How stablecoins are revolutionising property investment

Written by Barry James, Moneybrain Global Ambassador

According to global real estate agents, Savills, the total value of property is in excess of $379trillion globally and just over 75% is in the form of residential as opposed to commercial property. In 2024, the global market for real estate tokenisation using blockchain and stablecoins was worth $3.8 billion and is estimated to potentially reach $26 billion by 2030. Stablecoins are increasingly being used in many different transactions as a form of payment; indeed, in Q2 of 2024, stablecoins amounted to $8.5 trillion in transaction volume - bigger than Mastercard, Visa and PayPal. A factor driving the use of blockchain-powered stablecoins is that land registries are keen to reduce the time it takes to change the title of ownership when a property is bought and sold. According the UK Government, it can presently take up to 180 days for the title on a property to be changed.

Source: Gov.UK

The recent developments in Jersey, where property investment is being re-imagined through blockchain and stablecoin infrastructure, highlights a broader global momentum. There, digital assets are no longer abstract cryptocurrencies but are being tied directly to tangible, high-value assets such as homes, estates and land. In this emerging model, real estate is not bought and sold in months through lawyers and intermediaries but in minutes via peer-to-peer protocols and tokenised representations. The logic is undoubtedly compelling since, frustratingly, traditional real estate transactions are slow, costly and often exclusive. Tokenising property debt and breaking it down into digital units offers the possibility of fractional ownership, faster liquidity and global participation. Stablecoins that are pegged on a one-to-one basis to a fiat currency (such as $, £ or €) offer the ability to make a real estate transaction process to be executed much faster - especially if title deeds are digitised as well. For property owners, this could mean releasing equity in real time and, for investors, accessing markets that were once gated by high capital requirements.

Another factor that would encourage the use of stablecoins in real estate transactions is that stablecoins offer the potential to make programmable payments. The Solicitors Regulation Authority in the UK has recently issued a consultation paper questioning whether lawyers should be allowed to hold clients’ money, even in separate segregated client accounts. As reported in the Law Gazette, Paul Bennett, partner at specialist professional services adviser, Bennett Briegal, stated: “The major benefit for law firms is the entire risk matrix of the firm is much simplified: for anti-money laundering, for internal and external fraud, for cyber fraud and human error… meaning the risks are much lower.” So, instead of a lawyer obtaining access to a clients’ money, it is possible for the funds to remain under the control of the buyer of real estate. The buyer could simply hold stablecoins, and these stablecoins could be released via a smart contract once the title has been exchanged. Therefore, rather than the lawyer maintaining access to a client’s monies, the payment for the property, any relevant real estate taxes (stamp duty) legal fees and third party estate agent/relator costs could collectively be programmed and paid in almost real time - with no delays. Furthermore, assuming the stablecoin can be held in a separate wallet to earn interest, the buyer of the property would earn a return on the monies up until the date the real estate had been purchased. No more client reconciliations, no more discussions as to how safe the money held by the lawyer is and also what interest the lawyer pays. But this also begs the question that, should the lawyers not have access to client’s cash, would the lawyers’ professional indemnity insurance costs fall as a result? Hence, smart contracts are there to enable automated compliance, escrow and settlement processes, whereby replacing the inefficiencies of legacy systems with code. Certainly, if executed properly, this could democratise access to real estate markets globally, particularly in jurisdictions where financial infrastructure is either fragile or exclusionary. Moreover, by tokenising debt to purchase or develop a property, it potentially offers first time buyers a step onto the property ladder.

Alexander House once completed (Jersey)

Source: Moneybrain

The Jersey case study illustrates these benefits in action. There, tokenised luxury real estate, such as Alexander House, is being made investable not only for high-net-worth buyers but for a wider pool of investors through fractional ownership. Tokenisation also enables capital rich, income poor homeowners a means by which to access some of the equity locked up in their homes. This is achieved by selling a % of their property to a third party without the obligation to pay compound interest, something which many equity release products currently resort to. However, despite the potential, there are serious challenges and unanswered questions. Tokenising real estate is not as simple as digitising a JPEG, for example. It involves legal ownership, regulatory recognition and enforceable rights - all of which vary widely by jurisdiction. That is: who holds legal title? What happens if the token platform fails? And, can courts recognise smart contracts in disputes? Tenant disputes, maintenance issues and opaque landlords do not vanish simply because the asset is digitised. Moreover, even the use of stablecoins, often lauded for their efficiency, is not without risk. Whilst they offer stability in price, they continue to remain dependent on underlying trust in issuers and reserve transparency. Regulatory oversight is also still evolving and the failure of a major stablecoin, whether through mismanagement or lack of reserve backing, could ripple through tokenised ecosystems with severe consequences. Furthermore, tokenisation of real estate raises important socio-economic questions. Could speculative trading of fractional properties drive up housing prices and deepen inequality and will the technology enable more people to own homes or turn homes into volatile financial instruments for those who already own too many?

Jersey may be a test bed, but the implications are global. If digital pounds backed by property become a norm, similar models could unfold in cities from Dubai to Lagos to Los Angeles. Yet this moment calls for careful design, not just disruption. Tokenised real estate and stablecoin financing must be grounded in sound regulation, ethical frameworks and real-world utility, not merely technological zeal. The fusion of blockchain and bricks is more than a finance story, it is a story about the type of financial future we want to build. One that could radically expand access and opportunity, or one that might replicate old imbalances in shiny new wrappers. And the tools are powerful. What remains to be seen is how wisely we wield them. The union of stablecoins and tokenised real estate proposes a radical shift in buying and selling property, global access and fractional ownership. Yet it also introduces new layers of volatility, governance and technical risk. Investors and regulators must consider not only the convenience of digital money, but also how well the underlying asset is managed, how liquid the market truly is and whether token issuers maintain robust financial and operational transparency.