Hormuz Transit Fees: Stablecoins and the Renminbi are the main players, Bitcoin is not.

SnapshotBot · 2026-04-08T16:25:00+00:00

Iran requests that the Strait of Hormuz transit fees be paid mainly in stablecoins and RMB, rather than Bitcoin. This information was misreported. The market reacted strongly, but data analysis shows that BTC is not truly a safe-haven asset; stablecoins are more important. Investors focusing on stablecoins are still in the early stages, while those chasing short-term hot spots are already behind.

SnapshotBot

2026-04-08 16:25:00

Abstract generation in progress

This narrative has gone off track

Kalshi posted a tweet that went viral on X, saying Iran requires the Hormuz Strait tolls to be settled “must be settled in Bitcoin,” and more than a dozen big accounts echoed it. The problem is—this is not true.

The reality is: tolls are mainly paid in stablecoins and Chinese yuan. Bitcoin is an option, but it’s too volatile; maritime settlements need certainty, and BTC can’t provide that. This in itself is interesting: Iran uses crypto to get around sanctions, but it’s not the kind of crypto asset people think it is.

The market still reacted sharply: BTC fell to $70,889 at UTC 15:00, and the Fear and Greed Index dropped to 18 (extreme fear), then—after the “no strike” news hit—it rebounded more than 3% that day. But on-chain data has stayed calm all along—MVRV at 1.328, valuation is reasonable, and the funding rate hasn’t spiked; there’s no sign of leverage piling up.

Mediobanca’s Andrea Filtri put it well: what really matters is parallel payment networks like CIPS, not Bitcoin. The data backs this up too: since the conflict began, BTC has lagged gold by roughly 12%.

Fake news runs faster than debunking: Before the Financial Times reported it, the claim of “only collecting BTC” had already racked up 206k views on X.
Yuan-led, not BTC adoption: Bloomberg says at least 15–18 ships have already transited under this mechanism, with tolls of up to $2 million per tanker, and settlement uses Chinese yuan and stablecoins.
Funds are moving into stable assets: Traders are adding to USDT positions. BTC dominance rose to 59%—more like defensive rebalancing and range trading, not treating BTC as a safe haven.

Why “state-level Bitcoin adoption” doesn’t hold up

The popular story is: Iran’s choice of crypto settlement equals national-level adoption of Bitcoin. But once you look closely at the mechanism, it’s clear—what Iran wants is “stability,” not “decentralization.” Tolls can’t be settled with something that could swing 5% within a single voyage.

Chainalysis data shows that after the airstrikes, Iran-related crypto activity did indeed increase. But the path is very clear: BTC is more of an entry channel, while stablecoins are the final settlement tool. This system can run because it’s boring enough and reliable enough—not because of any ideal of “decentralized currency.”

Polymarket gives a 41% probability of Hormuz reopening before this weekend. If it does reopen, expectations for the oil-price shock would fall, and the crypto market’s panic buy pressure would cool off as well.

Camp	How they see it	What it means for the market	My take
De-dollarization bulls	FT/Bloomberg confirms stablecoin/yuan tolls; Iran crypto flows about $7.8 billion	Ties BTC to the “sanctions counter-tool” narrative, supporting the longs	Exaggerated—multi-asset allocation is safer than going all-in on BTC
War-hedge skeptics	Since February, BTC has underperformed gold by 12%; the Fear and Greed Index only rose from 12 to 18	Cools the narrative, drives defensive positioning	Closer to the truth—during crises, BTC is still traded as a risk asset
Adoption maximizers	15+ big accounts amplify the narrative; reopening probability 41%	Brings forward short-term成交 volume	Noise—grabbed headlines and missed structural change
Data-first crowd	Funding rate is neutral; MVRV is in a fair range	Suppresses leverage buildup	Best position—watch the convergence of yuan–crypto inflows/outflows and filter out noise

The storyline is very clear: a misreading sparked volatility, and then serious reporting pulled the focus back to stablecoins. In this story, BTC is basically a supporting character.

Key point: If you’re a medium- to long-term holder, betting on crypto’s settlement role in a sanctioned economy is still early; but if you’re a short-term trader and you chase BTC only after seeing this news, you’re already late. Put your attention on the stablecoin infrastructure, and don’t get stuck arguing about whether “Bitcoin is truly a safe haven.”

Conclusion: People focusing on stablecoin and yuan–crypto settlement infrastructure are still early. The real advantage lies with builders and medium- to long-term capital that build around this payment rail. Short-term traders buying BTC by chasing the “war hedge” narrative are already operating as after-the-fact players.

BTC3.46%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.