From the Federal Reserve's Open Payment System, observing the reshaping of the financial foundation in the RWA era

In October 2025, a subtle technical notice issued by the Federal Reserve triggered a chain reaction across global financial and crypto markets. According to The Wall Street Journal’s report on October 15, the Fed officially “proposed” allowing certain compliant stablecoin issuers to directly connect to its core payment systems FedNow and Fedwire after meeting strict review criteria. This proposal, called “Limited Access Main Account,” signifies that some digital asset issuers will be included for the first time into the U.S. sovereign currency clearing network. To outsiders, this is not just a regulatory “icebreaker,” but more like a realignment at the institutional level—marking a return of digital currency from the fringes of finance to its core infrastructure.

However, the true significance may go beyond the “stablecoin” itself.

It points more deeply to a broader transformation: against the backdrop of the rapid expansion of RWA (Real-World Asset tokenization), the financial system is reconstructing how it expresses and circulates “value.” As the dollar’s payment hub gradually integrates with blockchain assets, and assets gain native clearing capabilities on-chain, this move by the Fed may be silently paving the way for the institutionalization of the RWA market.

This is a seemingly gentle but fundamentally profound structural shift. From the openness of payment systems to the tokenization of real assets, a new monetary logic is emerging.

1. Policy Breakthrough Signals: From “Payment System” to “Digital Asset Infrastructure”

Since launching the real-time payment system FedNow in 2023, the Federal Reserve has been attempting to incorporate innovations from emerging financial technology without “disrupting the system.” According to the policy statement released on the Fed’s official website in October 2025, this “access” proposal is limited to institutions licensed and continuously regulated under federal or state trust laws, including bank-licensed stablecoin issuers. This means that the regulatory threshold has not been lowered; instead, through “compliance integration,” digital asset institutions are brought into a regulated framework.

From a regulatory perspective, the key is—shifting from “gray market” circulation outside regulation to “whitelisted” circulation within the regulatory system.

This aligns with the positioning of the payment system. FedNow and Fedwire are not only the core networks for interbank settlement in the U.S., but also foundational infrastructure for monetary policy transmission. When stablecoin issuers can directly use these systems for clearing and settlement, their tokenized assets are no longer solely dependent on commercial banks or on-chain oracles but are connected to “central bank-level” credit foundations.

What does this imply?

First, the clearing efficiency and security of stablecoins will be greatly enhanced. For example, Circle’s USDC has previously participated in dollar clearing indirectly through Silvergate and Signature banks, which collapsed in 2023, exposing systemic vulnerabilities. Direct access to Fedwire would significantly reduce such risks. More importantly, this structural change lays the groundwork for the circulation of tokenized RWAs—since a core bottleneck of the RWA ecosystem is the lack of a regulated, high-efficiency on-chain USD settlement tool. When this tool becomes possible through policy proposals, the pathway for real-world assets’ value transformation on-chain truly begins to close.

A commentary by Reuters on October 16 pointed out that this move by the Fed is not merely a fintech policy but is “building a trust bridge for the future of asset tokenization.” This “bridge” is not only about technological compatibility but also about extending institutional trust: confirming at the central bank level that digital tokens can enter the payment system legally, meaning the U.S. is gradually dissolving the “trust gap” between digital assets and fiat currency systems.

At the international level, this step also has a demonstration effect.

The European Central Bank tested digital euro payments in 2024 via a “bank channel model,” but maintained a separation between digital assets and central bank accounts; the Bank of Japan only opened participation at the banking level during CBDC pilots. The Fed’s proposal to allow some compliant institutions to directly access the core payment network is undoubtedly a form of regulatory “structural innovation”—not issuing a CBDC, but socializing some digital payment functions through “compliance outsourcing” (i.e., leveraging private sector innovation while maintaining control via access regulation).

In other words, the Fed is not fundamentally changing the monetary issuance logic but is using stablecoins as a medium, allowing the market to bear the risks and costs of digital transformation first. This aligns with the traditional path of American financial reform—driving innovation through market mechanisms within a risk control framework, then gradually formalizing rights through regulation.

This path is becoming a template for the institutionalization of RWA tokenization projects.

2. The Compliance Return of Stablecoins and the Practical Pull of RWAs

At this point in 2025, the Fed’s policy proposal coincides almost simultaneously with the expansion of the RWA market. According to a September report titled “Quarterly Review of the RWA Market” by Bloomberg, the global RWA tokenized asset market surpassed $48 billion in Q3 2025, rising over 70% since the start of the year. The U.S. accounts for over 40%, mainly driven by institutional products such as JPMorgan’s Onyx project, BlackRock’s BUIDL fund, and Goldman Sachs’ GS DAP platform. All these projects rely on stablecoins or equivalent on-chain USD as clearing media.

This makes the Fed’s “openness” proposal no coincidence.

The essence of RWA is to map traditional assets (such as bonds, real estate, commodities, or receivables) onto the blockchain, achieving digital value and automated clearing. The key to on-chain clearing is the legal and secure status of stablecoins within the system. Previously, even institutions like BlackRock issuing tokenized funds still relied on traditional banks for underlying fund clearing, creating a compliance “gap”—the value circulating on blockchain still needed off-chain bank settlement. This two-layer structure increased friction and limited the expansion of RWA.

The Fed’s latest policy suggestion aims to bridge this “gap.”

The Financial Times on October 17 noted that directly connecting stablecoins to the payment system would “enable tokenized assets to have central bank-level settlement guarantees”—potentially becoming a key catalyst for RWA market development. For RWA projects, this change means greater liquidity and lower settlement risk. For example, on Goldman Sachs’ GS DAP platform, tokenized government or corporate bonds typically settle in T+1 or T+2; if future settlement could be directly through FedNow, real-time settlement could be achieved, greatly reducing credit risk and holding costs for borrowers.

This shift is also reshaping asset pricing logic.

In traditional finance, liquidity premiums often serve as implicit costs in pricing—assets with poor liquidity are valued lower. When RWAs are realized with instant clearing and programmable payments on-chain, this premium will be compressed. For institutional investors, tokenized assets may no longer be just “alternative allocations” but a new efficient foundational asset class. This aligns with the Fed’s goal of “system efficiency enhancement.”

It is worth noting that this trend is not unique to the U.S.

Singapore’s MAS has been exploring RWA tokenization regulation through the Project Guardian initiative since 2023, focusing on compliance stablecoins or central bank accounts as clearing foundations. Switzerland’s FINMA permitted regulated banks in 2024 to issue “account-linked stablecoins” for institutional RWA trading. The Fed’s proposal may signal the formal introduction of this “European experiment” into the mainstream global financial system.

However, this transformation still carries risks, and opposition voices are significant.

A cautious stance was expressed by U.S. Treasury officials in an interview with The New York Times, emphasizing that allowing stablecoin institutions into the payment system “does not mean they will have the same status as banks.” Regulators remain concerned about cross-border fund flows and anti-money laundering risks. More critically, there are divisions within the Fed. Fed Governor Michelle Bowman, in recent speeches, repeatedly warned, “We are entering a complex phase where regulators must ensure that new payment tools do not undermine financial stability.” Her conservative view worries that integrating non-bank institutions into core payment systems could introduce new systemic risks, such as stablecoin runs directly impacting payment networks.

This suggests that the Fed’s proposal is more like a “conditional integration” experiment rather than a full release. Under such institutional boundaries, global circulation of RWAs still depends on multi-national regulatory coordination and compliance certification—crucial for whether RWAs can enter the mainstream financial core in the coming years.

3. From On-Chain Clearing to Real Financial Restructuring—The Institutional Leap of RWAs

If the Fed’s policy proposal to open the payment system on the surface grants “quasi-official” legitimacy to stablecoins, its deeper structural significance is actually laying the groundwork for the on-chain settlement of real-world assets (RWAs). This infrastructure change is transforming the “trust transfer” logic in financial markets.

Reviewing the timeline of RWA development, it is evident that it has implicitly synchronized with U.S. regulatory rhythms. In 2020, JPMorgan launched its blockchain platform Onyx when blockchain assets were still considered “technological experiments”; by 2023, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink publicly regarded “tokenization” as a “long-term trend in asset management,” marking the institutional entry. By 2025, with the Fed’s “system access permission” proposal, the entire tokenization industry is attempting to move from peripheral innovation into the core financial system.

This reflects a redefinition of the Fed’s stance on “payment system neutrality.”

For a long time, payment systems have been viewed as the most solid fortress of fiat currency. Whether USD, euro, or yen, their core clearing networks are controlled by central banks, making it difficult for external innovations to penetrate. Now, the Fed’s proactive opening of this edge creates a “programmable gap” in the trust system’s foundation. This enables RWAs to realize higher-level financial functions on-chain—not just trading digital certificates but also transferring, delivering, and clearing assets.

For example, JPMorgan’s Onyx platform, as reported by Bloomberg in August 2025, has tokenized over $300 billion in short-term assets, including government bond repurchases, money market fund shares, and corporate bonds. Each tokenized asset’s settlement actually requires a stable, regulated USD clearing channel. Previously, Onyx still relied on limited banking networks for indirect settlement; now, the Fed’s “proposal” suggests these tokenized trades could potentially be settled directly into FedNow, paving the way at the institutional level.

For RWAs, this “system access” has three significant institutional implications.

First, it reconstructs the trust transfer mechanism. In traditional finance, trust is transmitted top-down—central banks grant clearing rights to commercial banks, which then extend credit to market participants. In the RWA system, trust is generated bottom-up through smart contracts and blockchain consensus, then verified by regulators. The Fed’s openness effectively establishes a “confluence point” between these two trust systems—merging “central bank credit” with “on-chain algorithmic trust.”

Second, it blurs the boundary between currency and assets. When tokenized assets possess central bank-level settlement capability, their monetary attributes are amplified, and the traditional distinction between “assets” and “payment media” begins to merge. This trend is especially evident in tokenized bonds or fund shares.

Third, it transforms the regulatory model. When RWAs are traceable, verifiable, and can be settled directly into the central bank system, regulators shift from “post-supervision” to “embedded process,” increasing the granularity of financial compliance.

From an external perspective, this appears to be a silent institutional revolution.

The Financial Times pointed out that the Fed’s strategy “is not about legitimizing crypto assets but about making real-world finance more efficient and transparent.” The underlying message is that the U.S. does not intend to replace fiat currency with digital currency through policy but aims to reshape the circulation and technical structure of fiat via RWA and stablecoin market mechanisms. This is both a reinforcement of monetary sovereignty and a form of “digital defensive innovation.”

However, this restructuring faces significant risks.

Beyond the regulatory disagreements mentioned earlier, practical risks include technological integration and market acceptance. Connecting traditional financial assets with blockchain payment systems is technically complex, with cross-chain interoperability, system stability, and cybersecurity being major challenges. Market acceptance of these new assets will also take time, and liquidity migration from traditional channels to on-chain may be volatile. Bowman’s warnings are based on this—“charged experiments” could drive efficiency but also amplify systemic risks, especially as RWA asset scales grow and issues like exchange rates, collateral, and risk exposure between RWAs and sovereign currencies become regulatory focal points.

4. The Balance of Regulation—Between Compliance and Innovation, the “Centralized Trust” Boundary

The Fed’s proposal is not about “decentralization” but more like a “regulatory experiment” in institutionalization.

According to The New York Times on October 18, regulators explicitly stated that stablecoin issuers seeking access to the payment system must obtain comprehensive licenses at the federal level and undergo ongoing compliance audits. In other words, this is not a victory for digital currencies but a regulatory “capture” and reorganization.

This balancing act is characteristic of the U.S. regulatory style: neither fully embracing nor entirely blocking innovation, but allowing market-driven innovation to be absorbed within a controllable institutional boundary. This aligns with the regulatory logic in the RWA space.

For example, the SEC’s 2024 regulatory framework for tokenized funds explicitly classifies RWAs as “securities digitization,” not as standalone crypto assets. BlackRock’s BUIDL fund and Fidelity’s tokenized bonds must comply with the Investment Company Act and Securities Act standards. This institutional design allows RWAs to “grow embedded” within the traditional regulatory framework rather than creating a separate system.

The Fed’s proposal is an extension of this logic: through compliance, absorbing innovation into the regulatory “safety perimeter.” Although seemingly conservative, this approach appears highly efficient in the context of international finance.

Compared to the EU’s MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation), which adopts a “clear definition and unified constraints” approach with pre-classified categories and strict registration, the U.S.'s “function-oriented regulation” allows different innovations to adapt flexibly within compliance frameworks—an important reason for its resilience.

However, this “centralized trust” approach also raises concerns about the dilution of blockchain’s decentralization ethos.

Industry analysts in CoinDesk on October 19 warned that stablecoin integration into central bank systems could lead to “gradual centralization of blockchain,” with RWAs dominated by large financial institutions, squeezing out small innovators. When tokenized assets are linked to central bank clearing, regulators will have direct access to asset flow data, which is beneficial for compliance but may also spark concerns over data sovereignty and privacy.

This presents a dilemma for the Fed:

On one hand, it seeks to control systemic risk through “institutional absorption”; on the other, it must ensure that the innovation ecosystem remains sufficiently diverse.

Thus, the current regulatory approach resembles a “layered supervision”: key functions like payment, custody, and clearing are centrally controlled, while application and innovation layers retain some freedom. This resembles the “layered internet regulation model”—protocols are secured by the authorities, while the ecosystem is driven by market competition.

Within this framework, the compliance path for RWAs will become clearer. On-chain asset issuance and circulation will trend toward standardization, with qualified investors and financial institutions as core participants, and regulatory identities gradually aligning with traditional securities. In other words, future RWA markets will no longer be “emerging sectors” but integrated into the financial infrastructure.

5. Redefining Finance: The Co-Construction of RWA and Stablecoins in the “On-Chain Dollar Order”

When central bank clearing systems connect with digital asset systems, the boundaries of finance are redrawn.

In this new landscape, the dollar is not only a fiat currency but also a programmable settlement medium, with RWAs as its real-world mirror. The combination signifies that the “dollar standard” is migrating toward an “on-chain standard.”

According to Reuters on October 20, the Fed has established a “Tokenized Asset Supervision Working Group” to assess the technical and risk parameters of RWA and payment system interactions. This is the first official acknowledgment at the central bank level of RWA as a systemic asset class.

The practical significance is that when RWAs can be settled directly in stablecoins, their international liquidity no longer depends on traditional foreign exchange systems but on a blockchain-based global programmable clearing layer. This opens a new pathway for the dollar’s dominance worldwide.

For example, under Singapore’s Project Guardian, Citibank, UBS, and JPMorgan conducted cross-border RWA settlement experiments, tokenizing government bonds for on-chain USD settlement across three jurisdictions, achieving T+0 clearing. This was officially disclosed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore in late 2024 and is seen as a “future multilateral payment infrastructure prototype.” When the Fed proposes allowing stablecoin institutions into its payment system, it is undoubtedly vying for influence over this cross-border clearing standard.

This also makes “digital sovereignty of the dollar” a core topic in RWA discussions.

Unlike CBDCs (central bank digital currencies), which are issued administratively, the combination of RWAs and stablecoins is more market-driven and flexible: it allows the market to expand asset boundaries via tokenization while maintaining the dollar’s central role in clearing. This “dual-track” strategy enables the U.S. to pursue digital transformation without altering the monetary system itself. It exemplifies a “quiet hegemonic logic”—the dollar doesn’t need to change itself, only the world’s settlement methods.

Meanwhile, other regions are exploring alternative models. Hong Kong’s Monetary Authority has been pushing the “e-HKD Tokenized Bonds” project since 2024, aiming to support RWA settlement with a central bank digital currency; Switzerland, the UAE, and Thailand are testing cross-border tokenized clearing via projects like mBridge. These efforts show that RWAs are no longer just an extension of crypto assets but are becoming a new frontier in global financial competition.

6. Between Prudence and Innovation—Rebuilding Trust in the RWA Era

When the Fed quietly opens a door to its payment system, a corner of the global financial order is also being redefined.

This is not just a policy easing but a deeper institutional shift: seeking a new balance between compliance, innovation, and sovereignty. Gaining system access for stablecoins is not only a technical breakthrough but also an official entry point for the infrastructure of real-world assets (RWAs).

The transformation is still in its early stages.

Regulatory frameworks are not yet unified, technical standards are evolving, and cross-border compliance challenges are ongoing. The Fed’s proposal still requires lengthy discussions and assessments, and its final form and impact remain uncertain. However, the direction is clear: tokenization of real assets is no longer just an experimental fringe but is becoming part of the core sovereign monetary system.

As The Economist commented on October 21, “The future financial system will not be divided into ‘traditional’ and ‘crypto,’ but will be a unified digital ecosystem centered on redefining ‘trust.’”

This subtle policy adjustment by the Fed may be the starting point of this global trust reconstruction—where a seemingly weak institutional fissure is slowly giving rise to a new monetary order.

Author: Liang Yu Editor: Zhao Yidan