Italian Central Bank Study: Stablecoin Remittances Have No Systemic Cost Advantage, On-chain Components Only Account for a Small Portion

In a research report released by the Bank of Italy in July 2026, a "mystery shopper" empirical investigation was conducted for the first time, tracking 200 USDC transfers across ten corridors between Italy and Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, the UAE, and Japan. The results showed that the total cost of stablecoin remittances fluctuated greatly, with a minimum of only 0.3% and a maximum close to 9%. On-chain transfers accounted for an average of only 0.4%, with the bulk of costs concentrated in fiat withdrawal and deposit stages—traditional intermediary fees such as exchange buy-sell spreads, credit card fees, and withdrawal fees were the decisive factors. Compared to traditional channels like Wise, stablecoins have a cost advantage in some corridors like Brazil to Italy, but the costs are higher in corridors like UAE to Italy, showing a high degree of "corridor specificity."

In terms of speed, blockchain transfers themselves take only a few minutes, but end-to-end efficiency entirely depends on the quality of the traditional payment infrastructure in the destination country. Countries with instant payment systems, such as Brazil (PIX), Italy (TIPS), and Argentina (Transferencias 3.0), can keep the entire process under 20 minutes; whereas countries like South Africa, which rely on traditional bank transfers, see the arrival time extended to 1 to 2 business days. The report pointed out that the efficiency of stablecoin remittances is jointly determined by their own infrastructure and the surrounding traditional payment infrastructure, with both being complementary rather than substitutive. The report also analyzed the impact of global regulatory fragmentation: the EU's MiCA and the US's GENIUS Act represent mature compliance frameworks; Japan's strict "safety first" access, while lowering nominal costs, complicates processes leading users to offshore platforms; countries like India and Turkey are in a transitional regulatory phase; while countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, with prohibitive measures, have failed to suppress demand, instead pushing transactions into gray channels.