Thomas Jordan, Chairman of the Governing Board of SNB, discussed the pros and cons of the issuance of digital token money by private players and central banks. He highlighted that a variety of interesting potential uses exist for digital tokens, including the privately issued digital tokens in the form of stablecoins and the state-issued digital token money for financial market participants. While presenting the SNB stance on digital forms of money, including views on the Facebook-affiliated Libra, he outlined the regulatory and financial stability challenges posed by digital money, thus explaining why SNB remains critical about the idea of broad access to digital central bank money.
Mr. Jordan highlighted that it is important that to understand the characteristics and implications of these various tokens, as they could influence the SNB mandate. He pointed out that crypto tokens are more like speculative investment instruments than "good" money in terms of their characteristics. Users typically describe money as "good" if it has a stable value over time, is broadly accepted, and enables efficient payments. Given these parameters, it seems unlikely that crypto tokens will be widely used as money in Switzerland; however, the picture may be different for stablecoins. He added that Libra and the Swiss franc stablecoin represent only a small part of the spectrum of possible stablecoins. While discussing the privately issued digital tokens, he highlighted that the Facebook-affiliated Libra can be classified as a stablecoin, as its value is supposed to be kept stable against a basket of official currencies. However, there is no guarantee that Libra will be converted—proportionally and at any time—into the currencies in the basket. Libra is thus its own unit of account and a private currency.
He opines that stablecoins hold greater promise for widespread deployment as a payment instrument and store of value than the crypto tokens. This is why it is important to analyze and classify stablecoins rigorously from a regulatory and monetary policy perspective, said Mr. Jordan. On the regulatory front, it is essential to have clarity about the economic function of stablecoins. Stablecoins may have the characteristics of a bank deposit or a privately issued banknote. This would be the case for the Swiss franc stablecoin, were it to be used widely for cashless payments or as a store of value, as it would effectively become a substitute for Swiss franc bank deposits. The issuers of such Swiss franc stablecoins would take on functions similar to those of a bank—all the more so if they were to use the funds collected to finance risky, long-term projects and engage in maturity transformation. If the economic function of stablecoins is comparable to that of bank deposits, their issuers should have to play by the same rules as banks.
The principle of regulating by activity rather than by technology (same business, same risks, same rules) must apply here. However, not all stablecoins are directly comparable with bank deposits, particularly if a token is used more for investment purposes. Certain stablecoins could, therefore, conceivably be issued without the issuer holding a banking license. FINMA already classifies tokens according to their function and the regulatory treatment is different for each category. Whether or not a banking license is required, stablecoin issuers must abide by certain regulations, just like any other financial market participant. These range from investor and data protection to rules on combating money laundering and terrorism financing. Thus, stablecoins present many regulatory challenges, which in turn require close cooperation between various authorities. This is particularly true of cross-border projects like Libra.
Finally, Mr. Jordan stated that SNB remains critical about the idea of broad access to digital central bank money. This is because "broad access to digital central bank money would call the existing two-tier banking system into question." Instead of being the "banker to the banks, as it is today," SNB would act like a commercial bank, thus taking on the role played by the private sector. Broad access to digital central bank money could also pose a threat to financial stability. Switching over from bank deposits to digital central bank money is easier than changing to physical banknotes. In a crisis situation, this could increase the risk of a bank run. Thus, the implementation of this proposal would have far-reaching consequences not just for banks, but also for the entire financial system. These fundamental concerns would argue against opening up access to digital central bank money to all households and companies. Furthermore, cashless payments in Switzerland are already reliable, secure, and efficient and the system is continuously being updated and refined. So from that standpoint, too, access to digital central bank money for all households and companies, whether in the form of Swiss franc tokens or sight deposits, would bring virtually no advantages. He emphasized that SNB is closely following the developments in this area and is actively involved in the debate, not least through its future participation in the BIS Innovation Hub.
Related Link: Speech
Keywords: Europe, Switzerland, Banking, Securities, Digital Token Money, Stablecoins, Crypto Assets, Financial Stability, Libra, Digital Currency, Fintech, Regtech, SNB
Previous ArticleIAIS Consults on Revisions to IAIS Supervisory Material
BIS published the September issue of the Quarterly Review, which contains special features that analyze the rapid rise in equity funding for financial technology firms, the effectiveness of policy measures in response to pandemic, and the evolution of international banking.
The Basel Committee for Banking Supervision (BCBS) met in September 2021 and reviewed climate-related financial risks, discussed impact of digitalization, and welcomed efforts by the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation to develop a common set of sustainability reporting standards
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued a Cease and Desist Order against MUFG Union Bank for deficiencies in technology and operational risk governance.
The European Commission (EC) published the Delegated Regulation 2021/1527 with regard to the regulatory technical standards for the contractual recognition of write down and conversion powers.
In a response to the questions posed by a member of the European Parliament, the President Christine Lagarde highlighted the commitment of the European Central Bank (ECB) to an ambitious climate-related action plan along with a roadmap, which was published in July 2021.
The Single Resolution Board (SRB) published a Communication on the application of regulatory technical standard provisions on prior permission for reducing eligible liabilities instruments as of January 01, 2022.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) published a new set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) to provide guidance to authorized deposit-taking institutions on the interpretation of APS 120, the prudential standard on securitization.
The French Prudential Control and Resolution Authority (ACPR) published the corrective version of the RUBA taxonomy Version 1.0.1, which will come into force from the decree of January 31, 2022.
The European Commission (EC) announced that Nordea Bank has signed a guarantee agreement with the European Investment Bank (EIB) Group to support the sustainable transformation of businesses in the Nordics.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) published a new set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) to clarify the regulatory capital treatment of investments in the overseas deposit-taking and insurance subsidiaries.