PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 33.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 10, 2025
Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act 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 value).
Under the bill, only permitted issuers may issue a payment stablecoin for use by U.S. persons, subject to certain exceptions. 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 specifies requirements for (1) reusing reserves; (2) providing safekeeping services for stablecoins; and (3) supervisory, examination, and enforcement authority over federal-qualified issuers.
The bill allows foreign issuers to offer stablecoins in the United States if the issuer has the capability to comply with lawful orders. The Department of the Treasury must establish reciprocal agreements between the United States and similarly regulated jurisdictions.
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.
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.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 33.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Reported by Senator Scott SC, under authority of the order of the Senate of 03/14/2025 with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Reported by Senator Scott SC, under authority of the order of the Senate of 03/14/2025 with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
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: Oct 9, 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.919 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.919 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.919 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.919 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.