In an interview with Reuters, Interactive Brokers' billionaire founder Thomas Peterffy said the company is working on potentially issuing stablecoins, but has yet to make a final decision on how that will be offered to customers. The popular trading platform is now working on enabling instant, 24/7 stablecoin funding for brokerage accounts, as well as supporting asset transfers for commonly traded cryptocurrencies, said Peterffy, who also sounded a note of caution on the risks of rapid widespread adoption of crypto. Among the options being considered, the Greenwich, Connecticut-based firm could allow customers to use stablecoins issued by other financial institutions to fund their accounts, depending upon the credibility of the issuer. https://www.reuters.com/legal/gover...aunching-new-stablecoin-customers-2025-07-28/
I do trade through IBKR's for some assets... But I do NOT trust IBKR's founder, Peterffy, who in January 2021 joined the other major Brokers in turning OFF the BUY button for specific stocks without a decent reason for HIS company. IBKR had no regulatory or financial reason to do so... and his comment about doing so was chilling. So I would not trust Peterffy with any Stablecoin creation, implantation or ownership. Word to the wise.
Supposedly DTCC changed the capital requirements forcing retail firms to do this. There are even articles where DTCC brags about intervening and essentially rigging the market in this way. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-and-how-did-it-stop-gamestop-mania-quicktake The whole thing was IMO a ridiculous conflict of interest and should have resulted in criminal charges. Here's what I think happened... Melvin capital screwed up and as Citadel's client, Citadel was on the hook if Mevin failed. Some one a Citadel say a situation with only downside and decide to take a position in Melvin so they would have potential up side. A Citadel exec was on the board of DTCC and the all of a sudden DTCC stepped in and changed capital requirements to essentially rig the market. To this day I still haven't seen a public disclosure of what exactly the capital requirements that DTCC invented that caused it to be such that some firms wouldn't let customers buy GameStop from a cash account. Keep in mind Citadel's payments for order flow are also a major source of income for the retail brokers and also created an incentive for the retail brokers to rig the market against their own customers.
""In January 2021, amid the GameStop trading frenzy, Thomas Peterffy, the founder and chairman of Interactive Brokers, stated his concerns about the integrity of the market and the clearing system. He said that his firm restricted trading in GameStop and other volatile stocks to protect the market from potential collapse."" More Info on Google If Interested... Info Link '
These are what stick in mind for me: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/envir...ng-amid-gamestop-mess?context=article-related To me the interesting thing is that he may have been right. The way the rules are written, if firm A goes under their broker firm B has to cover the obligation. If B goes under the exchange has to cover it. In a short squeeze, the price can become arbitrily high. A high enough price would have brought down Melvin, Citadel and possibly even the exchange itself. Imagine dozens of the biggest firms simultaneously going bankrupt and all that wealth being transferred to a bunch of average joes. The courts and regulators would never have allowed it, but it's fun to imagine. Instead the lesson seems to be that as long as your corrupt behavior is on a large enough scale, we will let you get away with it to "protect the integrity of the system". Just like the GFC.