Latest Payments News: Industry Warns That ‘Onerous’ Stablecoin Rules Risk The UK Being Left Behind, and more

Catch up on some of the stories our payments compliance analysts have covered lately, and stay up-to-date on the latest news.

Industry Warns That ‘Onerous’ Stablecoin Rules Risk The UK Being Left Behind

The UK crypto industry is frustrated by the country’s slow progress towards regulatory clarity on stablecoins and has warned that, without a supportive framework, innovation may migrate to more welcoming jurisdictions.

In an open letter to UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves, industry leaders warned that the UK risks missing a “transformative moment” in financial services innovation if it fails to embrace stablecoins.

“The global regulatory tide is turning,” the letter says. “As other jurisdictions move decisively, the UK must act now to avoid being a rule-taker rather than a rule-maker in the digital asset era.

“This is an opportunity to transform regulatory ambiguity into competitive advantage. With leadership and foresight, the UK can position itself as the premier global hub for stablecoin innovation - reaffirming its role at the heart of international finance for decades to come.”

The letter, signed by 30 crypto CEOs and executives, argues that the UK urgently needs to develop a “national strategy” on stablecoins – one that positions stablecoins not as a “risk to be contained” but as a “financial infrastructure to be responsibly embraced”.

With signatories including Coinbase, Kraken, Fireblocks and Zodia Custody, the letter urges HM Treasury and the Bank of England (BoE) to prioritise a “forward-thinking” stablecoin strategy that is “aligned with the national interest”.

Binance Audit Signals Next Phase Of Australia’s Crypto Regulation

The scrutiny of the world’s largest exchange reflects broader reforms aimed at closing gaps in virtual asset regulation and tackling money laundering risks in the digital asset sector.

Last week, the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) ordered Binance to appoint an external auditor due to “serious concerns” about its local anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) controls.

The order was prompted by Binance’s latest independent review, which AUSTRAC described as “limited in scope” relative to the company’s size, risk profile and product and service offerings.

“Businesses need to maximise the value of independent reviews and ensure appropriate testing and review across critical processes and controls,” said Brendan Thomas, CEO of AUSTRAC. “They should seek and expect a level of rigour and challenge.”

In addition, AUSTRAC identified Binance’s “high staff turnover” and “lack of local resourcing and senior management oversight” as key AML governance concerns.

“This is a global company operating across borders in a high-risk environment,” Thomas added. “Capacity and risk controls need to correspond to the size of a business and its market presence, particularly as it scales.”

Binance has 28 days to nominate an external auditor for AUSTRAC’s consideration and selection.

Malta Unveils Intensified AML/CTF Plan For The Year Ahead

The country’s Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit (FIAU) will scrutinise crypto companies’ ownership structures over the next year as part of its ongoing drive against illicit finance.

In its AML/CFT Supervisory Plan 2025–2026, the FIAU said it would conduct meetings, on-site inspections and thematic reviews during the second year of its five-year compliance monitoring plan.

For crypto-asset providers, the FIAU will focus on compliance with beneficial ownership obligations, particularly in relation to complex structures and shell companies.

It will also scrutinise deposits and withdrawals involving crypto-assets in the remote gaming sector.

Credit institutions will be reviewed for misuse of products and services in trade-based money laundering, and financial institutions will face checks on money remittances, with both areas examined for terrorist financing risks.

CFPB Invites Comments On Proposed Changes To Open Banking Rule

Amid confusion around the regulation of open banking in the US, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has issued a request for comment to clarify industry views on key points.

In a notice published on August 22, 2025, the CFPB asked for comments within 60 days on four specific areas:

• The proper understanding of who can serve as a “representative” making a request on behalf of the consumer.
• The optimal approach to the assessment of fees to defray the costs incurred by a “covered person” in responding to a customer-driven request.
• The threat and cost-benefit pictures for data security associated with Section 1033 compliance.
• The threat picture for data privacy associated with Section 1033 compliance.

The request comes as the CFPB drafts regulations to implement Section 1033 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, amid a growing dispute between banks and fintechs over data-sharing fees.

DNB’s Bunq Enforcement Shows Limits Of Regulatory Tolerance

The €2.6m fine imposed on the Dutch fintech and neobank for deficiencies in its money laundering controls is a reminder that easing the compliance burden does not mean firms can get away with persistent failings.

In revealing this week that it imposed the fine in May 2025, De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) emphasised the severity of Bunq’s deficiencies during the period January 2021 to May 2022.

Between 2018 and 2023, DNB carried out several investigations into Bunq’s compliance with the Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing Act, (Wwft) and found various instances of severe non-compliance.

According to the regulator, it brought the failings to the firm’s attention, but this did not lead to a lasting change in its operations.

“DNB already took enforcement action on several occasions, including imposing a fine. However, this has not resulted in sustained compliance by Bunq,” it said.

“Following DNB’s examinations, Bunq has not made sufficient progress in complying with its statutory obligations. DNB has therefore decided to impose a punitive fine on Bunq due to the severity of the non-compliance.”

In the four cases on which DNB based its fine, Bunq’s continuous monitoring was found to be inadequate and its client oversight to be insufficient.

Bunq has appealed against the fine.

‍

Want to know more? 

Request a demo with one of our experts today to gain full access to the stories we cover - and much more - and start learning how you can make compliance a competitive advantage for your organisation.