Mega Financial's Real-World Stablecoin Test: Large-Scale Cross-Border Remittances Still Favor Banks! NT Dollar Stablecoin Use Cases Need Clarification

Mega Bank Conducts Real-World Testing of Cross-Border Remittances in 17 Countries, Comparing Bank and USDT Efficiency and Costs. Small Stablecoin Transfers Are Faster; Large Transactions Favor Banks.

Mega Bank’s Global Branch Test Compares Traditional Bank and Stablecoin Remittance Efficiency

Whether stablecoins will disrupt the traditional cross-border remittance system has been a hot topic in financial markets. On March 10, Mega Financial Holding and Mega Bank Chairman Dong Ruibin announced the results of a real-world test, using Mega Bank’s global branch network to compare the efficiency and costs of traditional bank remittances versus stablecoin transactions.

The test covered 17 countries and 25 overseas branches. Mega Bank arranged for local branch staff to open accounts in local banks and legitimate virtual asset exchanges under their personal names, then purchased USDT stablecoins through exchanges. They transferred 50 USDT to Taiwan’s BitoPro exchange each time, then compared this process with traditional bank cross-border remittance procedures.

Results showed that for smaller remittance amounts, stablecoins offer speed and some cost advantages. However, when remittance amounts exceed about $7,000 USD, roughly NT$200,000, bank remittances remain more cost-effective overall.

Dong Ruibin stated that the traditional financial system is not as easily replaced as some market views suggest. Banks still have complete infrastructure for fund clearing, compliance management, and customer service.

Small Transfers with Stablecoins Are Faster; Large Transactions Favor Banks

Results comparing the two cross-border remittance methods show that stablecoins have a clear speed advantage. Cross-border transfers via stablecoins typically complete in about 20 minutes. In contrast, bank remittances via SWIFT usually settle within about 2 hours.

In terms of fees, stablecoin transactions generally incur a fixed fee of about 1–2 USDT plus approximately 0.2% transaction fee. Bank remittances include a fixed postal fee of NT$300 and a 0.05% transfer fee, with total costs usually between NT$420 and NT$1,100, with a cap on charges. Since stablecoin transactions use a proportional fee model, the fee increases with larger remittance amounts. When amounts reach around $7,000 USD or NT$200,000, bank fees become lower than stablecoin fees.

Dong Ruibin pointed out that for corporate clients, banks often absorb part of the remittance costs, giving them a more significant cost advantage in large cross-border transactions.

Regulatory Restrictions in Multiple Countries Limit Stablecoin Cross-Border Testing

The testing also revealed that stablecoin cross-border remittances face many restrictions under the global regulatory environment.

Out of 25 overseas branches, 13 could not complete stablecoin cross-border tests. The main reasons include local regulations not permitting stablecoin trading, lack of legitimate issuers, or exchanges only allowing certain stablecoins.

• For example, in Asian markets like Japan, China, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, and Myanmar, regulatory policies restrict stablecoin trading.
• In Europe, countries like France and the Netherlands, due to EU crypto asset regulations, only permit certain stablecoin transactions.
• Even in financial hubs like New York, US exchanges only allow trading USDC, not USDT. These regulatory differences create significant hurdles for stablecoin cross-border applications.

Dong Ruibin explained that stablecoin trading often requires linking bank accounts through exchanges before purchasing, transferring, and exchanging. Cross-chain costs between different blockchains may also be involved, making the overall process not necessarily simpler than bank remittance.

Stablecoin Use Cases Still Need Clarification; Banks Emphasize Fair Regulation

Mega Bank’s tests also compared domestic remittance scenarios in Taiwan. Domestic transfers are usually completed within 2 minutes, with no fee from the bank, and cross-bank transfers cost about NT$15. While stablecoin transfers can also be completed quickly, they still require about 2 USDT and transaction fees, making them more expensive than bank transfers.

Dong Ruibin noted that Taiwan’s payment infrastructure is already quite mature, with advantages in both efficiency and cost for domestic remittances. Therefore, the practical application scenarios for NT$ stablecoins still need further exploration.

He also emphasized that if the stablecoin industry develops further, issuers should adhere to the same regulatory standards as banks, including AML, CFT, and KYC requirements. Only with consistent regulatory standards can fair competition in the financial market be maintained.

Additionally, cross-border stablecoin remittances involve exchange rate spreads, cross-chain costs, fiat redemption convenience, and foreign exchange reporting issues. Dong Ruibin stated that stablecoins do have application potential for small-value cross-border transactions, but for large-scale cross-border remittances and corporate financial services, traditional banking systems still hold a clear advantage.