Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey signalled a notable shift in tone on cryptocurrencies this week, suggesting that the digital assets pegged to real-world currencies could play a bigger role in the UK’s financial system than previously thought.

Speaking to the Financial Times, Bailey said it would be “wrong to be against stablecoins as a matter of principle”, adding that they could drive innovation in payments both domestically and internationally. He also noted that the financial system “does not have to be organised” around the current heavy reliance on commercial bank lending.

Read more: Crypto live prices

“It is possible, at least partially, to separate money from credit provision, with banks and stablecoins coexisting and non-banks carrying out more of the credit provision role,” Bailey wrote in the FT. But he cautioned that key questions remain, including whether stablecoins must be backed entirely by risk-free assets in order to be considered truly stable.

The Bank of England governor’s recent, more positive comments on stablecoins highlight just how far the UK’s central bank has come in its approach to this cryptocurrency innovation.

This marks a notable departure from Bailey’s earlier stance. In his September 2020 speech, he drew a sharp distinction between crypto-assets and money, characterising assets such as bitcoin (BTC-USD) as “unsuited to the world of payments”.

He stressed that any stablecoin used for payments must meet the same high standards applied to existing forms of money, including robust deposit protection, resolution mechanisms, liquidity and governance.

Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey takes part in the financial stability report press conference at the Bank of England in London on August 7, 2025. The Bank of England on August 7 cut its key interest rate by a quarter point to four percent, the lowest level in 2.5 years, as it bids to boost a UK economy still threatened by US tariffs. Alongside the expected decision, the BoE forecast British economic growth to hit 1.25 percent this year, slightly better than the central bank's previous estimate of one percent. (Photo by Jordan Pettitt / POOL / AFP) (Photo by JORDAN PETTITT/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey previously described crypto assets as ‘unsuited to the world of payments’. (AFP via Getty Images) · JORDAN PETTITT via Getty Images

Bailey also proposed that a better outcome might be for central banks themselves to “harness much of the technological and IT systems innovation and directly digitise cash”, raising the idea that central bank digital money could address the decline in paper currency “without the complications of creating the protections required around stablecoins”.

Since then, the Bank chief’s tone has become more cautiously open to stablecoins, provided they are regulated to the same standards as money. Despite his more recent willingness to engage with stablecoins, he continues to emphasise that any widespread adoption must be backed by strong safeguards.

Will Beeson, CEO of Uniform Labs, said the Bank of England illustrates the challenge for incumbents, which is that they hold a privileged position but risk losing out if they fail to move quickly on proven innovations from the crypto space.

“The currently entrenched financial intermediaries are in the privileged position to front-run innovation once feasibility and demand have been validated. The delicate question is whether they can execute quickly and boldly enough at the tipping point to defend their monopolies against increasingly mature, fast-moving new entrants,” Beeson told Yahoo Finance UK.

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to maintain a fixed value, typically pegged one-to-one to a fiat currency such as the US dollar, the euro, or the yen. Unlike highly volatile tokens such as bitcoin (BTC-USD), stablecoins aim to combine the efficiency of blockchain technology with the stability of traditional money.

This makes them a crucial building block of the digital asset ecosystem. Traders use them as a “safe haven” when exiting more volatile positions, businesses are testing them for cross-border remittances, and payment companies see them as a faster, cheaper alternative to card networks or bank transfers.

Read more: What price will bitcoin be by Christmas?

The market has grown to nearly $300bn (£223bn), dominated by US dollar-linked tokens like Tether’s USDT (USDT-USD) and Circle’s USDC (USDC-USD). Analysts at Citigroup forecast the market could expand to as much as $4tn by 2030. Sterling-backed stablecoins, however, remain limited in scale.

Supporters argue stablecoins can cut costs and modernise payments, while critics worry they could destabilise finance if not properly regulated. Bailey’s remarks suggest the Bank of England may be adopting a more pragmatic approach as policymakers weigh these risks against potential benefits.

Stablecoins are central to most crypto activity because they serve as a stable trading pair. For example, bitcoin and ethereum (ETH-USD) are frequently traded against tether (USDT-USD), the first large-scale stablecoin launched in 2014.

Tether’s rise established the model of issuing digital tokens backed by reserves such as cash, short-term government bonds, or other liquid assets. Circle’s USDC, launched in 2018, built on this idea with a stronger emphasis on regulatory compliance and transparency.

Today, stablecoins underpin activity in the crypto ecosystem, from decentralised finance (DeFi) lending platforms to non-fungible token (NFT) marketplaces, providing a reliable unit of account in otherwise volatile markets.

Well-known fiat-backed stablecoins are:

Tether (USDT-USD)

USD coin (USDC-USD)

Stasis euro (EURS-USD)

The debate over stablecoins is not only about regulation but also about one of blockchain’s most defining features: irreversibility.

Once a blockchain transaction is confirmed, it cannot be undone. Unlike credit card or bank payments, there is no central authority to reverse a fraudulent or mistaken transfer. This permanence is a deliberate design choice, making blockchains tamper-proof and resistant to manipulation.

Blockchain payment permanence is a core principle of their design. That core principle, however, is now being tested. Circle (CRCL), the world’s second-largest stablecoin issuer, has said it is exploring ways to make certain transactions reversible in cases of fraud or disputes.

Circle president Heath Tarbert told the Financial Times that a mechanism allowing refunds could help the stablecoin industry integrate more closely with traditional finance. “We are thinking through… whether or not there’s the possibility of reversibility of transactions, right, but at the same time, we want settlement finality,” he said.

Any reversibility feature would spark significant debate within the crypto community, with critics arguing that it would undermine the very ethos of decentralisation and immutability that blockchain technology was built upon.

Blockchain transactions are the backbone of the crypto ecosystem, enabling secure, decentralized and permanent exchanges of digital currency. At its core, a blockchain transaction is a digital record of value or data moving from one party to another, verified and permanently stored on a blockchain network.

When someone sends digital currency, such as bitcoin or a stablecoin, from one wallet to another, the transaction is broadcast to the blockchain network. Nodes, sometimes called miners, verify its authenticity using cryptography. Verified transactions are grouped into blocks, which are then added to the blockchain, creating a permanent record.

This system guarantees that transactions are unique and cannot be duplicated or reversed. Once confirmed, a transaction is permanently etched into the blockchain’s history, which is central to the security and reliability of digital currencies.

Unlike traditional banking systems, where transactions can be disputed or reversed by a central authority, blockchain transactions are designed to be permanent once confirmed by the network.

Irreversibility is a feature of blockchains, not a flaw. Because no central authority controls the ledger, and because transactions are cryptographically secured and permanently recorded, reversing a confirmed transaction is practically impossible. This ensures trust in the system, even without banks or payment processors.

Read more: How bitcoin could be used as collateral for UK mortgages

Each block in a blockchain contains a cryptographic hash of the previous block, linking the chain together. Altering any transaction in a past block would change its hash, which would then cascade through every subsequent block.

The computing power required to rewrite blockchain history is so immense that it is considered practically impossible, which is the main element of the revolutionary design of this technology.

Digital signatures further secure transactions. Only the owner of a private key can authorise spending from a wallet, and nodes verify these signatures against public keys.

Together with decentralised consensus, where thousands of nodes maintain the ledger, this makes blockchain transactions irreversible, and the mechanism that runs it decentralised.

A so-called 51% attack, in which a single actor controls the majority of a blockchain network’s computing power, could theoretically alter the ledger. However, for established blockchains such as bitcoin, such attacks are extremely costly and unlikely, as they would only be feasible if one actor controlled the majority of bitcoin mining power across the globe.

The permanence of blockchain transactions protects users against fraud, such as double spending, attempting to spend the same digital asset twice. It also supports the “trustless” nature of decentralised systems, so that users don’t need a central authority to verify transactions.

Read more:

Download the Yahoo Finance app, available for Apple and Android.