Meta Returns to the Stablecoin Track: Strategic Shift Behind the New Script

In 2019, Meta, then still called Facebook, launched the Libra project, attempting to establish a "digital dollar alternative." This ambitious plan attracted significant attention and scrutiny from regulators. After three years of difficult adjustments, Libra ultimately failed in January 2022, with its assets sold to SilverGate Bank.

However, Meta has not given up on the stablecoin space. In early 2025, the company appointed Ginger Baker as Vice President of Payment Products, and the return of this veteran with rich experience in fintech and compliance is seen as a signal of Meta's return to the stablecoin market.

Unlike the era of Libra, Meta has taken a more cautious and pragmatic approach this time. According to reports, the company is exploring the integration of existing stablecoins (such as USDC and USDT) into its platform's payment system, particularly for revenue settlement for content creators. This strategy allows Meta to avoid the regulatory risks associated with directly issuing stablecoins while still controlling key aspects of the payment process.

This move has raised the alarm among regulators. U.S. senators have questioned Zuckerberg, demanding clarification on whether Meta is attempting to circumvent regulations to restart a "private currency network." Although Meta claims it is merely using third-party stablecoins as a settlement tool, regulators' focus has shifted from "who issues the stablecoin" to "who controls the accounts and settlements."

Meta's new strategy reflects the overall trend in the stablecoin industry. With the implementation of the GENIUS Act, large tech platforms are prohibited from directly issuing stablecoins, but they are beginning to integrate stablecoins as backend settlement tools into existing services. This approach makes stablecoins feel more like an "invisible settlement API" to users, rather than independent digital assets.

In this new paradigm, stablecoin issuers like Circle are responsible for reserve management and on-chain settlement, while platforms like Meta become the new generation of financial intermediaries, controlling the user interface and transaction pathways. This division of labor enables stablecoins to become an embeddable and reusable universal dollar module.

Meta's transformation strategy highlights that the underlying logic of finance is being redefined. Although it no longer directly issues stablecoins, by controlling identity verification, fund scheduling, and payment pathways, Meta is still moving closer to the core of the financial system. This approach raises new regulatory questions: If a platform does not issue stablecoins but controls the flow of funds and account creation, should it be regarded as a tool provider or a new type of clearing organization?

As stablecoins gradually become platform-level infrastructure, the industry's focus has shifted from "whether stablecoins should be issued" to "who defines payments." Platforms that control the flow of funds in and out will have the ability to restructure fee structures, set entry thresholds, and even redefine the nature of transactions.

Although the story of Libra has come to an end, Meta's new round of attempts is unfolding. The discussion about the boundaries between technology platforms and finance may have just begun.