All NewsEducationTV
Equities & FundsCrypto & Digital AssetsAI & TechnologyBusiness & CorporateUS Politics & PolicyGeopolitics & Global RiskMacro, Rates & FXCommodities & EnergyEuropean Politics & MarketsAsia-PacificReal Estate & Property
Story archiveAll categories
← All Stories

Bank of Italy: Stablecoin remittances lack consistent cost advantage

Created at 31 Jul · 8:21 PM1 source↑ Market-relevant
IN SHORT

A Bank of Italy study found stablecoin remittances do not offer a systematic cost or speed advantage over traditional payment channels. Fiat conversion costs and payment infrastructure, rather than blockchain fees, accounted for most of the differences.

✉Newsletter

PiQ Daily

Pick your topics. Get only what matters, on your cadence.

Key Numbers

200USDC remittances tested
10bidirectional payment corridors
0.3% to nearly 9%total costs for stablecoin remittances
less than 20 minutessettlement time with instant payment systems
one to two business dayssettlement time without instant payment systems
6.65%World Bank global average remittance cost
threecorridors where stablecoin transfers were cheaper than Wise
$307 billionstablecoin market size
16%stablecoin market growth over past year

Who's Involved

Bank of Italy
conducted study on stablecoin remittance costs
USDC
stablecoin used in remittance tests
World Bank
reported global average remittance cost benchmark
Wise
traditional remittance service benchmark

↳ Why This Matters

The findings challenge the common assumption that stablecoins inherently offer cheaper and faster cross-border remittances, highlighting the significant impact of traditional financial infrastructure and regulatory environments on their actual efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

Key facts

  • Stablecoin remittances do not offer a systematic cost or speed advantage over traditional payment channels.
  • Fiat on- and off-ramp frictions accounted for the majority of costs and transfer delays in stablecoin remittances.
  • Blockchain transaction fees represented a small share of the total costs for stablecoin transfers.
  • Settlement times for stablecoin remittances were heavily dependent on the quality of local payment infrastructure.
  • Prohibitionist regulatory regimes for stablecoins push users toward offshore and unregulated platforms.

A study by the Bank of Italy has concluded that stablecoin-based remittances do not consistently offer a cost or speed advantage over traditional payment methods. Researchers analyzed 200 USDC remittances across ten payment corridors connecting Italy with Brazil, Argentina, Japan, the United Arab Emirates, and South Africa. The findings indicate that the primary drivers of cost and delays were not blockchain transaction fees, but rather the expenses and time associated with converting fiat currency to stablecoins and back again (on- and off-ramps).

The study revealed that total costs for stablecoin remittances varied significantly, ranging from 0.3% to nearly 9%, depending on the specific payment corridor. Settlement times were generally swift, under 20 minutes when instant payment systems were utilized, but extended to one to two business days otherwise. While stablecoin transfers were found to be cheaper than the World Bank's global average remittance cost of 6.65% in most tested corridors, they were only less expensive than the remittance service Wise in three out of seven comparable routes.

The researchers emphasized the critical role of payment infrastructure, suggesting that improvements in domestic instant payment systems could enhance the competitiveness of stablecoin cross-border payments. They posited that the most substantial economic benefits of stablecoins would be realized if they could be spent directly in the real economy without conversion back to fiat currency.

Furthermore, the study highlighted the influence of regulatory frameworks on remittance efficiency. It noted that overly restrictive regulations can hinder operational complexity for retail users, while prohibitionist approaches fail to eliminate demand, instead driving users to unregulated offshore platforms. These findings emerge as the EU implements its Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) framework and the U.S. enacts the GENIUS Act, both aimed at governing crypto assets and payment stablecoins.

Frequently asked questions

The study found that stablecoin remittances do not consistently offer a cost or speed advantage over traditional payment channels, with fiat conversion costs and payment infrastructure being the primary factors.

Fiat on- and off-ramp frictions, including exchange fees and currency conversion, made up most of the costs and transfer delays, rather than blockchain transaction fees.

While often cheaper than the global average remittance cost, stablecoin transfers were less expensive than Wise in only three of seven comparable corridors tested.

Investment in domestic instant payment infrastructure and the ability for stablecoins to be spent directly in the real economy without reconversion to fiat currency could significantly increase their economic advantages.

What Happens Next

01Further analysis on the impact of direct stablecoin spending in the real economy.
02Monitoring the implementation and effects of MiCA and the GENIUS Act on stablecoin usage.

Get the newsletter.

Pick the topics you actually care about. We'll email when there's news worth your time, on the cadence you choose. Cancel any time from your account.

Cadence

How It Developed

A Bank of Italy study examined 200 USDC remittances between Italy and five countries.
Researchers compared stablecoin costs and settlement times with traditional remittance services.
The study found fiat conversion fees, not blockchain fees, constituted most costs and delays.
Stablecoin transfers were cheaper than Wise in only three of seven comparable corridors.
Investment in domestic instant payment infrastructure could improve stablecoin competitiveness.
The authors suggested direct spending of stablecoins would yield greater economic advantages.
Regulatory design significantly impacts transfer efficiency, with prohibitionist regimes failing to suppress demand.
The EU's MiCA framework and the US's GENIUS Act govern crypto assets and stablecoins.

Sources

T1
Bank of Italy finds no consistent cost advantage for stablecoin remittancesResearchers found that fiat conversion costs and payment infrastructure, rather than blockchain fees, accounted for most of the differences in stablecoin remittance costs and settlement times.Cointelegraph

Related Stories

Tether reports $1.5B Q2 profit, reserve buffer falls to $4.11B
31 Jul · 4:36 PM
Circle subsidiary receives New York trust charter
31 Jul · 1:41 PM
SBI Holdings Reaffirms $41.2B Stake in Ripple Amidst XRP Price Slump
31 Jul · 1:56 PM
Coinbase Posts Surprise Loss as Crypto Trading Volume Declines
31 Jul · 12:16 PM
Texans Lost $57M to Crypto Kiosk Scams in 2025, Lawmakers Consider Ban
31 Jul · 11:21 AM