The post Analyst Says GENIUS Act Reshapes U.S. Debt Markets; Critics Slam “Overblown” Claims appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The post Analyst Says GENIUS Act Reshapes U.S. Debt Markets; Critics Slam “Overblown” Claims appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News A sharp debate has broken out after author & analyst Shanaka Anslem Perera argued that the GENIUS Act didn’t just regulate stablecoins, but reorganized financial power inside the U.S. government. His claim: the Treasury now controls a new, built-in engine for buying U.S. debt.  Supporters call it a plausible read of the numbers. Critics say it’s dramatic, selective, and flat-out wrong. A Bold Claim: Stablecoins as Mandatory Treasury Buyers Perera says the Act requires licensed stablecoin issuers to hold 100% reserves in short-term Treasuries or central bank cash, turning each new dollar-pegged token into an automatic purchase of U.S. government debt. Under his frame, stablecoins become a built-in demand engine – a form of “privatized QE” that runs outside the Federal Reserve’s reach. He points to the Treasury’s own projections as evidence of intent. Secretary Scott Bessent expects the stablecoin market to grow toward $2-3.7 trillion by 2030, potentially making issuers one of the largest holders of U.S. debt. Perera also cites JPMorgan’s decision to accept Bitcoin and Ether as institutional collateral, calling it a sign that Wall Street is adjusting to a new structure shaped by Treasury influence rather than the Fed. Why the Theory Caught Fire Stablecoins have become a core tool in emerging markets, where users often seek dollar stability amid inflation and capital controls.  Perera believes this global shift funnels capital straight into U.S. debt markets, strengthening Treasury financing while weakening the Fed’s influence over borrowing costs. Community Reaction: Sharp and Divided Critics didn’t hold back. Several users pointed to the law’s own text, noting it explicitly allows U.S. coins and currency as reserves, not just Treasuries. That detail alone challenges the idea of “forced” government-debt… The post Analyst Says GENIUS Act Reshapes U.S. Debt Markets; Critics Slam “Overblown” Claims appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The post Analyst Says GENIUS Act Reshapes U.S. Debt Markets; Critics Slam “Overblown” Claims appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News A sharp debate has broken out after author & analyst Shanaka Anslem Perera argued that the GENIUS Act didn’t just regulate stablecoins, but reorganized financial power inside the U.S. government. His claim: the Treasury now controls a new, built-in engine for buying U.S. debt.  Supporters call it a plausible read of the numbers. Critics say it’s dramatic, selective, and flat-out wrong. A Bold Claim: Stablecoins as Mandatory Treasury Buyers Perera says the Act requires licensed stablecoin issuers to hold 100% reserves in short-term Treasuries or central bank cash, turning each new dollar-pegged token into an automatic purchase of U.S. government debt. Under his frame, stablecoins become a built-in demand engine – a form of “privatized QE” that runs outside the Federal Reserve’s reach. He points to the Treasury’s own projections as evidence of intent. Secretary Scott Bessent expects the stablecoin market to grow toward $2-3.7 trillion by 2030, potentially making issuers one of the largest holders of U.S. debt. Perera also cites JPMorgan’s decision to accept Bitcoin and Ether as institutional collateral, calling it a sign that Wall Street is adjusting to a new structure shaped by Treasury influence rather than the Fed. Why the Theory Caught Fire Stablecoins have become a core tool in emerging markets, where users often seek dollar stability amid inflation and capital controls.  Perera believes this global shift funnels capital straight into U.S. debt markets, strengthening Treasury financing while weakening the Fed’s influence over borrowing costs. Community Reaction: Sharp and Divided Critics didn’t hold back. Several users pointed to the law’s own text, noting it explicitly allows U.S. coins and currency as reserves, not just Treasuries. That detail alone challenges the idea of “forced” government-debt…