BIS says stablecoins can weaken capital controls, and payment teams should pay attention

The Bank for International Settlements is putting a sharper point on a question payments teams have been watching for years: dollar-backed stablecoins can move value across borders in ways that are harder for traditional controls to contain. In a study covered by The Block, the BIS said foreign exchange restrictions and capital controls are "less effective" against stablecoins than against conventional foreign currency bank deposits.

That matters far beyond policy circles. For businesses that accept, hold, convert, or pay out in stablecoins, the practical issue is not whether stablecoins are controversial. It is how quickly they are becoming part of real settlement flows, especially where local currency access is constrained or where teams need a more direct route between customer payments and usable treasury balances.

The BIS study, as reported by The Block, analyzed stablecoin flows across more than 130 economies and found they appear largely unaffected by broad or specific capital flow restrictions. The report also said stablecoins create a new channel for accessing U.S. dollar liquidity, particularly in emerging markets and developing economies. That is a meaningful shift for operators who manage cross-border revenue, supplier payouts, or treasury movement across multiple currencies.

For payment teams, the regulatory takeaway is not simply that stablecoins are growing. It is that they are now part of the same conversation as FX controls, liquidity access, and settlement design. If stablecoins can circulate partly outside the traditional regulatory perimeter, then the operational questions become more important: where funds land, how they are converted, which balances are held, and what controls sit around payout and reconciliation workflows.

The BIS has been skeptical of stablecoins before, and this latest report continues that line. It also comes at a time when regulators in the U.S., EU, Japan, and other regions are building dedicated frameworks to bring stablecoins into the regulated financial system. That combination, growing adoption and tighter rulemaking, is what makes the current market different from earlier crypto cycles. Stablecoins are no longer just a trading venue asset. They are becoming a payments rail that finance teams have to account for.

For businesses using stablecoins in commerce, the operational standard should be the same as for any other settlement rail: clear source of funds, predictable conversion, documented payout logic, and clean reporting. Teams that rely on manual conversion or fragmented tooling usually feel this complexity first. The more a business uses stablecoins for acceptance or treasury movement, the more it needs a payment stack that can handle collection, conversion, and settlement without forcing every step into separate systems.

That is where products like Radom fit into the workflow. Radom is built for businesses that need to accept crypto payments, manage balances, and move between crypto and fiat in one place. Its crypto payments platform supports checkout, billing, invoices, payment links, and payouts, while its conversion and settlement tools are designed for teams that need to move between supported assets and settle in the asset their business needs. For operators dealing with stablecoin revenue, that kind of structure can reduce friction between payment acceptance and treasury use.

The broader market point is straightforward. As stablecoins become more embedded in business payments, the old divide between crypto and traditional finance keeps narrowing. Policy makers are focused on controls and monetary stability. Operators are focused on settlement speed, liquidity, and reconciliation. Both views are now shaping the same infrastructure stack.

For finance leaders, the right response is not to assume stablecoins will replace bank rails. It is to decide where stablecoins improve payment operations, where they introduce compliance or treasury complexity, and what infrastructure is needed to manage both. In many cases, the answer will be a hybrid stack that combines stablecoin acceptance, fiat settlement options, and systems that can keep reporting clean as volume grows.

If your business is evaluating stablecoins for payments or settlement, start with the operational questions first. How will you accept funds, convert them, and pay out recipients without adding manual work? If that is the problem you are solving, Radom’s crypto payments stack is designed for that workflow.