Coinbase supports Fed payment accounts that could pay interest, urges risk-based oversight in regulatory comments

Coinbase has weighed in on a Federal Reserve policy proposal related to “payment accounts,” backing the idea that balances held in those accounts could earn interest and arguing that any oversight should be structured around risk rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

The company’s position was shared as part of the public comment process that closed around the same time as submissions from Multicoin Capital and the Hyperliquid Policy Center, according to the coverage of Coinbase’s filing. The same period also included a separate public dispute involving Kyle Samani, who criticized his former firm, adding to the political and reputational noise around crypto policy this week.

While the specific language of Coinbase’s filing is not reproduced in the report that surfaced publicly, the thrust of the comments described by the outlet was consistent: encourage features that may make Fed-administered payment accounts more useful to market participants, including the potential to earn interest on balances. For firms operating in crypto markets, interest-bearing settlement or clearing-related balances can affect funding costs and operational planning, even if the proposal is aimed at the broader payments system.

Coinbase also indicated support for “risk-based oversight,” a concept regulators use to tailor how heavily they supervise an entity based on the likelihood and potential impact of problems. In practice, risk-based oversight can mean lighter-touch monitoring for lower-risk activities and more stringent requirements where the failure modes are more severe, such as liquidity stress, operational disruptions, or cross-system contagion.

The filing arrived in a wider moment where multiple voices in crypto policy circles were engaging with payments infrastructure rules. Multicoin Capital and the Hyperliquid Policy Center were referenced as having submitted a support letter, suggesting the proposal is drawing attention not just from regulated exchanges but also from trading and policy-focused organizations.

Still, the public description does not provide granular detail on what Coinbase asked the Federal Reserve to do beyond the themes of interest on balances and risk-calibrated supervision. It does not say whether Coinbase offered specific guardrails, how it defined acceptable risk thresholds, or whether it proposed particular implementation timelines.

For readers trying to understand what could change if a Fed payment-account structure allows interest, the key is how settlement and custody flows work across institutions. Payment accounts, as the term is used in banking and payments discussions, generally relate to how money moves between participants and how balances are maintained for operational continuity. If interest is allowed, stakeholders can better predict the cost of holding funds for settlement and daily operations, though the net economic effect would depend on the interest formula and the account terms set by the central bank.

What remains unclear, based on what was published in the reported coverage, is whether Coinbase’s comment includes any quantitative estimates, recommended interest benchmarks, or explicit concerns about risks that could arise from interest-bearing balances. The company also was not described as revealing any internal operational changes tied to the proposal, so it is not possible to tell from the public report whether it expects near-term changes to how it uses settlement channels or payment infrastructure.