Basel Committee Faces Industry Push to Revise 1,250% Bitcoin Capital Charge
Basel’s crypto capital rules under fresh industry pressure
Regulators set a hefty capital multiple for banks that keep Bitcoin and comparable tokens, a policy now drawing coordinated pushback from corporate crypto treasuries and asset managers.
Industry voices say the current approach makes on‑balance‑sheet crypto ownership disproportionately expensive versus cash and sovereign debt, creating a structural barrier to bank involvement.
Senior risk officers and chief executives of crypto treasury firms have publicly urged the committee to revisit that multiplier, arguing it suppresses legitimate financial activity by raising funding costs.
Basel introduced these capital measures after proposals in 2021 and finalized them later, placing self‑custodied tokens in the top-risk bucket under the framework.
The rule has real-world consequences: banks must hold far more approved collateral against digital-asset exposures, which squeezes return on equity and alters product economics.
Pressure increased when the stablecoin market expanded rapidly, nearing an estimated three‑hundred‑billion‑dollar scale, prompting Basel officials to acknowledge they might need a different approach.
Supporters of change highlight the contrast with low or zero capital requirements for cash, gold and government securities, which remain far cheaper for banks to hold.
Regulatory signalling shifted over recent months, from firm codification to exploratory reassessment as the committee weighs whether current metrics still match market evolution.
Market participants frame this as a new, subtler form of limiting crypto access — not outright account closures, but rules that make participation economically unattractive.
If Basel amends the treatment of digital assets, banks could begin offering custodial services and balance‑sheet exposure more widely, improving liquidity and product innovation.
- Key metric: the capital multiplier applied to crypto exposures is a central point of contention.
- Trigger: stablecoin growth and industry campaigns have prompted Basel officials to reconsider policy calibration.
Read Our Expert Analysis
Create an account or login for free to unlock our expert analysis and key takeaways for this development.
By continuing, you agree to receive marketing communications and our weekly newsletter. You can opt-out at any time.
Recommended for you
Bitcoin Policy Institute Presses Fed Over Basel BTC Risk Regime
The Bitcoin Policy Institute is mobilizing to alter how the Fed applies Basel rules to Bitcoin, contesting the proposed heavy capital treatment and its commercial effects on bank services for crypto. Expect a public comment campaign centered on BTC , the 1,250% risk metric, and the practical fallout for custody, lending, and market access.
Bitcoin: Capital Rotates Into Dollar‑Like Tokens After Fed Pause
Bitcoin slipped toward the low $70ks as traders fled risk and parked liquidity in stablecoins after a Fed pause and oil‑price shock. Spot ETF outflows and rising stablecoin market share indicate a liquidity rotation that amplifies regulatory focus on dollar‑pegged tokens.
Major U.S. Banks Move Toward Bitcoin Services as Industry Sentiment Shifts
A River-compiled snapshot shows roughly 60% of the top 25 U.S. banks have launched or plan to offer Bitcoin trading or custody, with Davos conversations and rising institutional product flows reinforcing the trend. Banks are prioritizing custody and regulated trading while remaining cautious about yield-bearing stablecoins and other balance-sheet liabilities, and broader market dynamics (ETF inflows, on-chain supply) are shaping how and how fast services roll out.
Crypto taxation surge reshapes markets and capital flows
A wave of new tax measures and reporting standards across jurisdictions is forcing firms and investors to reprice risk and move liquidity; combined with mixed institutional flows and geopolitical tariff headlines, price action has become more volatile around key levels (including sub‑$70,000 Bitcoin). Expect faster compliance consolidation, intensified lobbying over carve‑outs, and jurisdictional flight toward permissive domiciles over the next six months.
Coinbase Urges Removal of Bank of England Stablecoin Caps
In testimony to a UK parliamentary committee, Coinbase argued that the Bank of England’s proposed individual and commercial holding caps would prevent sterling‑denominated stablecoins from scaling into wholesale settlement infrastructure and urged removal of the limits, broader reserve eligibility and explicit liquidity backstops. The case sits against a BoE draft that favors a large minimum share of reserves held in central bank deposits (reported at around 40%), and a House of Lords inquiry with a March 11, 2026 submission deadline will weigh trade‑offs between containment and market enablement.
Banks say UK plans to ease trading-firm capital rules risk broader financial instability
Senior bank officials have warned UK regulators that proposals to relax capital requirements for high-speed electronic trading firms could amplify systemic vulnerability across markets. The debate gains added urgency after global bodies flagged rising leverage and liquidity mismatches in fixed-income markets and urged stronger margin, transparency and cross-border data measures.
Davos Cold Shoulder: Big U.S. Banks Push Back on Coinbase Over Stablecoin Rules
At Davos, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong was met with curt and dismissive responses from several leading U.S. bank chiefs as he lobbied against language in an active Senate stablecoin bill. The exchanges at the World Economic Forum track with a broader, paused CLARITY Act process — including a looming Agriculture Committee markup and a White House convening — that will decide whether non-bank platforms can offer repeat, interest‑like payouts on stablecoins.
Saylor Pushes Back on Critics, Frames Corporate Bitcoin Holdings as Strategic Capital Allocation
Michael Saylor defended corporate Bitcoin treasuries on a recent podcast, arguing that allocating surplus cash to Bitcoin can be a rational alternative to low-yield Treasurys or buybacks. He suggested that gains in digital assets can offset operating losses and warned that companies holding BTC face disproportionate scrutiny compared with those that do not.