Congressional Debate Over Stablecoin Rewards Intensifies as Public Opinion Emerges. Poll Finds
As lawmakers in Washington continue to weigh legislative approaches to regulating payment stablecoins, a new national poll offers timely insight into how Americans view one of the most contested aspects of the debate: whether consumers should be allowed to earn rewards on stablecoin-based financial products. At a moment when Congress is considering frameworks such as the Senate’s Responsible Financial Innovation Act (RFIA), the survey data suggests that public sentiment is far more permissive and innovation-friendly than some policy proposals might assume. Rather than calling for government intervention to restrict stablecoin rewards, most Americans appear to favor consumer choice, market competition, and regulatory restraint, signaling a potential disconnect between political discussions and public expectations.
The findings come from a nationwide survey conducted by HarrisQuest DIY on behalf of the National Cryptocurrency Association (NCA), an organization that represents the interests of cryptocurrency users and advocates for responsible innovation in digital assets. The results highlight strong support for allowing stablecoin rewards, limited concern about consumer harm, and widespread skepticism toward arguments advanced by traditional banking institutions seeking to limit or prohibit such rewards. In an environment where digital finance continues to evolve rapidly, the data suggests that Americans increasingly view stablecoins not as a threat to the financial system, but as an additional tool that can coexist alongside traditional banking services.
Strong Public Support for Allowing Stablecoin Rewards
One of the most striking findings from the survey is the degree of public support for allowing consumers to earn rewards on payment stablecoins. According to the data, 48 percent of respondents support allowing stablecoin rewards, compared to just 12 percent who oppose them. This translates to nearly a four-to-one margin in favor of permitting rewards, a ratio that underscores how lopsided public opinion appears on the issue. The remaining respondents were either neutral or undecided, suggesting that outright opposition to stablecoin rewards is not only a minority view but a relatively small one.
This level of support is notable given the often technical and abstract nature of stablecoin policy debates. While lawmakers and regulators frequently frame discussions around systemic risk, financial stability, and consumer protection, the survey indicates that average Americans are more focused on practical outcomes such as choice, access, and the ability to benefit from new financial products. For many consumers, rewards are a familiar feature of the financial landscape, already embedded in credit cards, savings accounts, and loyalty programs. Extending similar incentives to stablecoins appears, in the public’s view, to be a natural evolution rather than a radical departure.
The data also suggests that Americans do not perceive stablecoin rewards as inherently dangerous or destabilizing. If consumers believed rewards posed a serious risk to their finances or to the broader economy, opposition levels would likely be far higher. Instead, the overwhelming support indicates that most people see rewards as a benign or even positive feature that can encourage adoption and foster competition without undermining existing safeguards.
Consumer Choice and Financial Innovation as Central Themes
Beyond simple approval or disapproval, the survey reveals deeper insights into how Americans conceptualize the stablecoin rewards debate. At its core, many respondents view the issue not as one of consumer protection versus risk, but as a question of competition and innovation. This framing is critical, as it helps explain why public opinion diverges so sharply from the positions taken by some banking industry groups.
According to the survey, consumers broadly want more choices when it comes to financial products, particularly as digital technology reshapes how money is stored, transferred, and used. Stablecoins, which are typically pegged to fiat currencies such as the U.S. dollar, are often perceived as a bridge between traditional finance and the digital asset ecosystem. By offering rewards, stablecoin issuers can make these products more attractive, especially to consumers who are already accustomed to earning incentives for everyday financial activities.
The survey suggests that Americans see stablecoins as expanding the menu of financial options rather than replacing existing institutions. This distinction is important, as it counters narratives that frame stablecoins as direct threats to banks or as tools that could destabilize the traditional financial system. Instead, respondents appear to view stablecoins as complementary products that can coexist with checking accounts, savings accounts, and payment cards, giving consumers greater flexibility in how they manage their money.
Perceptions of Bank Opposition Focus on Competition, Not Safety
A particularly revealing aspect of the survey concerns how Americans interpret the opposition from banks to stablecoin rewards. When asked why they believe banks oppose such rewards, respondents were far more likely to attribute that stance to competitive concerns than to worries about consumer safety. Specifically, 46 percent of Americans said banks oppose stablecoin rewards because they are concerned about competition, while far fewer believed the opposition was driven primarily by a desire to protect consumers.
This perception matters because it shapes how the public evaluates policy arguments coming from the banking sector. If consumers believed banks were acting out of genuine concern for financial stability or consumer welfare, their opposition might carry more weight. Instead, many Americans appear skeptical, interpreting bank resistance as an attempt to protect market share rather than the public interest.
This skepticism aligns with broader trends in public attitudes toward large financial institutions, particularly in the wake of past financial crises and ongoing debates about fees, access, and transparency. Stablecoins, by contrast, are often associated with innovation, lower costs, and faster transactions. In that context, bank opposition to rewards can be seen as an effort to limit competitive pressure rather than a principled stand on safety.
The Role of the Responsible Financial Innovation Act in the Debate
The survey results are especially relevant given the ongoing discussion around the Senate’s Responsible Financial Innovation Act. The RFIA aims to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets, including stablecoins, but has sparked debate over how restrictive or permissive such regulation should be. Prior to the release of this polling data, policymakers had limited insight into how average Americans view specific policy proposals related to stablecoin rewards.
By providing empirical evidence of public opinion, the survey fills an important gap in the legislative process. It suggests that proposals to ban or severely restrict stablecoin rewards may be out of step with voter preferences. For lawmakers who prioritize constituent views, the data could serve as a caution against adopting overly restrictive measures that lack broad public support.
Stuart Alderoty, President of the National Cryptocurrency Association, emphasized this point by noting that the public appears to understand what is at stake in the debate. According to Alderoty, Americans overwhelmingly support choice and are skeptical of efforts to shut down new financial options under the guise of protection. His remarks underscore the idea that public opinion is not merely permissive but actively resistant to what many perceive as unnecessary or protectionist regulation.
Crypto Holders Express Even Stronger Views on Innovation Leadership
While the general population shows strong support for stablecoin rewards, the views of current crypto holders are even more decisive. Among individuals who already own or use cryptocurrencies, the survey highlights a heightened awareness of the broader economic and geopolitical implications of digital asset policy. For this group, stablecoin rewards are not just a consumer perk but a symbol of the United States’ willingness to lead in financial innovation.
According to the survey, 71 percent of crypto holders believe it is important for the United States to lead globally in stablecoin innovation. This finding reflects concerns that restrictive policies could push innovation offshore, allowing other countries to set standards and capture economic benefits associated with digital finance. In an increasingly interconnected global economy, leadership in financial technology is often seen as a strategic advantage, influencing everything from capital flows to the development of new business models.
Crypto holders tend to be more familiar with the mechanics and potential benefits of stablecoins, which may explain their strong views. Many see rewards as a way to encourage adoption, increase liquidity, and support the development of robust digital payment ecosystems. Restrictions on rewards, from this perspective, are not just inconvenient but potentially harmful to the country’s competitive position.
Stablecoins Viewed as Supplemental, Not Substitutes for Banks
Another key insight from the survey challenges the notion that stablecoins threaten to displace traditional bank accounts. When asked how they would manage their money if stablecoins were to offer rewards, respondents gave a range of answers that suggest moderation rather than wholesale shifts. Twenty-six percent said they would not move any money at all, while 28 percent were unsure what action they would take. Only 46 percent indicated they would move at least a portion of their funds into stablecoins.
These responses indicate that most consumers view stablecoins as a supplemental tool rather than a replacement for traditional banking relationships. Even among those open to moving funds, the survey does not suggest that consumers would abandon banks entirely. Instead, stablecoins appear to be seen as an additional option for specific use cases, such as payments, transfers, or earning incremental rewards.
This finding undermines arguments that stablecoin rewards could drain deposits from banks or destabilize the financial system. If a significant share of consumers either would not move money or remain uncertain, the immediate impact on traditional institutions may be more limited than critics suggest. Over time, competition could encourage banks to innovate and offer better products, benefiting consumers without triggering systemic disruption.
Limited Appetite for Government Intervention
Perhaps one of the most important implications of the survey is the apparent lack of public appetite for government intervention to stop stablecoin rewards. While Americans generally support reasonable regulation, the data suggests they do not favor bans or heavy-handed restrictions that eliminate consumer choice. Instead, respondents appear to prefer a balanced approach that allows innovation to proceed while addressing legitimate risks through clear and proportionate rules.
This perspective aligns with broader trends in technology regulation, where consumers often support oversight but resist measures that stifle innovation or limit access to beneficial products. In the case of stablecoins, rewards are seen as a feature that enhances value rather than a risk that demands prohibition. Efforts to restrict them, therefore, risk being perceived as overreach rather than protection.
For policymakers, this presents a challenge as well as an opportunity. Crafting legislation that reflects public preferences while ensuring financial stability requires nuance and engagement with stakeholders across the spectrum. The survey data provides a starting point for that conversation, highlighting areas where public opinion is clear and where further education or dialogue may be needed.
Implications for U.S. Innovation and Global Competitiveness
Taken together, the survey findings suggest that restricting stablecoin rewards could have unintended consequences for U.S. innovation. By limiting the ability of stablecoin issuers to compete with traditional financial products, such restrictions may slow the development of new technologies and business models. In a global context where other countries are actively exploring digital currencies and payment systems, falling behind could have long-term economic implications.
The data also indicates that consumers are capable of understanding and evaluating new financial products without excessive paternalism. Rather than assuming that rewards inherently mislead or endanger users, the public appears confident in its ability to make informed choices. This confidence challenges narratives that frame consumers as needing protection from innovation itself, rather than from specific, demonstrable harms.
As Stuart Alderoty noted, the data is clear in showing that consumers want choice and reasonable rules, not bans. They view many arguments against financial innovation as driven by banks seeking to avoid competition, rather than by genuine concern for consumer welfare. For lawmakers, acknowledging this perception may be essential to building trust and legitimacy in the regulatory process.
A Data-Driven Moment for Policymakers
As Congress continues to debate stablecoin legislation, the timing of this survey is significant. Policymakers now have access to concrete data showing how Americans view stablecoin rewards, competition, and innovation. Rather than relying solely on industry lobbying or abstract risk assessments, lawmakers can incorporate public opinion into their decision-making.
The survey does not suggest that regulation is unnecessary, but it does imply that outright restrictions on stablecoin rewards may be misaligned with consumer preferences and economic goals. A regulatory framework that allows rewards while setting clear standards for transparency, reserve backing, and risk management could strike a balance between innovation and protection.
Ultimately, the debate over stablecoin rewards reflects a broader question about how the United States approaches financial innovation. Will policy prioritize competition, choice, and global leadership, or will it default to restrictive measures that favor incumbents? According to this new polling data, the public appears to favor the former, offering a clear signal that could shape the future of digital finance policy in the years ahead.
About the National Cryptocurrency Association
The National Cryptocurrency Association (NCA) is a 501(C)(4) organization dedicated to educating consumers about how to engage with crypto. Crypto is positively impacting the lives of millions of Americans but misinformation has held back those who stand to benefit. The NCA is here to help make sense of crypto by sharing the stories of real people and businesses using crypto, providing educational resources to navigate the hype and confusion, and offering guidance and support through partnerships and services.
