Happy Wednesday, Fintech Listeners!

I hope your week is going well and you have some time to listen to a podcast, because I’ve got a good one for you today.

— Alex

Let’s Recap Stablecoins

I write about fintech for a living, and I’m still struggling to keep track of everything that happened with stablecoins in 2026.

So on Tuesday, Dec. 15, I’m sitting down with John Timoney-Gomez (Rain), Simon Taylor (Brainfood), and Rob Hadick (Dragonfly) for a live year in review.

We’ll connect the dots between new rules, banks jockeying for position, legacy players rebuilding their rails, and AI agents paying on their own.

Join us?

3 BIG IDEAS FROM THE PODCAST

Mr. Mikula and I had plenty to catch up on, including anxiety around AI agents (which was the dominant theme at Money20/20), the relay race for bank charters, the increasingly intense competition between stablecoins and tokenized deposits, the OCC's latest attempt to prove that debanking is a widespread problem, and so much more.

And then, inevitably, we ended up talking about tipping in fintech. My favorite!

Tune in for the full conversation here

And read below for my three big ideas...

#1: When the Bank Says No & The Bot Says YesCopy anchor linkCopied

Big banks have already started blocking external AI agents.

As I argued in my Money2026 recap, letting those agents back in safely comes down to identity and permissioning: Does the bank know this agent, and does it know what the customer behind it has authorized?

That’s the view from the bank’s side of the counter. Most banks profit off inertia, and personal agents are inertia-dissolving machines. On the podcast, Jason flipped the point of view back to the tech/non-bank side.

He actually gave his Instinct agent a separate credit card number, then tested whether it could log into one of his neobank accounts (it could). Then he had his agent arrange an airport pickup in Barcelona. The agent found a car service, created an account, retrieved email verification codes, and booked the car. Fortunately or unfortunately for Jason, his flight arrived early, so he took a taxi.

The walls exist, but they’re unevenly built. At least some institutions outside the biggest banks will let an agent stroll in, as long as it carries the customer’s own browser and credentials with them.

For a bank, that creates liability on two levels; legal liability and liability in the court of public opinion. Your terms of service might say the customer is responsible, but that won’t spare you a letter from Elizabeth Warren or questions from the New York Times.

There’s a different attitude on the fintech side, especially among business banking providers like Mercury and Ramp; if customers want to interact with their financial services through agents, they want to figure out how to support that.

That left me with two questions.

Will the big banks technically be able to block AI agents over the long term?

And if other institutions welcome those agents, does blocking them eventually become a competitive disadvantage?

#2: More Press Release Than ProductCopy anchor linkCopied

Stablecoins and tokenized deposits are increasingly fighting over the same ground. Last week, I took a closer look at SoFi's new tokenized deposit, SOFIE.

The short version: SoFi introduced SOFIE, a tokenized savings account paying 4.4% APY, in what looks like an attempt to attract crypto-native customers to the SoFi ecosystem. Customers can hold FDIC-insured tokenized deposits, convert them one-to-one into SoFiUSD, and then buy crypto or transfer money over blockchain rails.

Jason read the announcement and had a question: Who is this going to appeal to?

From the description alone, it struck us as a confusing UX situation.

Consider the mechanics. Someone with a regular SoFi savings account can already use their dollars to buy crypto or SoFiUSD in the app. With SOFIE, they hold dollars on a tokenized ledger, convert them into SoFiUSD, and then (likely) convert their SoFiUSD to a different stablecoin like USDC or USDT and then do whatever crypto thing they were planning to do. That’s actually less convenient.

Jason argued that a serious crypto person probably isn't using SoFi for this anyway. And I suspect the additional friction isn't exactly an inducement.

But Jason raised another comparison I found fascinating.

In his experience, consumer apps aimed at Latin America often go out of their way to make stablecoin balances look like ordinary dollars. The underlying mechanics, sometimes involving stablecoins and derivatives in DeFi pools, are often relegated to an FAQ or footer.

There are legitimate questions about how much legal and financial risk that approach conceals. Still, Jason's point is that regular people don't really care which ledger their money lives on. They just want to know whether their money’s safe.

SoFi's announcement takes almost the opposite approach, with tokenization as the headline.

As I told Jason, Anthony Noto (SoFi’s CEO) is especially good at keeping the bank’s retail investors excited about all the innovative things the company is doing. This announcement struck me as more compelling to those investors than to SoFi members (or prospective members) who probably aren’t demanding a tokenized version of a product that SoFi already offers.

#3: The Tip Jar Goes to CourtCopy anchor linkCopied

As long-time Fintech Takes readers know all too well: I think tipping in fintech is embarrassing and bad business.

I stand by that rant. And, naturally, Jason and I couldn't resist revisiting this case.¹

But our conversation surfaced a legal wrinkle worth unpacking.

Maryland's new law, which took effect October 1, prohibits earned wage access providers from soliciting or accepting tips. It also requires providers to disclose that they're prohibited from doing so.

As Jason pointed out, that's an interesting combination: Maryland is prohibiting certain speech while compelling other speech.

EarnIn argues this violates its First Amendment rights, and those of its customers, who can no longer voluntarily give tips. The company also raises due process objections.

Neither Jason nor I are lawyers (ALWAYS AN IMPORTANT REMINDER!), but he asked around with some lawyer friends who thought EarnIn's legal arguments were pretty solid. It seems entirely possible that EarnIn will prevail.

Now, consider why regulators are concerned about tipping in the first place.

Dave, another provider of small-dollar advances, faced intense FTC scrutiny over some remarkably manipulative practices. At one point, according to the FTC's complaint, its app displayed a cartoon child surrounded by food, supposedly representing meals funded by the customer's tip. Lower the tip amount, and the food disappeared. Reduce it to zero, and the child was replaced by an empty plate. Really!

That's an allegation against Dave, not EarnIn. But it's a vivid illustration of how a supposedly voluntary tip can become a manipulative piece of product and UX design.

And here's the irony. Dave subsequently abandoned tips for a straightforward mandatory fee, and reported stronger revenue and monetization without a hit to conversion or retention.

EarnIn may have a legitimate constitutional right to ask for tips.² Dave’s experience raises a different question: Why would EarnIn want to?

WHAT I'M LISTENING TO

#1: Brett King on Bank 5.0 & the Future of Banking (Fintech Business Weekly) 🎧Copy anchor linkCopied

Brett has been remarkably successful over the years at predicting the future of our industry. Always worth listening to him (and reading his books!)

#2: TV’s last great startup (Acquired) 🎧Copy anchor linkCopied

Not fintech, but a very interesting listen!

*Bonus: Collections Conversations (by me, with C&R) 🎧Copy anchor linkCopied

Anders Wallin, a former CIO at a credit bureau and a debt purchaser, says customers who default typically come back as payers 5-7 years later. In Episode 4, we apply his technology side view to collections, from what the UK’s outsourcing and debt sale market gets right to why northern and southern Europe view debt so differently. Tune in here.

*This rec is brought to you by one of our fantastic brand partners.

Thanks for the read! Let me know what you thought by replying back to this email. 

— Alex