PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 4, 2025
Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins of 2025 or the GENIUS Act of 2025
This bill establishes a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins (digital assets which an issuer must redeem for a fixed monetary value).
Under the bill, only permitted issuers may issue a payment stablecoin in the United States. Permitted issuers must be a subsidiary of an insured depository institution, a federal-qualified nonbank payment stablecoin issuer, or a state-qualified payment stablecoin issuer. Permitted issuers must be regulated by the appropriate federal or state regulator. Permitted issuers may choose federal or state regulation; however, state regulation is limited to those with a stablecoin issuance of $10 billion or less.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Permitted issuers must maintain reserves backing the stablecoin on a one-to-one basis using U.S. currency or other similarly liquid assets, as specified. Permitted issuers must also publicly disclose their redemption policy and publish monthly the details of their reserves.
The bill sets forth requirements for (1) reusing reserves; (2) providing safekeeping services for stablecoins; and (3) supervisory, examination, and enforcement authority.
In a bankruptcy insolvency proceeding involving a payment stablecoin issuer, stablecoin holders have priority over all other claims.
Under the bill, permitted payment stablecoins are not considered securities under securities law. However, permitted issuers are subject to the Bank Secrecy Act for anti-money laundering and related purposes.
The Federal Reserve must create and implement agreements with other jurisdictions that similarly regulate stablecoins for the purpose of facilitating international transactions and interoperability with U.S. dollar-denominated stablecoins issued overseas.
People & committees
Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jul 1, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.394 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.394 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.394 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.394 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.