Benefits of stablecoins for global business: a guide on Polygon

Stablecoins are moving from “crypto rails” to a practical option for treasury, payouts, and cross-border settlement. In 2024, stablecoins processed trillions in payments globally, and circulation roughly doubled over an 18-month period across 2024 and 2025, signaling growing adoption as financial infrastructure. For enterprise teams evaluating new payment rails, the benefits of stablecoins for global business come down to three levers: speed, cost, and reach—if you choose the right asset, controls, and compliance model.

Practical steps for implementing a corporate stablecoin strategy

A stablecoin program works best when it’s treated like any other payment or treasury change: define the use case, pilot, measure, then scale.

1) Start with a narrow, measurable use case

Pick one problem where stablecoins can outperform incumbent rails:

• Cross-border supplier payments where settlement time and intermediary fees are pain points
• Creator/freelancer payouts in markets with slow or expensive bank transfers
• Customer collections in regions with limited card penetration or inconsistent banking access

Define success metrics up front (examples):

• Settlement time reduced from days to minutes
• Lower all-in transfer cost vs. wires + FX spread
• Improved payment acceptance in target markets

2) Align finance, compliance, and operations early

Stablecoins change workflows across teams. Run short internal sessions covering:

• Asset selection and issuer risk
• Wallet/custody model and approval controls
• Reconciliation and accounting treatment
• Transaction monitoring and sanctions screening

3) Choose infrastructure that matches your risk posture

Most enterprises start with providers that can handle:

• On/off-ramps (fiat ↔ stablecoin conversion)
• Institutional custody (or managed wallet controls)
• Reporting and reconciliation hooks to existing finance systems

Polygon context: Polygon is commonly used for stablecoin transfers because it offers low fees and high throughput, which can matter for high-volume payouts and settlement. Your architecture should still be chain-agnostic enough to change routes if requirements shift.

4) Run a limited pilot and document the workflow

Start with a constrained corridor (one currency, one region, one counterpart type). Track:

• Network fees and end-to-end cost
• Counterparty experience (wallet, conversion, receipt confirmation)
• Operational friction (approvals, exceptions, failed transfers)
• Reconciliation quality (transaction references, timestamps, audit trail)

5) Expand in stages—and keep an exit path

Scale by adding:

• More corridors/regions
• More counterparties
• Additional use cases (intercompany transfers, treasury rebalancing)

Maintain:

• Fallback to fiat rails (e.g., conversion within 24 hours)
• Multiple issuer support to reduce concentration risk

Types of stablecoins and their associated risks (e.g., fiat-backed, algorithmic)

Stablecoin “stability” depends on the mechanism that maintains the peg. For corporate use, the model matters as much as the ticker.

Fiat-backed stablecoins

How they work: Typically backed 1:1 by cash and/or short-term government securities held in reserve. Holding the token is effectively holding a claim on a dollar-like reserve managed by an issuer.

Why enterprises use them: They tend to behave most like cash equivalents operationally.

Key risks to manage:

• Issuer and reserve risk: Quality, liquidity, and segregation of reserves
• Transparency risk: Attestations vs. independent audits; frequency and detail of disclosures
• Regulatory risk: Issuer licensing, redemption rights, and jurisdictional constraints

What to look for:

• Clear, frequent reserve reporting (preferably independent audits or robust attestations)
• Conservative reserve composition and strong governance
• Clear redemption and bankruptcy-remote structures where applicable

Commodity-backed stablecoins

How they work: Pegged to a commodity (e.g., gold). Example: tokens designed to represent a fixed quantity of gold.

Trade-offs: Useful for commodity exposure, but they are not “stable” versus fiat. Price moves with the underlying commodity.

Key risks:

• Commodity price volatility (relative to your reporting currency)
• Custody and auditability of the underlying commodity reserves

Crypto-collateralized stablecoins

How they work: Backed by other crypto assets locked in smart contracts, often overcollateralized (e.g., $150 in collateral to mint $100 in stablecoins) to absorb volatility.

Strengths:

• Onchain transparency (collateral visible on public ledgers)
• Reduced reliance on a single centralized custodian (depending on design)

Key risks:

• Collateral volatility and liquidation risk during market stress
• Smart contract and oracle risk
• Operational complexity compared to fiat-backed models

Algorithmic stablecoins

How they work: Attempt to maintain a peg primarily through market incentives and supply adjustments rather than hard collateral.

Key risks:

• High reflexivity: peg stability depends on market confidence
• Historical precedent of failure under stress (e.g., TerraUSD collapse in 2022)

For most corporate payment and treasury use cases, purely algorithmic designs are generally treated as higher risk.

Regulatory and compliance considerations for using stablecoins (MiCA, AML)

Stablecoin adoption is increasingly shaped by regulation, audit expectations, and compliance controls. Enterprises should assume stablecoin flows will be held to standards comparable to other electronic payment channels.

Regulatory frameworks to track (US, EU, and beyond)

• United States: The GENIUS Act establishes a federal framework for payment stablecoins, with requirements including 100% reserves in dollars or other low-risk assets, bankruptcy-protected structures, and AML/sanctions compliance. (Effective date targeted for by 2027 per the referenced framework.)
• European Union: MiCA sets requirements for crypto-asset service providers and stablecoin issuers operating in the EU, including governance, disclosures, and operational controls.
• Other major jurisdictions (e.g., Japan, Singapore, UK) are implementing comparable standards.

Implication for enterprises: Stablecoin choice is no longer just a technical decision; it becomes a vendor and regulatory diligence decision.

AML, sanctions, and transaction monitoring expectations

Regulators expect stablecoin ecosystems to support:

• Sanctions screening and blocking where required
• Monitoring for illicit activity patterns
• Cooperation with lawful requests

Enterprise best practice is to layer controls:

• KYC/KYB on counterparties (where applicable)
• Wallet screening and ongoing monitoring using blockchain analytics
• Policy-based approvals for higher-risk transactions and jurisdictions

Reserve transparency as a procurement requirement

Not all stablecoins provide the same level of disclosure. Build a recurring review process for:

• Reserve reports and their scope (audit vs. attestation)
• Reserve composition and concentration
• Legal structure and redemption mechanics

Institutional adoption (e.g., support by regulated financial firms) can be a useful signal—but it should not replace your own diligence.

Treasury management and governance for digital assets

Treat stablecoins like a new cash instrument with crypto-specific operational risk. The goal is to preserve speed without weakening controls.

Governance: apply cash-grade controls to stablecoin balances

Define:

• When you hold stablecoins vs. auto-convert to fiat
• Maximum exposure per issuer and per chain
• Approval policies by amount, corridor, and counterparty type

Controls to consider:

• Multisignature approvals for treasury wallets
• Role-based access and separation of duties
• Spending limits and whitelisting
• Incident response procedures (lost keys, compromised credentials)

Liquidity and conversion planning

Stablecoins are only useful if you can reliably convert at the size and speed you need. Establish:

• Relationships with liquidity providers (OTC desks, exchanges, banking partners)
• SLAs for conversion and settlement
• Stress scenarios (issuer event, chain congestion, market dislocation)

Some firms diversify across multiple stablecoins to reduce dependency on a single issuer or network.

Accounting, reporting, and audit readiness

In many jurisdictions, stablecoins are treated as digital assets for accounting and reporting purposes. Work with auditors to define:

• Recognition and measurement policy (often fair value at transaction time)
• Documentation standards (transaction IDs, timestamps, counterparty records)
• Disclosure approach for holdings and risk exposure

Contingency planning

Even with regulated issuers, disruptions can occur (technical, legal, or market-driven). Maintain:

• A playbook for rapid conversion back to fiat (e.g., within 24 hours)
• Predefined triggers (peg deviation thresholds, adverse regulatory actions, reserve concerns)
• A periodic review cadence for issuer disclosures and regulatory updates

Conclusion

Stablecoins can reduce settlement time and operational friction in cross-border payments and payouts, but the outcome depends on disciplined choices: asset model (and risks), compliance controls (MiCA/AML readiness), and treasury governance. For teams building on Polygon, the practical approach is to pilot a narrow corridor, use transparent fiat-backed stablecoins where appropriate, implement cash-grade controls for wallets and approvals, and design for optionality across issuers and rails as regulation evolves.

‍

FAQ's

‍

1. What are MiCA-compliant stablecoins?

‍MiCA-compliant stablecoins are tokens that meet the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) requirements, including governance standards, reserve backing, redemption rights, and ongoing disclosures. For enterprises operating in or touching the EU, MiCA compliance reduces regulatory ambiguity and clarifies issuer and operational risk expectations.

2. Which coin is pegged to gold?

‍Coins pegged to gold are commodity-backed stablecoins, with PAX Gold (PAXG) being the most widely referenced example. Each token represents ownership of a fixed amount of physical gold held in custody, and its value tracks the market price of gold rather than a fiat currency.

3. What is PAX Gold and how is it used?

‍PAX Gold is a gold-backed token where each unit corresponds to a specific quantity of physical gold stored by a custodian. For businesses, it is typically treated as tokenized commodity exposure rather than a payment stablecoin, since its value fluctuates with gold prices instead of remaining stable versus fiat.

4. What role do international monetary institutions play in stablecoins?

‍International monetary institutions do not issue most stablecoins, but they shape the regulatory environment through standards, policy guidance, and coordination among national regulators. Their focus is on financial stability, consumer protection, and cross-border payment integrity rather than operating stablecoin networks directly.

5. How do stablecoins fit into global business payments on Polygon?

‍Stablecoins are used as a settlement layer for cross-border payments, payouts, and treasury transfers. Networks like Polygon are often chosen for these flows because they support low-cost transactions and fast confirmation, which is valuable for high-volume or time-sensitive business payments, while compliance and conversion are handled offchain.

‍