Canadians be like:
"Hah, take that Americans! We have a stable banking system because of regulations!"
Then talks of adding regulations for stablecoins come up.
"Oh no! We can't have that, for reasons that some left-leaning periodical that I skimmed through has said why it's all a bad idea!"
Or because the industry is shown consistently violating regulation whenever it is examined in court?
Mostly, admittedly, not in Canadian courts.
Still not an argument against regulations at all.
If the industry is consistently found to violate regulation, and the industry is primarily outside of Canada (by valuation and transactional volume), then it should not be allowed to practice legally within Canada.
Sort of like we do not regulate wars within Canada's borders. They are just illegal.
It is illegal to take people's money in exchange for imaginary value. That's called fraud. A stable coin is not legal tender in Canada, therefore imaginary value. Thus, regulated.
> It is illegal to take people's money in exchange for imaginary value.
Taking money in exchange for something redeemable is not fraud (I know you said imaginary value, but a well-regulated framework would prevent the "imaginary" component).
> A stable coin is not legal tender in Canada, therefore imaginary value.
It's only imaginary when it's not backed nor redeemable, especially if regulated.
"legal tender" is a very specific legal term and concept. You may want to look it up.
In Canada, stable coin is not legal tender, and actual cash may soon not be.
Being redeemable is irrelevant, especially as I have already pointed out that the industry has been consistently found, in courts, to be in violation of regulation. What does matter is another legal term and concept: "intrinsically valueless".
1/2
E.g. Canada's polymer bills, were they not 'legal tender', have no value. A 1 troy ounce gold coin, on the other hand, does not need to be legal tender; it is intrinsically worth 1 troy ounce of gold.
2/2
Sal Rahman
Amgine