Exploring a New Operating System with Crypto-Assets & Stablecoins
Accounting, Controls, and Implementation for a New Payment Rail
In recent years, countries have been putting in place rules for crypto-assets including stablecoins. In the United States, the GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act of 2025) was enacted in 2025, setting out a legal framework for the issuance and operation of stablecoins.
Under the GENIUS Act, entities permitted to issue stablecoins are limited to banks under federal supervision and corporations licensed by federal or state authorities. The Act also requires issuers to maintain 100% backing at all times in safe assets—such as cash and short-term government securities—among other detailed, user-protection-oriented rules.
In Japan, where Yuto and Yuzuto are based, the amended Payment Services Act that took effect in June 2023 positioned stablecoins, ahead of many jurisdictions, as “electronic payment instruments.” In addition, as of August 2025, responsibility for the crypto-asset framework is expected to shift in stages from the Payment Services Act to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, indicating that crypto-assets are beginning to take on the character of financial instruments.
These developments have been taken as a starting gun by domestic financial institutions and major corporations that had been sitting on the sidelines. One example is Progmat Coin, which major trust banks (known as 信託銀行 in Japanese) are preparing to issue. As regulatory rules are clarified, companies are accelerating efforts to apply crypto-assets to the real economy. Stablecoins are rapidly emerging as a realistic option for core financial infrastructure.
Why Stablecoins Matter—and Their Practical Value
Crypto-assets have long faced two barriers to adoption: (1) price volatility and (2) high transaction costs. In particular, fiat-backed stablecoins (e.g., USDC/USDT) are designed to target 1 coin = 1 U.S. dollar, supported by reserves of cash and short-term government securities, which has substantially mitigated volatility in practice.
However, risks persist when it comes to short-term depegging and the structural vulnerabilities of algorithmic mechanisms. Well-known algorithmic stablecoin failures, such as TerraUSD, which saw its value collapse from $45 billion to virtually nothing when its paired token Luna entered a death spiral in May 2022, have made the inherent risks in algorithmic stablecoins widely understood. But algorithmic stablecoins are still under-regulated, so enterprises should exercise caution when implementing them at this time.
Before implementation, enterprises should evaluate issuer quality, the composition of reserves, transparency of redemption, and frequency of disclosures. Nevertheless, in the context of corporate payments, instances where price fluctuations impede operations have clearly declined.
On the cost side, the advantage is also evident. On-chain network fees (gas) on modern blockchains typically amount to only a few to a few dozen Yen, which is orders of magnitude lower than card acquiring fees or international wire transfers (often a few percent). A rough order-of-magnitude comparison is as follows:
At the same time, ancillary costs—such as on/off-ramps (fiat in/out) and compliance challenges still exist. Even so, for B2B high-frequency and high-value payments, cross-border small-and-frequent settlements, and 24/7 real-time settlement, stablecoins tend to be advantageous in terms of both total cost and speed.
For example, in Japanese manufacturing supply chains, it's possible to design operations that automatically trigger payment the moment delivery acceptance is completed, replacing the traditional “month-end close, payment in the second following month” cycle. This directly improves subcontractor cash flow. In content industries such as anime, manga, and gaming, micro-payments and royalty distributions can be executed across borders in real time at low cost, helping creators get paid more quickly and focus on their next work.
Stablecoins deliver both the experience of “digital cash with reduced price-volatility risk” and, via an on-chain stack, “a new payment rail that minimizes transaction costs.” In corporate payment operations, the core challenge of crypto (price volatility) is moving toward resolution; combined with low gas fees and automation via smart contracts, the technology is approaching a usable level on the ground.
Going forward, companies can maximize the benefits of stablecoins by building up, case by case, the surrounding costs and governance (price references, accounting/tax, and key management).
Moving Towards Business Use Cases
It is helpful to view the payments ecosystem that leverages stablecoins as three layers: infrastructure, service providers, and users.
Infrastructure layer: Provides the trusted foundation for payments—blockchain networks, stablecoin issuers and so on.
Service-provider layer: Builds and offers practical functions and products on top of the infrastructure.
User layer: Companies and individuals that ultimately adopt stablecoins in business and everyday payments.
In recent fundraising trends, significant capital has flowed into both the infrastructure and service layers, with a notable bias toward investments in mature, market-leading companies. This signals expectations for strengthening the foundational layers of the payments market.
At the infrastructure layer, for example, Circle’s APIs are increasingly used as a starting point for service-layer companies to build their own treasury and payment solutions. These use cases are not limited to a single vertical but span a wide range of corporate activities. In the United States, platform companies such as Shopify, PayPal, Visa, and Stripe are proactively building transaction infrastructure based on crypto-assets, including stablecoins. Representative examples include:
Shopify: Adopted Coinbase Commerce as a checkout option, enabling merchants to accept crypto payments such as USDC.
PayPal: Issued the U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoin PYUSD, which supports transfers and payments within its network and offers Pay with Crypto.
Visa: Conducted settlements using USDC across multiple chains (e.g. Solana, Ethereum) to advance faster, lower-cost cross-border payments.
Stripe: Provides solutions for crypto-related businesses to accept stablecoin payments and convert to fiat seamlessly.
Checkout.com: Partnered with Fireblocks to offer instant USDC settlement, improving cash flow for mid- to large-scale e-commerce merchants.
In Japan, examples include:
Mercari: In 2024, launched a feature allowing customers to pay for purchases with bitcoin.
Asteria: Japan’s Financial Services Agency (FSA) granted the first domestic approval for a Yen-denominated stablecoin JPYC. Asteria, a Japanese software company that specialises in data integration, announced direct integration between corporate finance/accounting systems and JPYC.
Traditional Banks (Progmat Coin): Progmat Coin, led by MUFG Bank, has generated considerable interest. Plans for cross-bank cross-border payments and settlement for security tokens will begin later in 2025.
SBI Holdings and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC): Exploring the use of a Japanese Yen-backed stablecoin to create an inter-company transaction network. This initiative aims to make existing financial functions more efficient by enabling instant, 24/7 payments and reducing transaction costs.
So far the story of stablecoins has mainly been that of digital dollars, but Japanese Yen is a systemically important currency: the world’s third-largest currency in terms of global reserve holdings and typically the third most traded currency on FX markets. The growth in usage of Yen-denominated stablecoins will offer enhanced opportunities for both Japanese businesses and international companies seeking to diversify beyond USD-denominated digital assets.
As crypto-asset infrastructure and service layers evolve, some companies have begun integrating stablecoins into end-to-end business workflows, not merely as a remittance method but as a means of process redesign. Examples include:
Lufthansa Group: Working with payment-orchestration platform FinMont to introduce a blockchain-based B2B settlement system using USDC for travel agencies in non-BSP (Billing and Settlement Plan) markets
Walmart: Exploring issuing its own USD-pegged stablecoin to reduce card-related fees and other costs.
Skyscanner: Created an integrated booking flow with Travala.com (crypto-friendly OTA), where flights and hotels found on Skyscanner can be paid for on Travala.com using stablecoins and other crypto.
On the other hand, many companies remain at the proof-of-concept (PoC) or at the early stage of exploring partnerships. This is due to a combination of factors: uncertainty around accounting treatment, tax handling, integration with existing core systems, and the complexity of building internal controls.
As transactions using crypto-assets, including stablecoins, move closer to industry standard, a key management challenge for companies will be building a dual-track operating model that handles both crypto-assets and fiat currency. Key issues include:
Differences in revenue-recognition timing between stablecoins and fiat.
Consistency of records and audit trails across on-chain and off-chain systems.
Accounting classification for closed-loop tokens (e.g., proprietary brand coins).
Compliance with jurisdiction-specific (national/state) legal and regulatory regimes.
High-fidelity capture of transaction data (currency type, timestamp, price source, gas fees, etc.).
Meeting these requirements calls not simply for technology adoption, but for institutional design that unifies accounting, legal, information systems, and operations—backed by a robust governance framework. In the next section, drawing on U.S. case studies and relevant tools, we examine how companies are addressing practical challenges from the perspectives of accounting, controls, and implementation.
The Challenges Of Crypto-Asset Accounting
When companies adopt crypto-assets, especially stablecoins, accounting treatment, internal controls, and tax positioning are paramount. In the United States, from 2025 onward, companies must measure qualifying crypto-assets at fair value at period-end and recognize changes in profit or loss. In Japan, the ASBJ’s (Accounting Standards Board of Japan) Practical Solution No. 38 requires period-end fair value measurement and P/L recognition where an active market exists.
While accounting for crypto-assets (including stablecoins) is increasingly settled under major frameworks, implementation still varies by company.
Four key crypto-asset accounting issues and potential solutions:
Measurement timing for non-cash consideration
Revenue received in crypto must be measured at fair value. Because IFRS does not explicitly specify the timing (contract inception vs. receipt), companies should codify a policy, including rules for FX, auto-conversion, and spread handling, and apply it consistently.Classification of crypto-assets
Classifying stablecoins as cash equivalents is generally difficult. They are typically intangible assets (or inventory for certain businesses). Since token design and contract terms can affect the accounting treatment, conduct a contract-level review and document the accounting policies.Closed-loop tokens
For proprietary brand coins that cannot be redeemed for fiat, the default treatment is a contract liability (deferred revenue). Breakage is recognized proportionally when it can be estimated reliably, or upon lapse of rights.Gas / network fees
Define—by transaction flow—whether on-chain fees are treated as a reduction of revenue, operating expense, or part of acquisition cost, and apply the policy consistently.
Three pillars for stable, repeatable operations:
Written policy
Standardize, in internal regulations, asset classification, revenue timing, a price-reference hierarchy (primary = principal-market price; secondary = reference rate with failover/reversion conditions), and treatment of gas and other fees—and fix these as the “specification” for accounting.Subledger (auxiliary ledger)
Record high-granularity, per-transaction data—chain, token, timestamp/TxID, price source, spreads, gas, counterparty wallet validation, and an event breakdown (receipt → auto-conversion → settlement)—to ensure traceability for monthly close and audit.Internal controls
Enforce segregation of duties (SoD) between key management and accounting records; establish payment approvals, price-source change logs, monthly reconciliations, and preservation of on-chain evidence—controls on par with those for cash, inventory, and receivables.
Vendors such as Bitwave, TaxBit, and Lukka offer products and services that support valuation, journal entries, and record-keeping. Their strengths in multi-currency flows, price referencing, and audit reporting position them well in the implementation phase.
In hybrid environments (crypto plus fiat), supplier selection should focus not only on single features but on end-to-end operability. Key evaluation criteria should include ERP integration depth, security posture (SOC/ISO), breadth of supported use cases, and the price-data architecture. For public or control-heavy organizations, also weigh compatibility with core systems, depth of customer references, and long-term audit resilience.
For example, while both Lukka and Bitwave are known as enterprise-grade platforms, their philosophies differ. Lukka prioritizes institutional trust and data integrity, with Lukka Prime delivering principal-market fair value under US GAAP/IFRS and turning messy data into audit-ready outputs.
Bitwave focuses on embedding its platform into daily operations, integrating two-ways with NetSuite, Sage Intacct, QuickBooks, Workday, and completing automated journals and reconciliations inside the ERP so teams can operate with minimal tooling change.
In Japan, major audit firms have formed crypto-audit teams, and domestic services such as Gtax and Cryptact are increasingly able to handle complex corporate histories—providing examples of how the supporting infrastructure is steadily maturing.
That said, fully production-grade accounting for crypto-based revenue and treasury remains relatively rare. Although ERP integration, price referencing, and subledgers are now practical, policy decisions under accounting frameworks, industry-specific flows, and audit-oriented control design still need to be finalized and implemented by each company. For example, flows via a PSP—receipt → auto-conversion to USDC → settlement—should be decomposed into price, fees, and recognition timing, with the revenue measurement aspect explicitly set in policy. In retail/e-commerce (returns, chargebacks) and travel (cancellations, no-shows), domain-specific rules are required to keep revenue recognition and refunds consistent.
At the frontier, PayPal executed an invoice payment to EY using PYUSD in 2024, integrating instant blockchain settlement with ERP via SAP Digital Currency Hub. As innovation continues to reduce time and cost per transaction, more companies are expected to follow.
What Companies Should Do Next
The infrastructure that supports crypto-assets is still maturing. Even so, the benefits for early adopters, such as lower transaction costs and greater working-capital agility, are becoming too significant to ignore. According to analysis by a16z, replacing even part of a company’s payment fees with stablecoin-based rails can improve profit margins via lower transaction costs and, in turn, support higher enterprise value.
Comments at an SAP session suggest that corporate adoption of stablecoins will likely start from accounts payable (AP)—large enterprises paying SMEs. SMEs need to receive funds as early as possible, while large enterprises face cumulative pain from fees and settlement delays across many vendors. With on-chain settlement and PSP-based stablecoin rails, 24/7, near-instant, low-cost payments become feasible—addressing both sides’ pain points simultaneously.
Against this backdrop, the priorities and implementation considerations for companies are as follows.
Accounting & Tax
To account properly for crypto revenues and valuations, codified accounting policies are essential. Four items are critical:Revenue timing for crypto receipts (contract inception vs. receipt).
Price-reference hierarchy (primary = principal-market price → secondary = reference rate) and switching conditions.
Classification of gas (network fees)—reduction of revenue, operating expense, or acquisition cost.
Asset classification for stablecoins (e.g., intangible, inventory, etc.).
Processes & ERP Integration
Adoption requires process redesign and tight coupling with core systems. Record sales, purchases, refunds, conversions, and custody events at high granularity in a subledger (auxiliary ledger) and sync to the ERP accurately and in near real time. Validate that your ERP can handle on-chain details such as block height, transaction ID, and gas.Security & Controls
Even with sound accounting and processes, weak controls will fail in operation. Embed key protection (MPC/HSM), segregation of duties (SoD), and payment-approval workflows into your existing control framework. Document an incident playbook (containment → recovery) and conduct regular drills.External Coordination & Regulatory Compliance
Design operations for KYC/KYT (customer due diligence and transaction monitoring) and sanctions compliance. Agree early with customers and vendors on accepted currencies, refund procedures, and invoice formats, and reflect these in contracts and internal policies. Because these choices tie directly to system design and accounting policy, design and testing should run in parallel from the requirements phase.Talent & Organization
Crypto operations span finance, legal, IT, and business functions. You need cross-functional specialists, either developed in-house or hired externally, who can adapt to changing technology and regulation while maintaining internal controls.
By addressing these points, the stablecoin advantages stop being theoretical and begin to show up in the numbers as real competitive gains. Companies that complete this preparation early will be better positioned to absorb the standardization of new payment rails into management and build a durable edge.
About The Authors
Yuto and Yuzuto work in the global investments and incubation team at Digital Garage, a technology company based in Tokyo with deep expertise in emerging innovation such as fintech, AI and enterprise technologies.
Matt Jones is a consultant, advisor and seasoned writer of “Payments Culture”. He has a deep expertise in Fintech and payments.
 | A guest post by
|