Cross-Border Stablecoin Payments: A Practitioner's Guide

When a European manufacturing company needs to pay a US supplier, the traditional banking system takes 3-5 business days and extracts fees that are often invisible. A new infrastructure exists that settles the same payment in under 30 minutes at roughly one-tenth the cost. This guide explains how it works.

The Case: A European Company Paying a US Supplier

Consider a German industrial components manufacturer that pays a US-based supplier approximately $5 million monthly. This is a common scenario across European mid-market companies with American supply chains. The CFO has two options: the traditional banking route or the emerging stablecoin infrastructure.

The difference between these options is not marginal. It affects working capital, treasury efficiency, and ultimately, competitive positioning.

The Hidden Cost Problem

According to Redbridge Debt & Treasury Advisory, nine out of ten companies overpay on foreign exchange transactions. The problem is not the wire fee itself, which is relatively modest at $35-50. The problem is the FX spread.

Banks apply a margin over the mid-market exchange rate, typically 2-4%. Documented cases show companies paying up to 2.5% on EUR/USD spot transactions. On a $5 million transfer, that is $125,000 extracted in a single transaction, without any line item appearing on a statement.

The Stablecoin Alternative: How It Works

A stablecoin-based cross-border payment involves six distinct stages, each handled by specialized infrastructure providers. Understanding these stages is essential for institutional adoption.

Provider Selection by Stage

Each stage has multiple provider options. The institutional buyer must evaluate based on regulatory status, geographic coverage, and integration complexity. Here is the current landscape for the Europe-to-US corridor:

The European Regulatory Advantage

MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation) enforcement in 2025 created a clear framework for institutional stablecoin use. Circle's EURC emerged as the dominant euro stablecoin, holding 41% market share, up from 17% twelve months prior. Q4 2025 saw EURC transaction sizes jump 280% as European clients avoided EUR/USD conversion costs by starting in euros.

For a European company, the regulatory path is now clear: use a MiCA-compliant stablecoin (EURC, EURCV, EURI) with a licensed orchestration provider (BVNK, which holds both EMI and CASP licenses). The compliance burden shifts from the corporate treasury to the infrastructure layer.

Implementation Considerations

For institutional adoption, the technology is no longer the barrier. The considerations are operational:

• Banking partner support: 51% of European organizations cite limited banking partner support as a major concern. Treasury teams must work with banks that either support stablecoin integration or are willing to coexist with it.
• Accounting treatment: Stablecoins held for payment purposes should be classified appropriately. Most jurisdictions treat them as cash equivalents when backed 1:1 and redeemable on demand.
• Counterparty readiness: The US supplier must be able to receive stablecoin payments or use an off-ramp provider. Increasingly, this is becoming standard capability for US companies.
• Policy engine configuration: Custody providers like Fireblocks allow configurable approval workflows. A $5 million transfer might require CFO + Compliance Officer sign-off, enforced at the infrastructure level.

The Bottom Line

For a European company sending $60 million annually to US suppliers, the stablecoin infrastructure offers $600,000-$1.3 million in annual savings versus traditional banking, plus the release of working capital previously trapped in 3-5 day settlement windows.

The infrastructure exists. The regulatory framework is in place. The question for corporate treasurers is no longer whether to adopt, but when.