US senators summon Mark Zuckerberg over Meta stablecoin plans, citing monopoly risks

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is once again under fire from U.S. lawmakers over its ambitions to launch a Meta stablecoin.

Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) have sent a scathing letter to CEO Mark Zuckerberg, demanding transparency on the company’s latest stablecoin efforts, a move they warn could threaten financial privacy and market competition.

The inquiry follows reports that Meta is in talks with cryptocurrency firms to integrate a Meta stablecoin across its platforms, reigniting fears similar to those that doomed its failed Libra (later Diem) project in 2019.

With over 3.5 billion daily users, Meta’s dominance in social media could translate into unprecedented control over digital payments, raising red flags for regulators.

“A dangerous power grab”: Lawmakers warn of Meta stablecoin risks

In their letter, Warren and Blumenthal accused Meta of attempting to “consolidate economic power” through a Meta stablecoin, which they argue could:

• Exploit consumer data for surveillance-based advertising.

• Undermine competition by locking users into Meta’s ecosystem.

• Weaken U.S. monetary policy by privatizing a segment of the money supply.

“Big Tech controlling its own private currency isn’t innovation—it’s a monopoly power grab,” Warren stated. “A Meta stablecoin would give the company even more tools to exploit user data and crush competitors.”

The senators’ concerns are amplified by Meta’s history of controversies, from privacy scandals to accusations of anticompetitive behavior. Their letter demands Zuckerberg disclose:

• Which crypto firms Meta has consulted.

• Whether it plans to issue its own Meta stablecoin.

• If it has lobbied against legislation restricting Big Tech’s role in stablecoins.

From Libra to Diem to Meta stablecoin: A troubled history

Meta’s first foray into digital currency, the Libra project, collapsed in 2019 after global regulators feared it could destabilize financial systems. Despite rebranding as Diem, the initiative was sold off in 2022 amid bipartisan opposition.

Now, with talks of a Meta stablecoin revival, experts question whether the company has learned from past mistakes—or if it’s doubling down on a risky strategy.

“Stablecoins should be transparent and decentralized, not controlled by a single corporation with a track record of abusing user trust,” said crypto policy analyst Mark Johnson. “A Meta stablecoin could centralize too much power in one entity.”

Regulatory showdown looms as Senate weighs new crypto rules

The senators’ probe coincides with a critical Senate vote advancing the GENIUS Act, which could pave the way for Big Tech firms like Meta to issue stablecoins. Warren slammed the bill, arguing it would “bless corporate corruption” rather than protect consumers.

Meanwhile, Meta has publicly denied developing a Meta stablecoin. In a May post on X, communications director Andy Stone stated, “There is no Meta stablecoin in development.” But lawmakers remain skeptical, pressing for concrete answers by June 17.

Why a Meta stablecoin could reshape finance—for better or worse

Proponents argue that a Meta stablecoin could streamline payments for billions of users, especially in underserved regions. Critics, however, fear it would:

• Deepen surveillance capitalism by linking financial transactions to Meta’s ad-targeting systems.

• Create systemic risks if the stablecoin faces a crisis (similar to TerraUSD’s collapse in 2022).

• Erode trust in decentralized cryptocurrencies by centralizing control.

As the debate heats up, one thing is clear: Meta’s ambitions won’t go unchallenged. Whether the Meta stablecoin becomes a reality—or another doomed experiment—depends on how regulators, competitors, and the public respond.

Meta has yet to comment on the senators’ latest demands.