WeFi CEO: Banks are overstating the threat from stablecoins

​Traditional banks fear losing deposits to stablecoins and are pushing for restrictions on crypto companies. But how real is this threat, and can blockchain-based platforms compete with the industry's largest players? In an interview with Traders Union, WeFi CEO Maksym Sakharov discusses the future of banking, stablecoin regulation, and the role of artificial intelligence in investing.

Why stablecoins have become a threat to bank deposits

One of the main points of contention in the U.S. financial market is whether stablecoin holders should be allowed to earn rewards. Traditional banks oppose such payments, fearing an outflow of deposits into digital dollars. Crypto companies, meanwhile, see these restrictions as an obstacle to competition.

Sakharov believes the issue should be assessed in terms of its actual impact on lending in the U.S. economy.

“I understand why banks worry about losing deposits. They use that money to make loans, but I think the danger is being overstated. The White House's Council of Economic Advisers estimated that an effective ban on returns paid for holding stablecoins would add just $2.1 billion to bank lending, roughly 0.02% of total loans.”

The debate has intensified as the U.S. implements the GENIUS Act, which establishes rules for payment stablecoins. In October, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) eased its approach to rewards paid through third parties. The regulator now intends to examine potential violations on a case-by-case basis.

According to Sakharov, this uncertainty creates additional difficulties for smaller crypto companies.

“The OCC didn't give businesses a clear test to determine which arrangements are allowed. Large companies can pay lawyers to work through the rules. Smaller crypto firms may simply stop offering rewards. That can give banks an advantage without them having to do anything.”

Starting in January 2027, stablecoin issuers will be prohibited from paying interest simply for holding their tokens. However, rewards offered through other services remain a subject of debate.

Sakharov believes regulators need to clearly distinguish between permitted and prohibited reward arrangements. An important factor is where the money used to pay customers comes from.

“But if an independent app pays cashback from its own budget when someone makes a purchase, I'd treat that as ordinary competition, assuming the arrangement is genuine.”

How is a deobank different from a neobank?

In recent years, the term “neobank” has become increasingly common in the financial industry. These digital banks offer familiar financial services through mobile apps. However, most still rely on traditional banking infrastructure.

WeFi proposes a different model called Deobank, which uses blockchain infrastructure to record balances and settle payments. Sakharov explains how this approach differs from conventional neobanks.

“Transactions can be checked directly on the network. Customers can still use familiar banking services, but they get greater visibility into their funds and more control over how those funds are held and transferred.”

Blockchain infrastructure does not rule out cooperation with traditional payment networks. In April, WeFi announced a partnership with Visa, which is also expanding stablecoin settlement. Sakharov believes that for digital currencies to gain widespread adoption, people must be able to use them for everyday purchases.

“If someone gets paid in digital dollars, they still want to use that money to buy groceries or pay for a hotel. And the merchant just wants to receive an ordinary card payment.”

Where digital dollars are in greatest demand

Outside the U.S. and Europe, stablecoin adoption is largely driven by access to financial services. In some countries, international transfers remain expensive, while opening a foreign currency account can be difficult.

This demand is particularly evident in Southeast Asia. According to Chainalysis, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam recorded 5.4 million peer-to-peer crypto transfers worth less than $10,000 each in the 12 months through June 2026. These transactions accounted for 14.4% of the global total.

Sakharov believes these figures primarily reflect the practical needs of individuals and businesses.

“A lot of the demand comes from people who have very practical problems with money. Someone working abroad needs to send money to their family. A small business needs to pay a supplier in another country. Sometimes opening a dollar account is difficult, or the available international payment service is expensive.”

However, transferring stablecoins does not solve every problem. Recipients often need to convert their digital assets into local currency, which requires access to reliable financial service providers.

Why regulation is becoming a decisive factor

In the European Union, the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) has become the foundation of crypto market regulation. It establishes common requirements for crypto service providers and allows companies authorized in one EU country to offer covered services across the bloc, subject to the required procedures.

Sakharov considers the introduction of common rules an important advantage for the European market.

“Crypto companies in Europe have spent years dealing with different national approaches to licensing. MiCA gives them a common framework, and I consider that a step forward.”

At the same time, complying with the new requirements involves additional costs. For smaller companies, licensing and legal support can become a significant burden. Some products also do not fit neatly into existing regulatory categories.

Outside Europe, Sakharov particularly favors the United Arab Emirates. Dubai has a dedicated virtual asset regulator, VARA, while certain stablecoin services fall under the rules of the UAE Central Bank.

“If I had to choose one, I'd go with the UAE, particularly Dubai. The emirate has an established financial sector, so there's a practical reason to be there beyond the crypto industry itself.”

According to the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), more than 1,100 regulated financial firms operated there in the first half of 2026. This concentration of financial institutions creates opportunities for crypto projects to collaborate with traditional financial companies.

However, a developed financial infrastructure does not necessarily mean regulatory requirements are easy to meet. Sakharov points to high licensing costs and the need to comply with rules imposed by several regulators.

How AI will change the use of stablecoins

Another area of financial technology development is the integration of artificial intelligence with blockchain. AI agents can already carry out certain transactions involving digital assets within spending limits set by users.

WeFi previously predicted that AI and account abstraction would make stablecoins and DeFi easier for ordinary users to access. Sakharov believes some of these predictions are already becoming reality.

“To send someone digital dollars from a conventional crypto wallet, you may first need to buy another cryptocurrency just to cover the transaction fee. Some newer wallets handle that for you. You enter the amount, confirm the payment, and you're done.”

According to Sakharov, AI's potential goes beyond processing payments. In the future, such systems could also play a role in more complex financial transactions.

“I can see AI helping people compare the costs and risks of different DeFi lending services before they put money into one. But I'd still want to approve any investment before an AI agent moved my money.”

What is holding back real estate tokenization

Despite growing interest among financial companies in tokenizing real-world assets, some segments of this market are developing much more slowly than expected.

Sakharov, who previously helped establish a blockchain platform for real estate transactions, believes one of the main obstacles is the complexity of defining and protecting investors' legal rights.

“If someone buys a token representing 10% of an apartment building, they need to know what they actually own. The token might give them shares in a company that owns the building, with no direct ownership of the property. The deal documents determine what rights they have.”

Another serious problem concerns the secondary market for tokenized real estate. According to Sakharov, the industry initially underestimated this issue.

“An investor might want to cash out after a year and find there are no buyers. Issuing a token doesn't create demand for it, so their money could remain tied up in the investment.”

Sakharov expects tokenization to become more widespread but does not see it as a universal solution for the real estate market. Blockchain can simplify certain stages of transactions, but it cannot replace legally recognized property records or the involvement of financial institutions.

Can new platforms challenge JPMorgan and HSBC?

Major financial groups are already actively experimenting with blockchain. JPMorgan uses its Kinexys platform for payments and settlement, while HSBC is developing a tokenized deposit service that allows corporate customers to conduct transactions around the clock.

However, the development of blockchain technology raises questions about the future relationship between traditional banks and emerging financial platforms. Sakharov believes both competition and cooperation are possible.

“Yes, I think blockchain-powered banks will compete with established banks, especially in international payments. If a smaller provider can get money to someone faster or at a lower cost, customers will notice.”

However, traditional banks retain significant advantages, including established customer bases, licenses, and extensive lending businesses. Sakharov therefore believes that new blockchain platforms may not only compete with these institutions but also provide technology to modernize existing financial infrastructure.