Legally speaking, is digital money really money?


Thursday, January 14, 2021 / 4:53 PM / by Catalina Margulis and Arthur Rossi, IMFBlog / Header Image Credit: China Daily

Countries are rapidly moving towards the creation of digital currencies. Or, thus, we hear various surveys showing that a growing number of central banks are making substantial progress towards an official digital currency.

But, in fact, nearly 80% of the world’s central banks are not authorized to issue a digital currency under their existing laws, or the legal framework is unclear.

To help countries make this assessment, we looked at the central bank laws of 174 IMF members in a new IMF staff document and found that only about 40 are legally authorized to issue digital currencies.

Proshare Nigeria Pvt.  Ltd.

Not just legal technicality

Any issuance of money is a form of debt for the central bank, so it must have a solid basis to avoid legal, financial and reputational risks for institutions. Ultimately, it’s about ensuring that a meaningful and potentially contentious innovation is consistent with a central bank’s mandate. Otherwise, the door is open to possible political and legal challenges.

Now readers may ask: if issuing money is the most fundamental function of any central bank, then why is a digital form of money so different? The answer requires a detailed analysis of the functions and powers of each central bank, as well as the implications of different designs of digital instruments.

Build a case for digital currencies

To be legally qualified as currency, a means of payment must be considered as such by the legislation of the country and be denominated in its official currency unit. A currency generally benefits legal tender status, which means that debtors can pay off their obligations by transferring them to creditors.

Therefore, legal tender status is generally only granted to means of payment that can be easily received and used by the majority of the population. This is why banknotes and coins are the most common form of money.

To use digital currencies, a digital infrastructure – laptops, smartphones, connectivity – must first be in place. But governments cannot force their citizens to have it, so granting legal tender status to a digital central bank instrument could be difficult. Without the legal tender designation, achieving full currency status could be just as difficult. However, many payment methods widely used in advanced economies are neither legal tender nor currency (for example, commercial accounting currency).

Unexplored waters?

Digital currencies can take different forms. Our analysis focuses on the legal implications of the main concepts considered by various central banks. For example, where it would be “account-based” or “token-based”. The first is to digitize the balances currently held in the accounts of a central bank; while the second refers to the design of a new digital token not connected to existing accounts that commercial banks hold with a central bank.

From a legal standpoint, the difference is between centuries-old traditions and uncharted waters. The first model is as old as the central bank itself, having been developed in the early 17e century by the Amsterdam Exchange Bank-considered the forerunner of modern central banks. Its legal status in public and private law in most countries is well developed and understood. Digital tokens, on the other hand, have a very short history and an unclear legal status. Some central banks are allowed to issue any type of currency (which could include digital forms), while most (61%) are limited to banknotes and coins.

Another important design feature is whether digital currency is to be used only at the “wholesale” level, by financial institutions, or could be accessible to the general public (“retail”). Commercial banks hold accounts with their central bank, so being to allow accounts of private citizens, such as in retail banking, would be a tectonic shift in the organization of central banks and would require significant legal changes. Only 10 central banks in our sample would currently be allowed to do so.

Proshare Nigeria Pvt.  Ltd.

A difficult business

The overlap of these and other design features can create very complex legal challenges and may well influence the decisions made by each monetary authority.

The creation of central bank digital currencies will also raise legal issues in many other areas, including tax, real estate, contract and insolvency laws; payment systems; privacy and data protection; more fundamentally, the prevention of money laundering and the financing of terrorism. If they are to be “the next step in the evolution of money,” central bank digital currencies need a solid legal foundation that ensures smooth integration into the financial system, credibility and broad acceptance by citizens and agents. economic countries.

Proshare Nigeria Pvt.  Ltd.

Related news

1.
Anchorage obtains the first national crypto-bank charter of the United States

2.
BIS: central bank group to assess potential cases of central bank digital currencies

3.
Central bank digital currencies: 4 questions and answers

4.
IMF takes stock of digital currencies

5.
From stablecoins to central bank digital currencies

6.
Digital currencies: the rise of stablecoins

7.
Why central bank digital currencies will destroy cryptocurrencies

8.
Cryptocurrencies, Digital Currencies, and Distributed Ledger Technologies: What Are We Learning?

9.
Bank of Russia considers premature to allow digital currencies, warns of ICO risks

ten. SEC Warns Against Investments in Cryptocurrencies and Other Virtual or Digital Currencies

Proshare Nigeria Pvt.  Ltd.

Proshare Nigeria Pvt.  Ltd.

Proshare Nigeria Pvt.  Ltd.