The next stablecoin explosion will come from enterprises not fintechs

Stablecoins have been the subject of a lot of hype, but the conversation is starting to move beyond speculation. The real question now is not whether stablecoins exist - it is where they actually make a difference, and when they become useful enough that people stop thinking about them at all.In a recent conversation, Marc Boiron, CEO at Polygon Labs, made a clear case for where stablecoins fit today, where they do not, and why the next phase is less about consumer novelty and more about practical infrastructure. If you want to understand the future of stablecoin payments, this is where the conversation gets interesting.

Why Stablecoins Are Becoming More Relevant Now

For a long time, stablecoins were held back by regulation and by the fact that the surrounding infrastructure was still immature. That is starting to change. According to Marc Boiron, the regulatory fog is beginning to lift, and that matters because it gives companies more confidence to build real products on top of stablecoins rather than treating them as an experiment.But the bigger shift is not just regulatory. It is practical.Stablecoins are becoming more relevant because they solve specific problems that traditional payment rails still struggle with - especially in cross-border and emerging-market use cases. Boiron was careful to point out that stablecoins are not automatically better for every payment. You probably do not need them to split a dinner bill in New York or to pay for everyday domestic spending in the US.Where they do make sense is in places where the current system is slow, expensive, or fragmented. That includes remittances, creator payouts, marketplace earnings, and business payments across borders.The key distinction: domestic vs cross-borderThis is one of the most useful ways to think about stablecoins. Boiron argued that the market often lumps together very different use cases when it talks about adoption.

• Domestic payments

  : usually not the strongest case for stablecoins yet

• Cross-border payments

  : where stablecoins can create real value

• Emerging markets

  : where poor payment infrastructure makes the benefits even clearer

That distinction matters because it keeps the conversation grounded. Stablecoins are not trying to replace every payment method. They are solving the transactions that existing systems make unnecessarily hard.

Why Consumer Adoption Will Take Time

A lot of headlines focus on whether consumers will start using stablecoins directly. Visa, Mastercard, and Cash App all getting more active in the space has made that question feel urgent. But Boiron’s view is more nuanced: consumer adoption is coming, but it will be slower than people expect.The reason is simple. Payments are not just about moving value from point A to point B. They are about what happens after the transfer.Boiron described a world where a creator in Colombia or the Philippines gets paid faster and at lower cost, but that is only part of the story. The real opportunity is when that person can immediately use the money - spend it, transfer it, save it, or earn on it without having to convert it through a pile of intermediaries.That is the difference between a settlement tool and a usable money system.The real unlock is spendabilityAt the moment, many stablecoin use cases still rely on a person cashing out or moving money through another layer before it becomes useful in daily life. Boiron thinks that will change as more of the ecosystem gets built out.He pointed to Argentina as a practical example. In places where the local payment system is unreliable or inflation is high, stablecoins are already much more than a settlement asset - they are becoming a way to pay for everyday goods. That is a very different stage of adoption from what most developed markets are seeing today.The same pattern is emerging in marketplaces and ride-sharing platforms, where people get paid frequently and need to move money quickly. In that setting, stablecoins start to feel less like a crypto feature and more like a better version of payroll, remittances, and wallet infrastructure.What marketplaces can do that banks cannotOne of the most compelling examples in the conversation was the marketplace model. Boiron said that when a driver or creator gets paid after every ride or every payout event, the benefit is not just speed. It is also financial utility.If someone receives money instantly, they can:

• transfer it to family immediately
• avoid waiting days for settlement
• potentially earn on it sooner
• use it in the next transaction without friction

That sounds small, but it compounds quickly. For people living on thin cash flow, even a two-day improvement can matter. Stablecoins, in that context, are not just faster - they are more economically useful.

What Stablecoins Mean for Visa, Mastercard, and Banks

This is where the conversation gets more strategic. If stablecoins reduce friction and bypass parts of the traditional payments stack, what happens to the companies that already dominate payments?Boiron’s answer was essentially: both threat and opportunity.For networks like Visa and Mastercard, stablecoins create a new option that merchants and payment providers did not previously have. That matters because payments are often defined by the available interface. If the only real way to pay is a card, then the card network is the default. If stablecoins become easy to use at checkout, that default gets challenged.At the same time, those networks are not going away. In fact, they may benefit from stablecoin adoption if they position themselves as infrastructure providers rather than just card rails.The economics are likely to shift behind the scenesBoiron noted that stablecoin adoption can reduce costs such as pre-funding. That is important because a lot of the current payments system involves capital being parked in the wrong place at the wrong time.If stablecoin rails reduce those capital costs, there is real value created. The open question is who keeps that value.

• Will networks pass savings on to consumers?
• Will they keep the margin?
• Will they use stablecoins to create a better user experience without lowering fees?

Boiron suggested that consumers may not automatically see lower costs, at least not at first. The bigger benefit could initially show up in the economics of the network itself.Stablecoin-backed cards may be the bridgeOne of the most practical ideas in the conversation was the distinction between a regular card transaction that settles in stablecoins and a true stablecoin-backed card.If a card is still tied to fiat banking infrastructure in the background, the user experience may not change that much. But if a payment can happen directly in stablecoins, then a lot of the existing fee structure begins to disappear.That is where the real strategic pressure comes in for banks and card networks. The system becomes more efficient, but efficiency may force companies to rethink how much of the savings they retain and how much they pass through.

Will Banks Launch Their Own Stablecoins?

The next major question is whether banks will issue their own stablecoins, or whether they will standardize on a smaller number of common assets.Boiron’s answer was that this is really two separate questions:

1. Will banks use public blockchains or their own chains?
2. Will they issue stablecoins or tokenized deposits?

Both matter. And both are already being explored.Tokenized deposits may matter more than people thinkBoiron argued that tokenized deposits have not taken off simply because there has not yet been enough demand for them. That does not mean they are useless. It means they are waiting for a use case that makes them genuinely valuable.That use case may be stablecoins.If a bank customer already holds tokenized deposits, moving into stablecoins can become much easier. Instead of paying fees and waiting to onboard through older rails, the transition can happen almost instantly.That makes tokenized deposits more attractive, not less. In other words, the growth of stablecoins could indirectly drive demand for bank tokenization products.Banks are unlikely to want a massive stablecoin migrationBoiron was skeptical that banks will want to move large amounts of traditional deposits into stablecoins. Deposits remain highly valuable to them, and stablecoins do not necessarily replace that business model.What is more likely is a hybrid structure:

• deposits held in tokenized form
• stablecoins used when needed
• seamless movement between the two

That raises an important challenge: interoperability. If there are thousands of stablecoins and thousands of tokenized deposit systems, how do you move between them?Right now, that is still messy. But Boiron thinks it will get better over time as infrastructure matures and one-to-one conversion pathways become more common.

Why Governments Will Shape the Stablecoin Market

One of the strongest parts of the conversation was about government influence. In markets like South America or Turkey, stablecoins can help consumers protect themselves from local currency weakness. That is a real use case, but it is also one that governments may not love.If people move too much value into stablecoins, governments lose some control over monetary policy and currency circulation. That raises the obvious question: will regulation become a barrier?Boiron thinks regulation will shape the market, but not kill it.Expect more non-USD stablecoins, not fewer stablecoins overallA lot of people assume USD stablecoins will dominate forever. Boiron pushed back on that idea. He expects more local-currency stablecoins to emerge, especially as regulatory frameworks mature in different regions.That matters because it creates a more balanced market. Instead of one overwhelmingly dominant stablecoin ecosystem, we could see a broader mix of:

• USD stablecoins
• euro-denominated stablecoins
• local currency stablecoins
• tokenized deposits tied to regional banking systems

Polygon already supports around 20 different stablecoin currencies, according to Boiron, and usage is growing. His point was that government action will not eliminate stablecoins. It will shape which ones grow fastest and how they are used.The FX market may shift into stablecoinsIf multiple currency-denominated stablecoins become common, then foreign exchange activity will increasingly happen inside the stablecoin ecosystem itself. That creates a new layer of opportunity - and new complexity.It also suggests that stablecoins may not just be a better payment tool. They may become a new kind of global currency plumbing.That is a big shift, and it is one reason regulators are watching closely.

What to Expect in the Next Six Months

Boiron did not point to one single dramatic event. Instead, he described the next phase as a snowball effect.In his view, the most exciting shift over the next six months will be the move from early fintech adoption to broader enterprise adoption. Right now, the visible announcements mostly come from fintechs, neobanks, and companies already close to money movement.The next wave, he thinks, will come from businesses that move a lot of money but are not traditionally thought of as payment companies.The next wave is enterprise adoption Examples like Meta’s creator payouts show what that could look like in practice. Once a large enterprise starts using stablecoins for payouts, the concept stops feeling theoretical.Boiron expects more of this to happen in:

• marketplaces
• global platforms
• enterprise payout systems
• business-to-business payment flows

That is important because enterprise adoption can create a network effect. More companies using stablecoins means more consumers holding them, which means more reasons for merchants and financial institutions to support them.And once that loop starts, it becomes much harder to ignore.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are stablecoins only useful for crypto trading?

No. Trading was the first major use case, but the real growth now is coming from payments, remittances, payouts, and cross-border settlement. That is where stablecoins begin to solve everyday business problems.

Will stablecoins replace cards? Probably not entirely. More likely, they will become an alternative rail that competes with cards in certain situations and complements them in others. The biggest impact may be on backend settlement rather than the visible checkout experience.

Why do banks care about tokenized deposits? Because tokenized deposits may make it easier for customers to move into and out of stablecoins, while still keeping funds within a banking relationship. That could make banks more competitive in a stablecoin-driven payments world.

Will governments ban stablecoins? Boiron’s view is that governments are more likely to regulate and shape stablecoins than ban them outright. The market may end up with more local-currency stablecoins and more rules, not fewer stablecoins overall.

What is the biggest stablecoin opportunity right now? Cross-border payments, marketplace payouts, and enterprise disbursements look like the clearest opportunities. These are areas where speed, cost, and settlement efficiency matter most. Stablecoins are not just a faster version of existing money movement. The real shift is that they can make value usable sooner, across more systems, and with less friction. That affects consumers, marketplaces, banks, and payment networks in very different ways.The biggest takeaway is that adoption will not happen all at once. It will spread through the parts of the economy where the pain is strongest first - then gradually move into broader use. 

If you are watching the space, that is where the real story is unfolding.Want to go deeper? Watch the full conversation with Marc Boiron and The FinTech Times.