The post On Creating A World That Lets Us Believe In “The Chair Company” appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ron (Tim Robinson) co-creator and star of “The Chair Company” Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max There’s a scene early in The Chair Company, when we see Ron Trosper, portrayed by actor and series co-creator Tom Robinson, sitting by himself listening to Elliott Smith while wearing some truly horrible saggy pants. They desperately need tailoring and it’s one of many moments that set us up to not expect much from our protagonist. We’re supposed to assume that because Ron is so busy undermining himself, it is unlikely he’ll be effective should any stressful events unfold, while also knowing that all sorts of bizarre, potentially traumatic plot points are likely to begin at any moment. But truth in this show is rarely what is obvious and this very well written story is filled to the brim with complex twists and turns throughout every episode. Every episode sticks to the landing. I was able to meet with the show’s costume designer, Nicky Smith, and its director of photography, Ashley Connor, and I was indulged with a fascinating conversation about the requirements for plausible worldbuilding, underscored by the fact mutual respect amongst departments and consistent clear communication are necessary for storytelling on film to be effective. The people who made this show had quite a lot of fun making it, and I very much believe that is an important reason why the final product is so good. We started at the beginning, with the pilot, but Lovely Reader, as ever, please do not worry about spoilers if you haven’t been watching. There is plenty to examine without giving anything away, and the end is something you should truly see for yourself. Ron Trospar (Tim Robinson) Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max “I think the pilot sets up the rest of the… The post On Creating A World That Lets Us Believe In “The Chair Company” appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ron (Tim Robinson) co-creator and star of “The Chair Company” Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max There’s a scene early in The Chair Company, when we see Ron Trosper, portrayed by actor and series co-creator Tom Robinson, sitting by himself listening to Elliott Smith while wearing some truly horrible saggy pants. They desperately need tailoring and it’s one of many moments that set us up to not expect much from our protagonist. We’re supposed to assume that because Ron is so busy undermining himself, it is unlikely he’ll be effective should any stressful events unfold, while also knowing that all sorts of bizarre, potentially traumatic plot points are likely to begin at any moment. But truth in this show is rarely what is obvious and this very well written story is filled to the brim with complex twists and turns throughout every episode. Every episode sticks to the landing. I was able to meet with the show’s costume designer, Nicky Smith, and its director of photography, Ashley Connor, and I was indulged with a fascinating conversation about the requirements for plausible worldbuilding, underscored by the fact mutual respect amongst departments and consistent clear communication are necessary for storytelling on film to be effective. The people who made this show had quite a lot of fun making it, and I very much believe that is an important reason why the final product is so good. We started at the beginning, with the pilot, but Lovely Reader, as ever, please do not worry about spoilers if you haven’t been watching. There is plenty to examine without giving anything away, and the end is something you should truly see for yourself. Ron Trospar (Tim Robinson) Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max “I think the pilot sets up the rest of the…

On Creating A World That Lets Us Believe In “The Chair Company”

2025/11/30 02:15

Ron (Tim Robinson) co-creator and star of “The Chair Company”

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

There’s a scene early in The Chair Company, when we see Ron Trosper, portrayed by actor and series co-creator Tom Robinson, sitting by himself listening to Elliott Smith while wearing some truly horrible saggy pants. They desperately need tailoring and it’s one of many moments that set us up to not expect much from our protagonist. We’re supposed to assume that because Ron is so busy undermining himself, it is unlikely he’ll be effective should any stressful events unfold, while also knowing that all sorts of bizarre, potentially traumatic plot points are likely to begin at any moment.

But truth in this show is rarely what is obvious and this very well written story is filled to the brim with complex twists and turns throughout every episode. Every episode sticks to the landing.

I was able to meet with the show’s costume designer, Nicky Smith, and its director of photography, Ashley Connor, and I was indulged with a fascinating conversation about the requirements for plausible worldbuilding, underscored by the fact mutual respect amongst departments and consistent clear communication are necessary for storytelling on film to be effective. The people who made this show had quite a lot of fun making it, and I very much believe that is an important reason why the final product is so good.

We started at the beginning, with the pilot, but Lovely Reader, as ever, please do not worry about spoilers if you haven’t been watching. There is plenty to examine without giving anything away, and the end is something you should truly see for yourself.

Ron Trospar (Tim Robinson)

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

“I think the pilot sets up the rest of the show,” director of photography Ashley Connor explained. “When director Andrew DeYoung and I first started working on the pilot, the theory behind the aesthetics was always for everything to take itself very seriously. We have to take ourselves very seriously in Ron’s world to be able to depict his descent into more obsessive behaviors really seriously.”

“The production designer who did the pilot episode,” costume designer Nicky Smith told me, “Rosaria Jimenez, she’s super, super talented. It was one of those things where we sat down and talked about the office a lot, but for the rest of the world, we were all on the same page. Once I saw Ashley’s boards, I understood that we were all speaking the same language: I’m going to do them in regular clothes. We’re not going to give away anything, to who the characters are outside, of their socioeconomic status, who they are as people. No jokes. We’re not going to give away anyone’s secret feelings on anything. We really played it straight so that we could all create this world that surprises you when the laughs come in. It surprises you when you cringe. It keeps the audience guessing what’s going to happen next.”

Ron (Tim Robinson) is chased by a mysterious man in black.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

“I think Episode Five is the best example, it’s shot like a thriller chase,” Smith continued. “They’re running. They’re doing this. This person’s running in here. And Ashley did a beautiful job of shooting it, in that when they’re running down the stairs, the camera’s jumping down the stairs. You feel like Ron and the drug dealer are running with you. I think that’s the beauty of collaborative environments; when everyone’s all focused on the same goal. As long as we continue to remind ourselves that we’re all we’re telling the same story. And it’s the story of a man who, when he understands there is this huge conspiracy, his eyes kind of open up to the world.”

While doing my research before this conversation, I read in a few places comparisons between this series and Twin Peaks. I wanted to know what Conner thought about that.

“I’m a huge Lynch head, like, I’m a huge Twin Peaks fan,” the director of photography told me. “But, Lynchian to me, it’s not photographed strangely. It’s very middle of the road. And that gives the characters within Twin Peaks the space to exist and to be real people. But Tim Robinson and Zach Kanin have created a world where all these men, all these very unique characters, audiences can believe that they exist in the world, even if ‘the world’ feels like a portal next door. That Tamblay’s shop scene is such a perfect example.”

Ron (Tim Robinson) gives a speech.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

“He owns that shop with his dad, they met him on the scout, you know, and just loved his thing. And I think Tim and Zach are so good at casting. They’re so good at seeing the potential of people. Andrew is so good working with actors, and non actors, that they created a space for him to succeed. And he showed up and did an amazing job. It’s really Tim’s presence, I think, in a lot of ways he exists as an actor playing Ron, and takes it very seriously. He’s not showing up and treating people like this is a joke scene. I think that sincerity makes audiences really want to understand Ron more, and aim for the journey.”

Tamblay’s, for the uninitiated, is a low-mid pricepoint menswear store, and it enters our story when Ron finds a shirt important enough to track down. It’s a brief first introduction that still manages to delve into the forensic science of men’s shirts with a character behind the counter designed to push exactly as many buttons as Ron is currently in possession of.

This scene was shot at a real store, a much nicer store, Suit Man in Mount Vernon, New York, which the production redecorated to suit their hyper specific needs. The clerk in the scene I’m talking about was played by Jared Linder, a co-owner of Suit Man, who so impressed Tim Robinson that he was cast in the series.

Alice (Regina Ohashi) and Jeff (Lou Diamond Phillips) both look upset.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

“With a lot of the characters on the show, we had them come in for the fitting,” Smith explained. “But with Jared especially, we had him bring his own clothes. There’s something authentic, as a costume designer, about incorporating what we have with what other people have. Even if it’s just some worn shoes or some really sad cargo shorts, it helps to create a full flesh person in a way that there are textures, to have a variety of clothes in different states of care. I think that’s a really big thing. And for him, he had so many thoughts about what he should wear. I was like, actually, just wear what you normally wear, like a shirt and a blazer and simple chinos and just keep it very simple. And again, it’s like the character speaks for itself, because of the way it was written and the way that they do casting. And I think that’s the heavy lifting. Then, for the rest of us, on the aesthetic side of it, it’s just bringing it to life.”

As though enkindling a 360° character from the ether was nothing, I thought to myself.

“I always feel like whenever I try to describe the show, to anyone,” Conner said, “whenever I have tried to describe it, I sound like a third grader writing a book report. It just has this energy. We talked so much about how we have to be on Ron’s side. What Ron is willing to risk is his family, like, we’re presenting a character that’s willing to risk his family, who he clearly loves. He is willing to risk his life, his safety, everything, in order to follow this obsession. And the season, the arc, does such a good job of really being on Ron’s team, helping to watch him go through this process.”

If watching, we didn’t feel like we were on Ron’s team, some of his choices would be extremely hard to watch. But when not saturated with his selfish obsession, Ron cares very deeply. And he tries really hard. There’s a scene I knew I had to ask about.

Natalie (Sophia Lillis) talks to her dad, Ron (Tim Robinson).

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

Ron’s daughter, Natalie Trosper (Sophia Lillis) is getting married, and she and her fiance have decided to change the venue. What makes this hard is that her fiance’s family is not going to like or approve of their choice, and Natalie has asked her dad to speak to her new father-in-law, Terry (Torrey Hanson) for the couple.

“You know, the crew doesn’t necessarily have all the scripts,” Connor told me. “And a lot of times, they’re reading them on the day. And so there were so many questions with this one, like, ‘wait, where are we going?’”

Connor, the type of person who is completely capable of reading a room, knew that this was a time and place when she needed to step in, to communicate and to help the members of her team, or those in any department, to see the world she and the creators and director saw, the very world the crew was working so hard to make real.

“I’d be like, here’s where we’re going. Here’s where we’ve been. But that scene in particular, him on the deck with the fiance’s dad, a bunch of my crew came up to me, they’re like, that was really good. Dramatic, good, well acted.”

Terry (Torrey Hanson), Nancy (Jane Gabbert), Tara (Grace Reiter), Natalie (Sophia Lillis), Barb (Lake Bell) and Ron (Tim Robinson) at THAT family dinner.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

Lovely Reader, if you have not seen that scene for yourself, it is all of that and more. It was a scene written with compassion and beautifully shot. And the costumes each actor wore performed exactly as intended, supporting the creation of character without ever calling out for attention. I love elegantly executed work so much.

“They cast actors that could really act,” Smith said. “They cast actors who understood comedy,” the costume designer continued, “but who also understood drama and emotion and human interaction. I think a lot of the moments that people are going to resonate with, they kind of tell the line between both of those worlds, where it’s funny because of what just happened. But there’s this beautiful moment of human recognition that grounds you into the world that you’re taking a journey through.”

“There was this definite build out of Ron’s two worlds,” Conner added, “like the safety of home and the thrill of the chase. And we really liked the office being almost a neutral space. But we were speaking in different languages for these spaces. It wasn’t like ‘home bad, office bad, this good.’ We always wanted the family to be a safe, good space. we wanted home to feel nice. We wanted anytime he’s there, like with his kids, he loves that. There was like this constant of safety that needed to ground Ron’s journey. And Lake Bell is just amazing.”

Natalie Trospar (Sophia Lillis), Barb Trospar (Lake Bell), Seth Trospar (Will Price) and Ron Trospar (Tim Robinson) at dinner.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

“Oh my gosh, she is the best,” Smith grinned. “When we first spoke, she had so many ideas, which she sent me. And I was like, girl, you’re gonna look too good in all of this. I’m so sorry to tell you like, we’re gonna have to make you look like a suburban mom that’s only focused on practicality. She has to drop off the kids, she has a meeting. It’s less about how to tell a story that’s fashionably appropriate. It’s really focusing on, how does this woman move through the world? How does she start to see her husband, as he’s becoming a different person? a lot of the clothes that we chose to tell that story were like UNIQLO. There’s a lot of vintage, a lot of secondhand, some high end blouses, just because the patterns felt very apropos for the character. But working with Lake is easy. It’s fun and it’s joyous.”

“I think that’s what I was so impressed with about the cast,” Conner said thoughtfully, thinking about how to explain what she wanted to say. “Because I feel like Lou Diamond Phillips and Lake Bell, and Will Price and Sophia Lillis and Joseph Tudisco, like there’s a version of this, which is really cheesy, and really trying to like, hat on hat, winky to people. And it’s the earnestness that they bring to it, like Barb Trosper, as a character, Lake was so good, because I felt like she was Ron’s anchor. Literally, sometimes, in a world where Ron could have felt like someone you don’t care about, Lake brings you back, really grounds that relationship and makes the stakes feel really real. I was so impressed by her. And I texted her the other day, she’d posted herself in some premiere outfit just looking amazing.”

“Yes!” Conner said with another giant smile, “I literally was like, Oh my god, I’m only praying at your church. She’s so beautiful. She would come in and I’d be like, girl, I am so sorry, we’re taking you down.”

Jeff Levjman (Lou Diamond Phillips) everyone’s boss at Fisher Robay.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

Jeff Levjman, Lou Diamond Phillips, everyone’s boss at Fisher Robay where Ron works, which builds malls, is the most traditionally stylish character in this story. Jeff is definitely the one with the most money, though for someone with so many advantages, he comes across as rather angsty, which really speaks to the quality of the acting and all the invisible work going on on the other side of the camera’s lens.

“With Jeff’s character,” the costume designer explained, “immediately I wanted to make sure that in the office, there are levels of status. It’s done in a way where Tim’s character wears a blazer, tie and pants, and you really don’t see that silhouette on anyone else. And then, to top Tim, you have Brenda who wears suits and beautiful blouses and dresses. It’s very much a business appropriate, managerial type. Then to top Brenda, you have Jeff Levjman, and he wears tailored, high-end suits without the tie. And because he’s a cool boss, a pocket square. Because it brings you into this kind of charming, enigmatic, exciting guy. And then you’re like, what is he doing at this office? And then in turn, as you go down the layers to like the office crew, like Monica, Alexis, Ben, Cal, Louis, Doris, all of those people, you have different levels of age and seniority. where Douglas should dress like a man his age, in that he’s not trying to dress like Ben or Cal or one of the younger employees, that maybe wear sneakers to work. It’s like, how do you define levels of authority?

“Then on top of it, there is a huge age gap, where you have Doris and Douglas that are in their late seventies. Then, you have people like Alexis and Monica that are in their early thirties, that’s a 40-year-plus age gap. There should be a difference in the way that they approach work wear. We have some of the older characters landing on silhouettes that really fit them in like the late 1990s, early 2000s. They’re like, this is great. I’m just going to keep wearing the same blouse because it’s my work blouse.”

The staff of Fisher Robay watch the groundbreaking of a project.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

“We’ve got to talk about Glo Tavarez,” Conner interjected, “because Jamie is the icon.”

“Yes! Thank you, Ashley,” Smith said. “Every time Glo would come to set, I’d be like, that’s a cute outfit and such a bright light on set. But her looks were always so fun and playful. And she’s a younger assistant in the office.

“I loved how you dressed Jamie,” Connor told the costume designer.

“Thanks girl,” she responded, “I appreciate that. I love to talk about Jamie and Glo. When she first came to the character, she said she had some earrings that she thought were interesting. And I was like, why don’t we do a different airing for the outfit? So if you look, when she’s kind of frustrated, she’ll wear bright, funny earrings, like a lemon wedge, something to make her feel better. I think a lot of times people do make those choices in life, like, I want to impress my boss so I’m going to be really cute today. And we try to make those choices with Jamie, and really being mindful of body positivity, making sure that everyone on set, no matter what their body type was, that they looked and felt really great. And with her, it’s like, as Ron starts to kind of see the world beyond himself, he starts to notice that Jamie’s actually this important person. So Ron’s POV activation opened everyone’s closet. The first two episodes, it’s very similar, but as he starts to expand his world, we start to see variety in people’s clothes and the way they dress because he’s becoming acutely aware of everything around him.”

Jamie (Glo Tavarez) sits at her desk wearing tiny perfect earrings.

Courtesy of Warner Brothers / HBO Max

I understood what I was hearing; there’s something about paranoia, even when it is justified, that makes a person or a character pay more attention to what is happening in the periphery. The look of that on screen, it’s not exactly genre specific, but furtive maintains a very specific appearance.

And since we were talking about the interiors of characters, I had to ask about Douglas, a character who definitely freaked me out, for at least 12 reasons. He is absolutely a character I was super glad I would never have to work with.

“He’s the only one who does sweater vests,” Smith said to me with a laugh. “And James Downey, first and foremost, is a comedic genius. We were so lucky to have Jim be a part of this and literally Tim and Zach would be like, ‘Hey Jim, we’re thinking of doing this.’ And he’d be down for whatever they wanted, costume wise.”

James Downey, this seems like a good place for me to remind you, is the writer with the most time spent working on Saturday Night Live; more than 30 years. He was also ‘Sandy Irvine’ in One Battle After Another, Paul Thomas Anderson’s latest film which was also released this year. So when I mentioned him being creepy a little earlier, I hope it was clear that that was a compliment to the actor.

Douglas (James Downey) blows bubbles in the office like a weirdo, in front of Doris (Evangeline Johns) And Ron (Tim Robinson).

Courtesy of Warner Brother / HBO Max

“He’s just so down to live in this character,” Smith explained. “I think with Jim, we really wanted to make sure that he felt that, if he wasn’t creepy himself, you would think he was a nice guy. We really played on the clothes being period appropriate for someone that age, someone who would have really loved a sweater vest. When Jim, as the actor, brings a creepiness to it, it’s even creepier because of the juxtaposition of this nice, sweet man saying things like, ‘let’s do a Mistakes Party.’ I think the beauty of the storytelling is that we present these characters as regular, normal people. And then the script and the action dictates how weird and wild it all gets.

“Jim is so legendary and so deadpan,” Conner said. “And every single time he would just show up and kill the delivery. And he’s a writer, so he understands the intention and understands Tim and Zach so well. It was such a pleasure to watch him become a part of their world because he just gets the joke and then he delivers on the joke. It’s really fun to watch.”

“I think that doing this as a comedy meant that the comedic beats could play stronger and louder because we approached it so earnestly, Our references are like William Friedkin and Sidney Lumet, we’re looking at all the guys from that time period. We’re looking at Network, we were really inspired by Zoom work. We were watching Punch Drunk Love and Seven, and watching these things that have just a propulsive energy behind them, because really we wanted the audience to ride along with Ron. Everybody walked away at the end of the job knowing this one was special. I was getting texts from people after like, I miss the work. But crew member after crew member after crew member just kept showing up and making this was just so much fun. I had such a great time and I think that you can feel that.”

The Chair Company Poster.

Courtesy of HBO

“I think what you’re seeing is a really talented group of artists coming together to use the resources really well,” the director of photography told me, “It’s not the biggest budget show, so you have to think smarter. And I’ve been on shows where you get every piece of gear, when you have a huge budget and you have every single thing that you want. But really, I find limitations to be a generator of better creative choices, and that’s kind of where we all sat. It was like, you can’t have everything, so, how are we going to focus on what we do have and like, sharpen that axe.”

The final episode of Season One of ‘The Chair Company’, created by Tom Robinson and Zach Kanin, featuring the work of director of photography, Ashley Connor, and costumes designed by Nicky Smith, debuts on HBO Max on Sunday, November 30, 2025.

MORE FROM FORBES

ForbesRuth E. Carter’s Costumes For ‘Sinners’ Have Made Pop Culture BetterForbesAs If—Mona May’s New Book Celebrates ‘The Fashion Of Clueless’Forbes‘The Lowdown’: FX’s Brilliant Neo-Noir Designed For The 21st Century

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelelspethgross/2025/11/29/on-creating-a-world-that-lets-us-believe-in-the-chair-company/

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Adoption of Web3 in Europe: Current Status, Opportunities, and Challenges

The Adoption of Web3 in Europe: Current Status, Opportunities, and Challenges

How decentralization technologies are advancing in the Old Continent.
Share
The Cryptonomist2025/12/06 15:00
Wang Yongli, former vice president of the Bank of China: Why did China resolutely halt stablecoins?

Wang Yongli, former vice president of the Bank of China: Why did China resolutely halt stablecoins?

Written by: Wang Yongli , former Vice President of Bank of China China's policy orientation of accelerating the development of the digital yuan and resolutely curbing virtual currencies, including stablecoins, is now fully clear. This is based on a comprehensive consideration of factors such as China's leading global advantages in mobile payments and the digital yuan, the sovereignty and security of the yuan, and the stability of the monetary and financial system. Since May 2025, the United States and Hong Kong have been racing to advance stablecoin legislation, which has led to a surge in global legislation on stablecoins and crypto assets (also known as "cryptocurrencies" or "virtual currencies"). A large number of institutions and capital are flocking to issue stablecoins and invest in crypto assets, which has also sparked heated debate on whether China should fully promote stablecoin legislation and the development of RMB stablecoins (including offshore ones). Furthermore, after the United States legislated to prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing digital dollars, whether China should continue to promote digital RMB has also become a hot topic of debate. For China, this involves the direction and path of national currency development. With the global spread of stablecoins and the increasingly acute and complex international relations and fiercer international currency competition, this has a huge and far-reaching impact on how the RMB innovates and develops, safeguards national security, and achieves the strategic goals of a strong currency and a financial power. We must calmly analyze, accurately grasp, and make decisions early. We cannot be indifferent or hesitant, nor can we blindly follow the trend and make directional and subversive mistakes. Subsequently, the People's Bank of China announced that it would optimize the positioning of the digital yuan within the monetary hierarchy (adjusting the previously determined M0 positioning. This is a point I have repeatedly advocated from the beginning; see Wang Yongli's WeChat public account article "Digital Yuan Should Not Be Positioned as M0" dated January 6, 2021), further optimize the digital yuan management system (establishing an international digital yuan operations center in Shanghai, responsible for cross-border cooperation and use of the digital yuan; and establishing a digital yuan operations management center in Beijing, responsible for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the digital yuan system), and promote and accelerate the development of the digital yuan . On November 28, the People's Bank of China and 13 other departments jointly convened a meeting of the coordination mechanism for combating virtual currency trading and speculation. The meeting pointed out that due to various factors, virtual currency speculation has recently resurfaced, and related illegal and criminal activities have occurred frequently, posing new challenges to risk prevention and control. It emphasized that all units should deepen coordination and cooperation, continue to adhere to the prohibitive policy on virtual currencies, and persistently crack down on illegal financial activities related to virtual currencies. It clarified that stablecoins are a form of virtual currency , and their issuance and trading activities are also illegal and subject to crackdown. This has greatly disappointed those who believed that China would promote the development of RMB stablecoins and correspondingly relax the ban on virtual currency (crypto asset) trading. Therefore, China's policy orientation of accelerating the development of the digital yuan and resolutely curbing virtual currencies, including stablecoins, is now fully clear . Of course, this policy orientation remains highly debated both domestically and internationally, and there is no consensus among the public. So, how should we view this major policy direction of China? This article will first answer why China resolutely halted stablecoins; how to accelerate the innovative development of the digital yuan will be discussed in another article . There is little room or opportunity for the development of non-USD stablecoins. Since Tether launched USDT, a stablecoin pegged to the US dollar, in 2014 , USD stablecoins have been operating for over a decade and have formed a complete international operating system. They have basically dominated the entire crypto asset trading market, accounting for over 99% of the global fiat stablecoin market capitalization and trading volume . This situation arises from two main factors. First, the US dollar is the most liquid and has the most comprehensive supporting system of international central currencies, making stablecoins pegged to the dollar the easiest to accept globally. Second, it is also a result of the US's long-standing tolerant policy towards crypto assets like Bitcoin and dollar-denominated stablecoins, rather than leading the international community to strengthen necessary regulation and safeguard the fundamental interests of all humanity. Even this year, when the US pushed for legislation on stablecoins and crypto assets, it was largely driven by the belief that dollar-denominated stablecoins would increase global demand for the dollar and dollar-denominated assets such as US Treasury bonds, reduce the financing costs for the US government and society, and strengthen the dollar's international dominance. This was a choice made to enhance US support for dollar-denominated stablecoins and control their potential impact on the US, prioritizing the maximization of national interests while giving little consideration to mitigating the international risks of stablecoins. With the US strongly promoting dollar-denominated stablecoins, other countries or regions launching non-dollar fiat currency stablecoins will find it difficult to compete with dollar-denominated stablecoins on an international level, except perhaps within their own sovereign territory or on the issuing institution's own e-commerce platform. Their development potential and practical significance are limited . Lacking a strong ecosystem and application scenarios, and lacking distinct characteristics compared to dollar-denominated stablecoins, as well as the advantage of attracting traders and transaction volume, the return on investment for issuing non-dollar fiat currency stablecoins is unlikely to meet expectations, and they will struggle to survive in an environment of increasingly stringent legislation and regulation in various countries. The legislation on stablecoins in the United States still faces many problems and challenges. Following President Trump's second election victory, his strong advocacy for crypto assets such as Bitcoin fueled a new international frenzy in cryptocurrency trading, driving the rapid development of dollar-denominated stablecoin trading and a surge in stablecoin market capitalization. This not only increased demand for the US dollar and US Treasury bonds, strengthening the dollar's international status, but also brought huge profits to the Trump family and their cryptocurrency associates. However, this also posed new challenges to the global monitoring of the dollar's circulation and the stability of the traditional US financial system. Furthermore, the trading and transfer of crypto assets backed by dollar-denominated stablecoins has become a new and more difficult-to-prevent tool for the US to harvest global wealth, posing a serious threat to the monetary sovereignty and wealth security of other countries . This is why the United States has accelerated legislation on stablecoins, but its legislation is more about prioritizing America and maximizing American and even group interests, at the expense of the interests of other countries and the common interests of the world. After the legislation on US dollar stablecoins came into effect, institutions that have not obtained approval and operating licenses from US regulators will find it difficult to issue and operate US dollar stablecoins in the United States (for this reason, Tether has announced that it will apply for US-issued USDT). Stablecoin issuers subject to US regulation must meet regulatory requirements such as Know Your Customer (KYC), Anti-Money Laundering (AML), and Counter-Terrorist Financing (FTC). They must be able to screen customers against government watchlists and report suspicious activities to regulators. Their systems must have the ability to freeze or intercept specific stablecoins when ordered by law enforcement agencies. Stablecoin issuers must have reserves of no less than 100% US dollar assets (including currency assets, short-term Treasury bonds, and repurchase agreements backed by Treasury bonds) approved by regulators, and must keep US customer funds in US banks and not transfer them overseas. They are prohibited from paying interest or returns on stablecoins, and strict control must be exercised over-issuance and self-operation. Reserve assets must be held in custody by an independent institution approved by regulators and must be audited by an auditing firm at least monthly and an audit report must be issued. This will greatly enhance the value stability of stablecoins relative to the US dollar, strengthen their payment function and compliance, while weakening their investment attributes and illegal use; it will also significantly increase the regulatory costs of stablecoins, thereby reducing their potential for exorbitant profits in an unregulated environment. The US stablecoin legislation officially took effect on July 18, but it still faces numerous challenges : While it stipulates the scope of reserve assets for stablecoin issuance (bank deposits, short-term Treasury bonds, repurchase agreements backed by Treasury bonds, etc.), since it primarily includes Treasury bonds with fluctuating trading prices, even if reserve assets are sufficient at the time of issuance, a subsequent decline in Treasury bond prices could lead to insufficient reserves; if the reserve asset structures of different issuing institutions are not entirely consistent, and there is no central bank guarantee, it means that the issued dollar stablecoins will not be the same, creating arbitrage opportunities and posing challenges to relevant regulation and market stability; even if there is no over-issuance of stablecoins at the time of issuance, allowing decentralized finance (DeFi) to engage in stablecoin lending could still lead to stablecoin derivation and over-issuance, unless it is entirely a matchmaking between lenders and borrowers rather than proprietary trading; getting stablecoin issuers outside of financial institutions to meet regulatory requirements is not easy, and regulation also presents significant challenges. More importantly, the earliest and most fundamental requirement for stablecoins is the borderless, decentralized, 24/7 pricing and settlement of crypto assets on the blockchain. It is precisely because crypto assets like Bitcoin cannot fulfill the fundamental requirement of currency as a measure of value and a value token—that the total amount of currency must change in line with the total value of tradable wealth requiring monetary pricing and settlement—that their price relative to fiat currency fluctuates wildly (therefore, using crypto assets like Bitcoin as collateral or strategic reserves carries significant risks), making it difficult to become a true circulating currency. This has led to the development of fiat stablecoins pegged to fiat currencies. (Therefore, Bitcoin and similar crypto assets can only be considered crypto assets; calling them "cryptocurrency" or "virtual currency" is inaccurate; translating the English word "Token" as "币" or "币" is also inappropriate; it should be directly transliterated as "通证" and clearly defined as an asset, not currency.) The emergence and development of fiat-backed stablecoins have brought fiat currencies and more real-world assets (RWAs) onto the blockchain, strongly supporting on-chain cryptocurrency trading and development. They serve as a channel connecting the on-chain cryptocurrency world with the off-chain real-world, thereby strengthening the integration and influence of the cryptocurrency world on the real world. This will significantly enhance the scope, speed, scale, and volatility of global wealth financialization and financial transactions, accelerating the transfer and concentration of global wealth in a few countries or groups. In this context, failing to strengthen global joint regulation of stablecoins and cryptocurrency issuance and trading poses extremely high risks and dangers . Therefore, the surge in stablecoin and cryptocurrency development driven by the Trump administration in the United States has already revealed a huge bubble and potential risks, making it unsustainable. The international community must be highly vigilant about this! Stablecoin legislation could severely backfire on stablecoins. One unexpected outcome of stablecoin legislation is that the inclusion of fiat-backed stablecoins in legislative regulation will inevitably lead to legislative regulation of crypto asset transactions denominated and settled using fiat-backed stablecoins, including blockchain-generated assets such as Bitcoin and on-chain real-world assets (RWA). This will have a profound impact on stablecoins. Before crypto assets receive legislative regulation and compliance protection, licensed financial institutions such as banks find it difficult to directly participate in crypto asset trading, clearing, custody, and other related activities, thus ceding opportunities to private organizations outside of financial institutions. Due to the lack of regulation and the absence of regulatory costs, existing stablecoin issuers and crypto asset trading platforms have become highly profitable and attractive entities, exerting an increasing impact on banks and the financial system, forcing governments and monetary authorities in countries like the United States to accelerate legislative regulation of stablecoins. However, once crypto assets receive legislative regulation and compliance protection, banks and other financial institutions will undoubtedly participate fully. Payment institutions such as banks can directly promote the on-chain operation of fiat currency deposits (deposit tokenization), completely replacing stablecoins as a new channel and hub connecting the crypto world and the real world . Similarly, existing stock, bond, money market fund, and ETF exchanges can promote the on-chain trading of these relatively standardized financial products through RWA (Real-Time Asset Exchange). Having adequately regulated financial institutions such as banks act as the main entities connecting the crypto world and the real world on the blockchain is more conducive to implementing current legislative requirements for stablecoins, upholding the principle of "equal regulation for the same business" for all institutions, and reducing the impact and risks of crypto asset development on the existing monetary and financial system. This trend has already emerged in the United States and is rapidly intensifying, proving difficult to stop . Therefore, stablecoin legislation may seriously backfire on or subvert stablecoins ( see Wang Yongli's WeChat public account article "Stablecoin Legislation May Seriously Backfire on Stablecoins" on September 3, 2025 ). In this situation, it is not a reasonable choice for other countries to follow the US lead and vigorously promote stablecoin legislation and development. China should not follow the path of stablecoins taken by the United States. China already has a leading global advantage in mobile payments and the digital yuan. Promoting a stablecoin for the yuan has no advantage domestically, and it will have little room for development and influence internationally. It should not follow the path of the US dollar stablecoin, but should instead focus on promoting the development of stablecoins for the yuan, both domestically and offshore. More importantly, crypto assets and stablecoins like Bitcoin can achieve 24/7 global trading and clearing through borderless blockchains and crypto asset trading platforms. While this significantly improves efficiency, the highly anonymous and high-frequency global flow, lacking coordinated international oversight, makes it difficult to meet regulatory requirements such as KYC, AML, and FTC. This poses a clear risk and has been demonstrated in real-world cases of being used for money laundering, fundraising fraud, and illegal cross-border fund transfers. Given that US dollar stablecoins already dominate the crypto asset trading market, and the US has greater control or influence over major global blockchain operating systems, crypto asset trading platforms, and the exchange rate between crypto assets and the US dollar (as evidenced by the US's ability to trace, identify, freeze, and confiscate the crypto asset accounts of some institutions and individuals, and to punish or even arrest some crypto asset trading platforms and their leaders), China's development of a RMB stablecoin following the path of US dollar stablecoins not only fails to challenge the international status of US dollar stablecoins but may even turn the RMB stablecoin into a vassal of US dollar stablecoins. This could impact national tax collection, foreign exchange management, and cross-border capital flows, posing a serious threat to the sovereignty and security of the RMB and the stability of the monetary and financial system. Faced with a more acute and complex international situation, China should prioritize national security and exercise high vigilance and strict control over the trading and speculation of crypto assets, including stablecoins, rather than simply pursuing increased efficiency and reduced costs . It is necessary to accelerate the improvement of relevant regulatory policies and legal frameworks, focus on key links such as information flow and capital flow, strengthen information sharing among relevant departments, further enhance monitoring and tracking capabilities, and severely crack down on illegal and criminal activities involving crypto assets. Of course, while resolutely halting stablecoins and cracking down on virtual currency trading and speculation, we must also accelerate the innovative development and widespread application of the digital yuan at home and abroad, establish the international leading advantage of the digital yuan, forge a Chinese path for the development of digital currency, and actively explore the establishment of a fair, reasonable and secure new international monetary and financial system . Taking into account the above factors, it is not difficult to understand why China has chosen to resolutely curb virtual currencies, including stablecoins, while firmly promoting and accelerating the development of the digital yuan.
Share
PANews2025/12/06 15:08