Stablecoins Are Fast, but Fees Add Up Along the Way

A Bank of Italy experiment covering ten international payment routes found the cost of sending $200 through stablecoins could be roughly 60 cents on one route and nearly $18 on another. Buying the tokens and cashing them out accounted for most of the expense, with the on-chain transfer representing only a small portion.

That is no trivial sum. For someone whose wages arrive in stablecoins, the fees can be a meaningful burden. The money may land in a crypto wallet at the same time rent still has to leave a bank account.

In a separate survey, BVNK, the stablecoin infrastructure provider Mastercard acquired, found that freelancers, gig workers and marketplace sellers got roughly 35% of their income through stablecoins.

Stablecoins have already proved themselves useful across many industries. The tougher issue is what is left of the money by the time it gets somewhere practical.

Where the Costs of Stablecoins Mount

A transaction may mean buying stablecoins, moving them, and then selling them for local currency. Charges can appear at each step. Even a zero advertised transfer fee can be undermined by an exchange-rate spread that reduces the final payout.

The 0.30% to nearly 9% range from the Italian study spans the entire journey on the routes it sampled, rather than being a global average cash-out fee.

BIS research also explores how conversion and cash-out expenses shape stablecoins' standing against banks and fintech services.

Taylor Bossung of RedotPay, talking at TOKEN2049, pointed to the remaining friction. Since RedotPay provides physical and virtual cards for spending stablecoins at more than 130 million merchants, the company has a clear picture of the obstacles.

“On-ramping and off-ramping is still too expensive.”

He cited the example of someone drawing out money for a major purchase, such as a down payment. The option to pay for groceries using a card funded by stablecoins does not by itself bring a sizable withdrawal within reach.

Simplifying Stablecoin Payments

A person may need to work through wallet addresses, blockchain networks and dedicated tokens for network fees before comparing prices. It is an unfamiliar set of decisions placed between the user and the money they earned.

Raagulan Pathy runs KAST, a global money app powered by stablecoins, and described the company's goal:

“Keep the money movement as simple as stablecoins allow while the user experience looks like Web2,” said Raagulan Pathy.

In practice, that points to interactions people already know, such as paying straight to a phone number. Underneath that is a more basic observation:

“What people care about is money, not the instrument underneath.”

A cleaner interface means less work for the user. Even so, someone still has to manage conversion and delivery behind the scenes.

Companies embracing stablecoin payments need to keep that difference in mind if they hope to expand and genuinely meet the challenge now confronting more customers. Even a smooth payroll system can still push the work of making wages spendable onto the employee.

When Stablecoin Payments Look Better on Price

There are recipients who prefer to hold digital dollars, while others must have local currency right away. The equation shifts depending on which of those applies.

For anyone who already has stablecoins, the relevant comparison involves what it costs to spend or withdraw them. For someone beginning with regular currency, the purchase price has to be added in.

What it is being weighed against also matters. According to the World Bank, the global average remittance cost in Q3 2025 was 6.36%, and its digital-only money-transfer-operator index stood at 3.54%.

These older figures make clear that measuring stablecoins only against high-priced transfer options can distort conclusions.

The right way to compare is to send the same sum to the same place, in the same currency, using the same payout method.

What Would Reduce the Cost of Cashing Out?

Bossung sees a role for regulation:

“It lets on- and off-ramp providers negotiate better deals, and a competitive market then drives down the price of core functions,” said the Head of Corporate Affairs at RedotPay.

It is a claim that should be measured against the outcome for customers. Improved commercial terms only matter if they translate into a more favorable exchange rate, a cheaper withdrawal fee or a bigger amount arriving at the end.

Whether it is rent or supplier bills, the decisive question for the payer is how much lands, how fast, and whether the person on the other end can actually use it. The speed advantage means little unless the savings hold up from start to finish.