Stablecoins used to be discussed like a crypto-only category. Jody Mettler, BitGo’s Chief Operating Officer and President of BitGo Trust, argues that era is ending fast.
In an interview with CryptoPotato, Mettler frames the current regulatory clash as a broader fight over payment and settlement infrastructure. The headlines point at stablecoin rules. Mettler points at the “plumbing” that determines how money moves across borders, how it’s held, and what happens when institutions need confidence that looks a lot like traditional finance.
The “wrestle” is about standards that define global settlement
CryptoPotato highlights a warning from Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey. He said global regulators may be heading for a “wrestle” with the U.S. over stablecoin rules. In Mettler’s account, that isn’t mainly about consumer protection versus financial stability in isolation.
The real disagreement, she argues, is how modern payment and settlement systems should be designed, and which standards become globally defining.
Mettler says institutions in her experience are not asking for “crypto rules.” They want banking-grade certainty on three operational points. Custody. Settlement finality. Redemption mechanics. When those details diverge by region, regulatory divergence matters in practice.
She also draws a directional contrast. The U.S. is leaning toward a market-led framework that encourages participation. Europe is building a more prescriptive system under MiCA, with emphasis on systemic stability, reserve quality, and controlled market entry.
MiCA turns policy into an operating rulebook
CryptoPotato’s interview describes Europe’s approach as more than licensing. MiCA is portrayed as a standardization push across the EU, aiming to align how custody, issuance, trading, and transfer work across member states under a single supervisory perimeter.
That matters because it reduces the “27 different interpretations” problem that institutions face when they try to build one model across jurisdictions.
Mettler adds that institutions care about bankruptcy-remote custody structures, settlement finality across venues, and moving liquidity between regulated counterparties without changing their risk assumptions every time they cross borders.
Under this lens, MiCA helps by giving institutions a more defined rulebook for custody and market access. Outside Europe, Mettler says the operational friction returns because jurisdictions still differ.
What “divergence” means to firms that move value
The headline “U.S. and Europe diverge on stablecoins” can sound abstract. Mettler makes it concrete.
CryptoPotato reports her view that firms are splitting less along “crypto versus traditional finance.” They are splitting along how each region defines and controls the plumbing of digital money.
If global institutions want one operating model, the infrastructure they plug into may still be regionally defined. That raises a practical question Mettler points to. Will liquidity, custody standards, and settlement systems converge globally, or do they evolve into parallel regional stacks that only connect in limited ways?
Mettler’s emphasis on “connectivity to global liquidity” also signals a specific operational goal in Europe. She says BitGo focuses on regulated custody, segregated client assets, and infrastructure that lets institutions move and settle assets without rebuilding market-by-market.
Regional frameworks first, interoperability later… or not
On whether the world will end up with one global stablecoin market, Mettler tells CryptoPotato she expects regional frameworks first.
She expects the dollar to keep dominating because it sits at the center of global liquidity and trade. But she also says Europe is trying to build a regulated digital financial infrastructure that can develop alongside dollar liquidity, rather than depend fully on U.S.-dominated payment rails.
The risk she highlights is fragmentation. If rules for reserves, redemption, custody, and supervision differ too much across jurisdictions, cross-border payments can face friction in liquidity and settlement even when the underlying markets are linked.
In her framing, MiCA reduces fragmentation within the EU. But cross-border use still runs into different approaches in other markets.
When stablecoins stop behaving like assets and start behaving like money
Mettler also pushes on a policy boundary. Where do stablecoins end as crypto products, and where do they begin as payment or banking infrastructure.
CryptoPotato reports her view that the shift likely comes when stablecoins move into institutional-scale usage for settlement, treasury operations, and cross-border fund movement. At that point, they stop acting like purely speculative assets and interact more directly with payment systems and financial infrastructure.
That makes custody, segregation of assets, settlement finality, and regulatory oversight core requirements, not optional “nice to have” features.
She also ties this to Europe’s explicit policy objective around financial autonomy, which she frames as the ability to build infrastructure not dependent on U.S. dollar rails.
Key facts from the CryptoPotato interview
| Topic | What Mettler said | Source in text |
|---|---|---|
| Core disagreement behind the “wrestle” | Standards that define payment and settlement infrastructure, not just crypto rules | CryptoPotato interview with Jody Mettler |
| What institutions want | Banking-grade certainty on custody, settlement finality, redemption mechanics | CryptoPotato interview with Jody Mettler |
| Europe’s approach | MiCA standardizes custody, issuance, trading, and transfer across the EU under one supervisory perimeter | CryptoPotato interview with Jody Mettler |
| U.S. approach (as described) | Market-led framework that encourages innovation and participation | CryptoPotato interview with Jody Mettler |
| Near-term market shape | Regional frameworks first, dollar dominance likely to persist | CryptoPotato interview with Jody Mettler |
| Risk for cross-border use | Divergent rules can create friction in liquidity and settlement | CryptoPotato interview with Jody Mettler |
| “Asset class” versus “monetary system” | Stablecoin use at institutional scale shifts how they interact with payment infrastructure | CryptoPotato interview with Jody Mettler |
The deadline isn’t a token deadline
Stablecoin regulation often gets treated like a compliance checklist. Mettler’s view is narrower and more structural.
The deadline for institutions is whether they can plug into custody and settlement systems with consistent safeguards across borders. The “wrestle” Bailey referenced may sound like a policy showdown. Mettler portrays it as a battle over who gets to set the operational standards that define how digital money works at scale.