ReserveBeat monitors public stablecoin figures — issuer-published attestation reports and independently measured on-chain supply — with the methodology and its limits rendered on every page. Nothing here is a solvency claim about any issuer.

← All posts

What the GENIUS Act actually requires of stablecoin reserve reporting

The GENIUS Act, enacted in July 2025, requires each permitted payment stablecoin issuer to hold reserves backing outstanding tokens at least one-to-one in narrowly defined assets and to publish a monthly reserve disclosure — composition plus outstanding count — examined by a registered public accounting firm and accompanied by executive certification of the report.

By Aaron Cohen

The GENIUS Act — the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, enacted July 2025 — is the first United States federal licensing regime for payment stablecoin issuers. This explainer covers the reserve and disclosure mechanics in plain language. The statute's own text controls in every case: cite S. 1582, 119th Congress rather than this summary, and see the glossary for each term of art.

Most coverage of the Act has stayed on the licensing horse race — who may issue, under which regulator, on what timeline. Practitioners should read the disclosure mechanics first, because that is the part that produces a public, recurring document trail. Licensing decides who sits at the table once; the monthly disclosure decides what anyone can check, every month, for as long as the token circulates. It is also the part you can act on today: the reports the Act requires are ordinary published documents, and reading them well is a skill the licensing headlines never exercise.

The reserve requirement

A permitted issuer must hold reserves backing its outstanding payment stablecoins on at least a one-to-one basis, composed of permitted reserve assets: United States coins and currency, certain insured deposits, short-dated Treasury bills, certain Treasury-backed repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, and certain government money market funds. Reserves must not be pledged or reused except as the Act allows.

The monthly disclosure

The Act's monthly reserve disclosure requirement is the part ReserveBeat reads every month: each permitted issuer publishes the composition of its reserves and the number of its outstanding payment stablecoins, examined by a registered public accounting firm, with executive certification of the report. Those published reports are the primary sources behind every composition figure on the coverage board — rendered verbatim at their stated scope, never recomputed.

What a monthly examination is — and is not — is covered in the glossary's attestation entries: it is an attestation engagement over management's assertions, distinct from an audit.

Read plainly, a monthly examined disclosure tells a holder this much: at a stated date, management asserted a reserve composition and an outstanding token count, and a registered public accounting firm examined those assertions under attestation standards. That is a real floor, and a higher one than the pre-Act status quo. What it does not tell a holder: anything about the days between report dates; anything an examination's scope does not reach (it is a point-in-time attestation engagement, not an audit); and anything the issuer chose not to itemize within the rules — depth of itemization, publication lag, and per-chain detail all still vary from report to report. That is a statement about what the engagement type can carry, not about any particular issuer.

Redemption, yield, and marketing lines

Three further duties round out the holder-facing mechanics:

Federal and state paths

Supervision runs on two paths: a federal path under the relevant federal banking regulator, and a state path for issuers below a statutory issuance threshold under a state regime the Act deems sufficiently similar. Which path an issuer takes changes its supervisor, not its reserve and disclosure duties.

Where reporting practice goes from here

My expectation — opinion, clearly labeled as such — is that reporting practice converges upward from the statutory floor. Once a few permitted issuers publish promptly-issued, deeply itemized monthly reports, sparse disclosure starts to read as a choice rather than a norm, and choices invite questions. Watch three things as the Act's deadlines arrive: publication lag shrinking, itemization deepening toward instrument-level detail, and per-chain circulation breakdowns moving from rare to expected. The statute fixes the minimum; the interesting movement will happen above it, and it will be visible one published report at a time.

Last updated: Timestamps reflect the underlying data — when a figure was captured or a report was published — never when a page was built.

Frequently asked questions

Who may issue a payment stablecoin under the GENIUS Act?

Only permitted payment stablecoin issuers: subsidiaries of insured depository institutions, federally qualified nonbank issuers, and state-qualified issuers, each approved and supervised by the corresponding federal or state regulator. Issuing outside this category is restricted under the Act.

What must the monthly disclosure contain?

The composition of the issuer's reserves and the number of its outstanding payment stablecoins, examined by a registered public accounting firm, with executive certification of the report. The statute states the exact requirements; issuers' published reports show how they meet them in practice.

Is a monthly examined disclosure the same as an audit?

No. An examination is an attestation engagement over management's assertions at a point in time; a financial-statement audit is a different, broader engagement. The glossary covers the engagement types in plain language, with citations to the standard-setters.