According to Odaily, Matthew Sigel, Head of Digital Asset Research at VanEck, has criticized the U.S. Treasury's recent perspective on digital assets, arguing that its opposition to stablecoins is based on outdated academic views. Sigel pointed out that the Treasury relies on a study by Gary Gorton and Jeffery Zhang to justify its preference for a centralized financial system. He argued that the study's U.S.-centric historical analysis promotes a 'circular narrative' that private money is inherently unstable, which he believes is misleading.
Sigel emphasized that historical evidence from other countries shows that private money does not automatically lead to instability. With the right checks and balances, private currencies can be as reliable as government-issued money. Notably, the Treasury's document positively evaluated the representation of real assets on the blockchain (tokenization) and suggested that stablecoins and tokenization could reshape the financial landscape.
However, the report also warned of potential stability risks associated with stablecoins, suggesting that without regulation, their increasing reliance on U.S. Treasury bonds could pose risks. Sigel countered that stablecoins have demonstrated the potential to operate safely under appropriate global regulatory frameworks. He highlighted that modern stablecoins, with real-time data and transparent transactions, differ significantly from the chaotic environments of the past, rendering old issues irrelevant.
Sigel concluded by calling for a broader global review. He believes that understanding the potential of stablecoins and private digital currencies requires moving beyond a U.S.-only perspective and drawing on international financial experiences. Additionally, he urged U.S. regulators to adopt a more inclusive viewpoint that reflects the interconnected nature of the digital global economy.
