US Stablecoin Rules Could Accelerate CBDC-Like Control Grid

While President Donald Trump promised America that his administration would not establish a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), a system with similar characteristics may be in the works.

“Federal regulators are moving to require certain payment stablecoin issuers to verify the identities of customers who open accounts directly with them, extending bank-style customer identification requirements into a digital asset sector that has been promoted as a faster, more flexible alternative to traditional payments,” Biometric Update said. “The Federal Reserve Board on Thursday requested comment on a joint proposed rule that would require permitted payment stablecoin issuers to maintain written customer identification programs (CIPs), comparable to those already required of banks and credit unions.”

Stablecoins are cryptocurrency systems (digital currency) which are purported to maintain a more stable value than traditional cryptocurrencies. Stablecoins often accomplish this by pegging their value to a central bank currency, such as the U.S. dollar. Importantly, while this mechanism would stabilize a stablecoin in relation to the U.S. dollar, the dollar itself is not stable.

“The rule would implement part of the GENIUS Act, the 2025 law that created a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins,” Biometric Update said. “Under the proposal, permitted payment stablecoin issuers would be treated as financial institutions for purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act and would have to maintain an effective customer identification program, including procedures for identifying and verifying account holders. The proposal marks another step in the federal government’s effort to bring payment stablecoins into the same anti-money laundering and counterterrorist financing framework that governs traditional financial institutions.”

One of the main criticisms of a CBDC system has been the control that the government and central bank could exert on individuals, since the CBDC would be issued and managed by the central bank under the supervision of the government. The government or central bank could, in theory, turn off an individual’s money or monitor their transactions if they are deemed to be a political dissident.

While a CBDC could make financial surveillance and monetary control over a population more efficient, these actions are somewhat possible under the current financial system.

While the current U.S. dollar is issued by the central bank (as a Federal Reserve Note), its use is managed by the corporate banking sector. All banks require identifiable information from accountholders, generally in the form of government-issued ID.

Some of these financial institutions have engaged in the de-banking of individuals for apparently political reasons under the guise of being private companies, although some have alleged the debanking stemmed from political pressure.

Trump has issued an Executive Over to curb the practice of debanking for political or religious beliefs, or lawful business activities.

Under the traditional monetary system, debanking only prevented an individual from using a particular private financial institution, not the currency itself. Although with a large yet finite number of banks, an individual could have theoretically been banned from each and every bank, but that circumstance did not arise before Trump’s Executive Order banned the practice.

One high-profile case of debanking involved MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell. Due to only being banned from a couple banks, but not the currency itself, Lindell was able to switch banks and continue engaging in commerce with the U.S. dollar.

While banks can be subpoenaed to turn over financial records to the government, that process would require a court order. Banks have been caught selling private information, although the practice is controversial. The post-9/11 USA Patriot Act widened the government’s ability to monitor the banking sector.

Paper currency, the Federal Reserve Note, does not come with the digital track-and-trace abilities of crypto or a CBDC, although the bills contain serial numbers which could, in theory, track some of their movement throughout an economy.

While paper currency generally allows private off-the-books commerce by its very nature, digital systems generally do not, albeit with some exceptions such as privacy-focused cryptocurrency. The issue then becomes computer surveillance (such as what is typed on a keyboard or displayed on a screen, not the cryptocurrency’s private blockchain network). Physical gold and silver coins, rounds and bars provide the greatest level of privacy and decentralization, but cannot be transacted digitally like crypto or dollars in a bank account.

Biometric Update detailed the bank-like identification requirements the recently proposed rules would bring to the stablecoin sector:

Before opening an account, an issuer would generally have to collect a customer’s name, date of birth for individuals or date of formation for legal entities, address, and identification number.

For U.S. persons, that would mean a taxpayer identification number.

For non-U.S. persons, it could include a taxpayer identification number, passport number and country of issuance, alien identification card number, or another government-issued document showing nationality or residence and bearing a photograph or similar safeguard.

The proposal would allow documentary and non-documentary methods of verification.

For individuals, documentary verification could include an unexpired government-issued identification document, such as a driver’s license or passport.

For corporations, partnerships, trusts, and other entities, documents could include certified articles of incorporation, a government-issued business license, a partnership agreement, or a trust instrument.

Non-documentary methods could include contacting the customer, comparing customer-provided information against consumer reporting agencies or public databases, checking references with other financial institutions, or obtaining a financial statement.

The agencies also recognize the growing use of digital identity tools, including mobile driver’s licenses and verifiable credentials, but they are not proposing a separate regulatory framework for those technologies.

Instead, the proposal would leave issuers flexibility to determine, under a risk-based approach, whether a particular digital identity tool is trustworthy enough to use for customer verification.

The proposal would also require issuers to maintain records of information obtained through the CIP. Identifying information would have to be retained for five years after an account is closed, while records related to verification methods and results would have to be retained for five years after the record is made.

Issuers would also have to include procedures for determining whether a customer appears on any federal government list of known or suspected terrorists or terrorist organizations designated by the Department of Treasury in consultation with federal functional regulators.

Laws that bring the know-your-customer (KYC) regulations which are already established in traditional banking to the stablecoin sector form the basis of a monetary system more akin to a CBDC than to privacy-focused cryptocurrency or paper notes.

Perhaps the most important factor determining how future monetary systems will be managed may not be anonymity or the lack thereof, but rather how many alternatives exist to fall back on if one becomes too authoritarian.

In a recent interview that talkshow host Mike Adams held with lawyer Tom Renz, the control element of CBDC was brought up.

Renz painted a picture of a dystopian medical tyranny future where AI and robotics displaced the human workforce. The unemployable workers would then be forced to turn to a universal basic income (UBI) issued through a CBDC. Under this nightmare system, Renz said, individuals would be required to receive perpetual vaccinations to collect their UBI through the CBDC.

New interview with Tom Renz! AI, CBDCs and the Globalist War on Human Freedomhttps://t.co/bmQNnNRm25

— HealthRanger (@HealthRanger) June 19, 2026

In Patrick Wood’s 2015 book ‘Technocracy Rising The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation,’ the century’s-old system of technocracy was defined in great detail. Political systems would give way to unelected scientific experts who control every facet of human activity. Currency would give way to energy credits, which could be turned in for goods or services. The credits would be nontransferable and would expire, prohibiting the accumulation of wealth. Credits could also be deducted or withheld to mold behavior. While this system was envisioned a century ago, only today does the technology exist to make it a reality.

---