to qualify as a cash equivalent:

  • A right to redemption on demand: The holder must be able to redeem the token for cash at its discretion, without significant fees or restrictions.

  • A direct redemption right with the issuer: The token must be redeemable directly from the issuer, not through an intermediary such as an exchange or market maker. Indirect redemption, the FASB argues, adds counterparty risk however liquid the secondary market is.

  • Segregated 1:1 reserves: Mirroring the GENIUS Act’s reserve requirement, the stablecoin must be backed at least 1:1 by short-term, highly liquid assets held in segregated reserves.

More consistent accounting: Stablecoins that pass the test could be treated as cash equivalents, narrowing the divergent practices seen today. It would also simplify reporting: companies that settle transactions in stablecoins without treating them as cash currently may need to track each payment separately and disclose the activity outside their cash flow statements.

  • No European equivalent: That relief would only apply to companies reporting under U.S. GAAP, the U.S. accounting standards. Under IFRS, the accounting framework used by listed companies in the EU and the UK, there is no comparable proposal. The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has issued no guidance on stablecoins, leaving classification to each company’s judgment. It is reviewing the definition of cash equivalents, but on general application questions, not stablecoins.

  • Nothing for bank ratios: Even in the U.S., the impact would stop at financial reporting, as the FASB does not set prudential rules. Cash-equivalent treatment would neither qualify a stablecoin for a bank’s liquidity buffer nor change its risk weighting. Under the Basel Committee’s crypto-asset rules, stablecoins on permissionless blockchains carry risk weights of up to 1,250%, with holdings capped at a small fraction of a bank’s capital. Although the Basel Committee has announced plans to revisit its crypto-asset capital rules, the current framework has officially been in effect since January 1, 2026.

The road ahead: For now, the guidance remains a proposal. Once the comment period closes on November 19, the FASB will resume its deliberations and could still amend or withdraw it. A final standard is unlikely before 2027.

Nik Fahrer is the Blockchain & Digital Assets Practice Leader at Forvis Mazars US, a leading audit and advisory firm.

In the short term, who would benefit first from this harmonization of accounting rules for stablecoins?

Initially, the main beneficiaries would be crypto-native companies that already hold significant stablecoin balances in their treasury operations.

For them, this Accounting Standards Update (ASU) may more closely reflect the way in which stablecoins are used in operations, while giving financial statement users a clearer picture of the company’s liquidity, business processes, and financial activity.

Today, a company can hold millions in stablecoins and still look short of cash on paper. That’s because the balances sit outside the official cash position that lenders and investors look at, and often they do not count toward the minimum amount of cash a company has promised its lenders to keep on hand. Treating stablecoins as cash equivalents would fix both.

This has a big knock-on effect. If stablecoins count toward that minimum, a company no longer needs to park extra traditional cash next to them just to stay within its loan terms. That frees up liquidity for other uses.

Traditional companies will take longer. Most still need to work through custody, governance, and the operational side of blockchain infrastructure first and also identify the right use cases.

Antoine Scalia is the founder of Cryptio, a financial accounting and reporting platform specializing in digital assets.

The FASB’s test also applies to the holder, not just the token. Two companies holding the same stablecoin might have to account for it differently. What does that mean in practice?

Exactly that. Even a stablecoin built to meet the GENIUS Act’s requirements, would not qualify automatically for every holder. What matters also is how a company can redeem. A company with an account at the issuer, and the right to redeem at par on demand, may treat the stablecoin as a cash equivalent. A company that has to sell through an exchange or market maker may not.

Moreover, access requirements vary across issuers. Circle Mint serves institutions operating at scale, Ripple limits direct RLUSD redemption to enterprise clients, and Paxos requires customers to complete its onboarding process to redeem PYUSD at par. A treasurer holding three different stablecoins would therefore need to maintain three separate issuer relationships.

One potential outcome is a two-tier market in which large institutions qualify for cash-equivalent treatment, while smaller holders of the same tokens do not. That gives issuers a new dimension to compete on: not yield or chains, but redemption eligibility and terms.

FASB clears the accounting barrier. Only a couple more left for corporate adoption.
Illustration: Blockstories

  1. The Compatibility of Permissionless Networks and Financial Integrity (Rettig, Malekan & Mosier) - A practical guide explaining how financial institutions can use permissionless blockchains while complying with existing U.S. anti-money laundering and sanctions rules.

  2. Are Stablecoins Efficient for Remittances? (Banca d’Italia) - This paper examines whether stablecoin transfers are cheaper and faster than traditional remittance services across ten corridors connecting Italy with five countries. Surprisingly, it finds no consistent cost advantage, as the economics and speed of stablecoin transfers largely depend on crypto on- and off-ramps, domestic payment infrastructure, and local regulation.

→ Want more? Visit Blockstories Library for a curated selection of 120+ reports on digital assets.

Login or Subscribe to participate

Subscribe

Disclaimer: The information provided in the Institutional Briefing by Blockstories does not constitute investment advice. Accordingly, we assume no liability for any investment decisions made based on the content presented herein.

Reply

Avatar

or to participate

Keep Reading

View more
caret-right
© 2026 Blockstories.
beehiivPowered by beehiiv