Mega Bank Holding held a media briefing on the 10th. Chairman Dong Ruilin revealed that to objectively compare the efficiency of bank remittances and blockchain transfers, Mega Bank last year mobilized 17 countries and 25 overseas branches for testing. Branch staff opened accounts at local legal exchanges and used the virtual asset trading platform BitoPro to trade USDT stablecoins, transferring 50 USDT back to Taiwan each time, and compared this with traditional bank cross-border wire transfers.
The results showed that stablecoins do have advantages for small-scale cross-border remittances, but for amounts exceeding NT$200,000 (about $7,000 USD), banks remain more cost-effective.
Mega Bank Experiment: Banks Are Cheaper for Transfers Over $7,000 USD
The test results indicated that in a scenario where “paying NT dollars in Taiwan and receiving local currency at the destination,” bank wire transfers generally arrive within about 2 hours, with fees ranging from NT$420 to NT$1,100, including a fixed postal fee of NT$300 and a remittance fee of 0.05% based on the transfer amount (minimum NT$120, maximum NT$800).
In comparison, stablecoin cross-border transfers can be completed within about 20 minutes, but require paying 2 USDT plus approximately 0.2% transaction fee. Since stablecoin fees are proportional to the amount transferred, they are cheaper for smaller amounts. However, for transfers over $7,000 USD, banks have fee caps, making their overall costs more competitive.
Dong Ruilin stated that the efficiency and convenience of stablecoins for small cross-border remittances are currently unmatched by banks. However, for large amounts and corporate clients, banks still hold a clear advantage.
Domestic Payment Banks Still Have Overwhelming Advantages
The tests also showed that within Taiwan’s domestic payment scenarios, stablecoins offer almost no advantage. For example, bank transfers typically arrive within 2 minutes, with no fee for intra-bank transfers and NT$15 for interbank transfers. Using stablecoins for transfers also takes about 2 minutes but requires paying 2 USDT plus transaction fees, making the overall cost higher.
Dong Ruilin pointed out that Taiwan’s payment system is already quite mature, so the question of “why issue New Taiwan Dollar stablecoins” is worth considering.
Unclear Use Cases for New Taiwan Dollar Stablecoins
Regarding whether Taiwan needs to launch a “New Taiwan Dollar stablecoin,” Dong Ruilin frankly said that specific use cases are still hard to imagine. He believes that if the central bank issues digital NT dollars (CBDC) as a settlement tool among banks, that might be more reasonable. But whether the market needs a new NT dollar stablecoin remains unclear. He emphasized that financial innovation should not be for innovation’s sake; if there’s no practical use, it risks repeating the development trajectory of NFTs.
Banks Have Little Incentive to Issue Stablecoins
The Financial Supervisory Commission is currently promoting the “Virtual Asset Service Law,” which plans for banks to serve as stablecoin issuers, requiring 100% fiat reserves to ensure full redemption. However, Dong Ruilin admitted that under this framework, issuing stablecoins is not attractive for banks. He explained that with 100% reserves, banks cannot generate investment income or pay interest, so the incentives for companies and the public to hold stablecoins are limited. If reserves are fully backed, they cannot pay any interest.
Three Responses to Mega Bank’s Cross-Border Stablecoin Experiment: Blockchain Isn’t That Expensive
Ethereum transaction fees are near zero; blockchain payments do not charge percentage fees
Regarding Mega Bank’s experiment, “stablecoin cross-border remittance can be completed within about 20 minutes, but requires paying 2 USDT plus approximately 0.2% transaction fee.” This fee rate is higher than the typical Ethereum withdrawal fee on centralized exchanges; on-chain transfers are actually much cheaper and faster.
Mega Bank used a centralized exchange’s Ethereum withdrawal channel. The fee structure for withdrawals on centralized exchanges is similar to banks; most of the time, the delay is due to the exchange’s processing. Transferring from the exchange wallet to the user’s wallet takes only a few seconds to 2-3 minutes. The main difference in time and cost depends on the blockchain network chosen. For example, BitoPro supports BSC and Polygon, with fees as low as $0.10 and faster speeds.
Blockchain withdrawal fees are usually paid in native tokens, with no fixed percentage of transfer value. For example, a fee might be 0.0001 ETH, which depends on transaction complexity rather than a percentage. Simple transfers are cheaper than complex DeFi interactions. Contrary to the common perception that Ethereum is expensive and slow, after multiple network upgrades, the average transaction fee on Ethereum by early March 2026 is around $0.09–$0.097.
(Ethereum fees hit a historic low! Less than $0.10 on average, with L2 scaling entering the “ultra-low fee era.”)
Wen Hongjun: Taiwan’s cross-border trade needs infrastructure
As for whether Taiwan needs to develop stablecoins, Wen Hongjun offered a different perspective from the “on-chain financial infrastructure” angle. As global on-chain finance and blockchain settlement become more widespread, Taiwanese companies may increasingly receive USD stablecoins from overseas partners for cross-border trade or digital services. At that point, converting on-chain USD stablecoins to off-chain NT dollars or using NT dollars as a unit of account and transaction medium on-chain will face infrastructure gaps.
Without NT dollar stablecoins, companies converting on-chain USD stablecoins to NT dollars often need multiple exchanges and currency conversions, resulting in “slippage”—additional costs and efficiency losses. Moreover, in the on-chain financial world, without tools denominated and stored in NT dollars, companies’ funds are mostly limited to holding non-interest-bearing USD stablecoins (like USDT, USDC), which limits capital efficiency.
Wen Hongjun noted that Japan and South Korea have already recognized this pain point and are actively promoting their own fiat-backed stablecoin systems and applications to meet future on-chain trade and digital asset market needs. He believes that if Taiwan delays establishing stablecoin regulations and issuance mechanisms, its competitiveness in the international on-chain financial system may gradually decline.
Pros and Cons of 100% Reserve Backing
Finally, Dong Ruilin mentioned, “If 100% reserves are required, banks will be unable to generate returns from their funds.” This is indeed a dilemma in blockchain finance. Regulators have consistently demanded over-collateralization of reserves to safeguard withdrawals. In contrast, banks typically only need to hold assets meeting reserve requirements, backed by “trust” and “deposit insurance.” But blockchain still adheres to the principle of “Don’t Trust, Verify.”
This article, “Mega Bank Chairman Dong Ruilin’s Test of Stablecoin Remittance, but Blockchain Costs Are Misunderstood,” first appeared on Chain News ABMedia.
