Bank of Italy Study Questions Stablecoin Remittance Savings | Amatoshi

In short: Stablecoin remittances are not automatically cheaper than conventional money transfers. Bank of Italy research indicates that conversion fees, foreign exchange spreads, cash-out costs and banking access can absorb the savings from low-cost blockchain transfers. The final cost depends on the full route from sender funds to recipient funds.

Stablecoins are often presented as a straightforward way to move value across borders: buy a digital dollar, send it in minutes and avoid the friction of older payment networks. New research from the Bank of Italy adds an important qualification. In a mystery-shopping exercise, researchers found that stablecoin remittances were not consistently cheaper than conventional alternatives once every step of the transaction was counted.

That matters for people who use crypto to pay for real-world goods. A low blockchain fee can be genuinely useful, but it is not the same thing as a low final cost. The price a shopper or sender faces may also include the cost of entering crypto, converting between currencies and getting funds into or out of the banking system.

The transfer is only one part of the journey

A stablecoin payment can appear inexpensive when viewed only at the moment it moves onchain. Depending on the network, the transaction fee may be tiny compared with a traditional international wire. But remittances and purchases rarely begin and end on a blockchain.

Someone may need to use a card, bank account or cash to acquire the stablecoin. The recipient may need local currency, a bank deposit or cash rather than a token. Each handoff can introduce a separate charge, rate spread or delay. The Bank of Italy findings point to this wider route, rather than treating the blockchain transfer as the entire product.

For users, the practical question is simple: how much money leaves at the start, and how much usable value arrives at the end? That comparison is more meaningful than comparing network fees alone.

Foreign exchange can change the result

Stablecoins tied to the US dollar can reduce price volatility during a transfer, but they do not eliminate foreign exchange costs when either side uses another currency. A conversion from euros into a dollar stablecoin, followed by a conversion into a recipient’s local currency, may involve spreads at more than one point.

These spreads are not always obvious in a headline fee. A service can advertise a low transfer charge while building some of its cost into the exchange rate. That does not make stablecoins ineffective, it simply means the economics vary by provider, payment method and destination.

• Check the buy price: Compare the amount of stablecoin received for your starting funds.
• Check the exit route: Confirm what it costs to turn the asset into spendable local money, if needed.
• Check the final amount: Focus on what the recipient or merchant can actually use.

Access to rails still matters

The study also underlines a point that crypto users know well: digital assets do not operate in isolation from the rest of finance. A fast wallet-to-wallet transaction is valuable, but its usefulness depends on access to reliable exchanges, payment methods, local cash-out options and merchants willing to accept the asset.

In some situations, stablecoins may still be especially helpful. They can offer more flexible hours, rapid settlement and another route when a conventional service is slow or inaccessible. In others, a familiar transfer provider may be less expensive after all fees are counted. The better choice is not universal, it depends on the payment corridor and the user’s goal.

Shopping with crypto at Amatoshi

For crypto shoppers, the lesson is to look beyond the network fee before funding a purchase. Consider the full cost of converting funds and the asset you choose to spend. Clear planning helps make crypto payments for products from around the world more practical and predictable.