TL;DR
Paymentology CTO Tim Joslyn told PYMNTS that stablecoins may gain wider use by funding existing payment cards rather than replacing cards at checkout. He cited round-the-clock transfers and cross-border payments as potential advantages, while saying acceptance, consumer protections and dispute processes remain important parts of the system.
Stablecoins may find a more practical route into consumer payments by funding existing payment cards rather than asking shoppers and merchants to adopt a separate checkout system, Paymentology Chief Technology Officer Tim Joslyn told PYMNTS. His argument puts the potential role of stablecoins in moving and supplying money behind a card transaction, while established card networks remain the way consumers pay at merchants.
Joslyn said consumers already have a familiar way to use money across a broad range of merchants: payment cards. Card networks and payment providers also have established processes for routing purchases and handling fraud claims, disputes and chargebacks. A stablecoin-linked card could let a customer spend from a digital-currency balance while the merchant receives a conventional card payment, without needing to accept a stablecoin directly.
“If you look at stablecoins without cards, it’s very hard to spend them,” Joslyn told PYMNTS. “Cards solve the acceptance problem.” He described demand as less of a barrier than the systems needed to connect stablecoin balances to everyday spending. The report cited research that 42% of stablecoin holders want to use them for major purchases, compared with 28% who do; it did not provide further details about the survey’s sample or methodology.
Joslyn framed the opportunity as a division of roles: cards handle spending, while stablecoins could help move funds into a spendable balance. He pointed to cross-border payments and the ability to transfer value at any time as potential advantages over processes dependent on banking hours. He also said payment disputes do not require a reversible blockchain: they require agreed rules, responsible parties and a way to direct funds when a transaction must be corrected.
Cards Could Carry Stablecoin Balances
If this model gains adoption, shoppers may use stablecoins without changing how they pay in stores or online. The card credential stays familiar, while the source of funds changes behind it. That could reduce the need to persuade every merchant to accept a particular digital currency or convince consumers to choose a new checkout method.
The approach also shifts attention to the movement of money before a purchase. Stablecoins could be useful when a customer, business or payment provider needs to move funds across borders or outside standard banking hours, then make those funds available through a card. Joslyn described this as a possible advantage, not proof that stablecoins are cheaper, faster in every case or better for every payment.
It could also change competition among financial providers. If one card can draw from checking, credit, stablecoins and other balances, the wallet or platform that selects the funding source may hold greater influence over the payment experience. The report presents that as a possible direction for payment products; it does not establish that such an arrangement is widely available today.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Payments Split Behind the Proposal
Much of the earlier case for cryptocurrency payments focused on getting consumers to pay directly with digital assets and merchants to accept them. Joslyn’s argument turns that model around: merchants could continue accepting cards while a stablecoin balance supplies the funds behind the card payment. In that setup, stablecoins are infrastructure rather than a visible checkout choice.
The distinction is between sending money and spending it. Card systems already provide a widely used way to spend at merchants, while stablecoins may offer an always-on method of transferring value. Joslyn told PYMNTS that this can matter when a conventional transfer would have to wait for banks to resume processing after a weekend or outside business hours. The report does not compare transfer times, fees or settlement outcomes across specific providers.
Card payments also operate within established procedures for handling disputed purchases and assigning liability. Blockchains do not automatically provide the same consumer-facing remedies, according to Joslyn. He argued that payment rules and accountable parties can address problems even where the underlying transfer uses blockchain technology. The card layer, in this model, supplies acceptance and familiar processes; the stablecoin layer could provide another way to fund the transaction.
““Cards solve the acceptance problem.””
— Tim Joslyn, Paymentology chief technology officer, speaking to PYMNTS
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Adoption and Consumer Protections
The report describes a proposed payment model, not evidence that stablecoin-funded cards have achieved broad adoption. It does not identify the stablecoin products, card programs or jurisdictions that would make the approach available, nor does it give comparative data on cost, speed or reliability. The cited 42% and 28% figures are presented without survey details, so their representativeness and the precise definition of use for major purchases are unclear.
It is also not clear how specific providers would handle conversion between stablecoins and card balances, who would bear the cost of that conversion, or what protections customers would receive if a transfer, card purchase or linked account were disputed. Joslyn said rules and accountable participants can address reversals and liability, but the report does not describe a particular policy framework or guarantee that all providers would follow the same procedures.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Evidence Needed From Payment Providers
The next test is whether card issuers, payment platforms and stablecoin providers build products that connect digital balances to card spending in practice. Useful evidence would include which markets and currencies are supported, how funds are converted, when transfers settle, what fees apply and how customers can challenge errors or unauthorized transactions.
Further data could also clarify whether consumers use these products for cross-border transfers, everyday purchases or larger transactions, and whether the cited gap between interest and reported use changes over time. Until providers publish operational details and comparable results, the case for stablecoins behind cards remains a strategic proposal, rather than a demonstrated replacement for existing payment arrangements.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What is the proposal in the PYMNTS report?
Paymentology CTO Tim Joslyn argues that stablecoins could fund card payments in the background, while shoppers continue to use familiar card credentials and merchants continue to accept cards.
Would this mean merchants accept stablecoins directly?
Not necessarily. In Joslyn’s model, merchants accept a card payment; the customer’s stablecoin balance could supply the funds behind that payment.
Why does Joslyn see a role for stablecoins?
He points to transfers that can operate around the clock and potential uses in cross-border payments. The report does not provide comparative figures showing that stablecoin transfers are always faster or less expensive.
What do the 42% and 28% figures measure?
The report says 42% of stablecoin holders want to use stablecoins for major purchases, while 28% actually do. It does not provide the survey sample, methodology or additional detail about how those responses were defined.
What remains uncertain about stablecoin-linked cards?
The report does not establish how widely such products are available, what they cost, how funds are converted, or which consumer protections apply when payments or transfers are disputed.
Source: rss
