Central Bank Digital Currencies - Part 2 of the "Virtual Currencies" EP report of July 2018 — Steemit

Central Bank Digital Currencies - Part 2 of the "Virtual Currencies" EP report of July 2018

in busy •  4 months ago

The Crypto-financial Ecosystem

This is the second part of the analysis of a recent report authored by a German think-tank and published by the European Parliament.

Why is it important to analyze it, why should you care? Because such reports shape the understanding of political decision-makers and influence their attitude and position with respect to this new domain of blockchain and cryptocurrencies. If advisers and experts from think-tanks have an outdated, partial view, they will provide incomplete information that may lead to sub-optimal political and regulatory outcomes.

Because we have in Steemit / Busy a platform for public expression, it is ultimately in our hands to complete the views of politicians and regulators with the most up-to-date information concerning the rapid evolution of the blockchain and crypto space, what I called in the previous post the Cryptoverse.



The report authors correctly identify excessive volatility as one of the major factors hindering broad adoption of cryptocurrencies. They dedicate several paragraphs to analyzing its causes and trying to predict whether and how it might recede in the future.

Price volatility in cryptocurrencies is all the more upsetting for "mainstream people" (thus slowing adoption outside the circle of enthusiasts) as traditional risk management techniques from classic finance do not seem to function well when applied to bitcoin & co.:

"Standard empirical models have difficulties describing the behaviour of volatility of Bitcoin and other crypto assets.

However one positive aspect is identified, going forward, provided volatility is tamed somehow:

We could even go from the current "lender of last resort" paradigm to a "system of last resort" where cryptocurrencies work as a fall-back option in case the traditional currency system should fail, just as e.g. the US-Dollar has replaced failing currencies in some countries such as Zimbabwe and Venezuela in the past. However, as discussed above, so far there are severe limitations on Bitcoin to fill such a role with respect to scalability"

I do posit that SBD on the steem blockchain with not face the same scalability issues as Bitcoin when replacing government fiat in, say Venezuela but that assumption needs testing.

Just above there is a noteworthy related remark:

[...] cryptocurrency investments could work as a hedge for other investment risk and play a productive role in overall risk management

Indeed, it made me think of the "0.1%" strategy I've heard some Canadian asset managers were discussing (maybe even applying?). The idea is that crypto being (till now at least) completely uncorrelated with traditional asset prices, parking 0.1% of the total holdings in a basket (heavy on BTC) could play the role of "systemic hedge", in case of a global financial meltdown.

The report spells out a very powerful idea:

cryptocurrencies could discipline financial institutions and central banks, which could ultimately lead to more financial stability.

The importance of sowing this seed in the minds of (specifically) European policy makers should not be underestimated. Indeed, crypto provides, for the first time since the beginning of the Bretton Woods era, a grassroots competitor to the monopolistic, crisis- and abuse-prone financial system.

Steem the Unnamed

In Part 1 I opined that probably the biggest oversight of the report was to implicitly equate "crypto investment in ICOs" with "fiat investment in ICOs" thus spurring unwarranted and potentially harmful "protective" reflexes from regulators.

Here in Part 2 lies what might count as the best recommendation in the report, which also makes a direct reference to Steemit without naming it:

Regulation should be careful to account for diversity and evolution in a rapidly changing environment to not unnecessarily restrain wealth creation. The market of distributed ledger technologies is very diverse. Business models include not only currencies but range from "good content” gratification tokens in social media

i.e. STEEM ...

... across automated digital contracts and ways to manage intellectual property, towards pension schemes. In a rapidly changing market, where new services and tokens are offered daily, regulators must be careful to avoid unduly restricting welfare enhancing innovations.

This display of a clearly positive inclination toward the Cryptoverse on the part of the authors is paired for good measure with an indirect scolding of the German regulators in the last paragraph of this chapter:

Another example of potential overregulation is the German financial services supervisory authority (BaFin) classifying Bitcoin as a financial instrument (unit of account, to be exact) and not as a currency. Therefore, the strict Banking Act (Kreditwesengesetz) applies, effectively creating an entry hurdle which reduces cryptocurrency demand and liquidity and ultimately inhibits further mass adoption of cryptocurrencies.

Mass adoption of cryptocurrencies is thus seen as a positive development to be encouraged by their classification as currencies (rather than as financial instruments). This is a serious "leg up" for the Cryptoverse with European political decision makers.

Central Bank Digital Currencies

The 6th chapter is probably the most daring - and therefore controversial - of the report. It basically supports the thesis of the Vollgeld ("Monnaie Pleine") proponents, most active in Switzerland (such as @orlandumike here on Steemit).

What they have said for a long time: that the rent-seeking behavior and risks imposed by commercial banks are not an acceptable compromise anymore in exchange for broader access to credit. That the fractional banking system should be overhauled, people should be allowed to have an account directly with the Central Bank and the commercial banks should work harder to find other sources of funding rather than exploiting cheap deposits from ordinary citizens.

The report boldly ventures into exploring this possibility using Central Bank-issued cryptocurrencies as a practical implementation vehicle and conclude that, but for the disruption it will cause to the present-day financial system, it could work!

If a CBDC were introduced and rose to prevalence, the present fractional reserve system could evolve into a full reserve system, or at least leave considerably less room for commercial banks to create money out of thin air and to use sight deposits as a source of funding.

While I agree that currently commercial banks enjoy too much power and abuse it at regular intervals, I have three qualms with such a development.

First, the authors fail to convincingly account for commercial banks' role in providing fine-grained risk management. Extending credit to individuals and business relies on a poorly scalable activity, credit-risk assessment, for which commercial banks employ lots of people and systems. Credit risk management could become a lot more efficient and a lot less "people intensive" thanks to blockchain technologies as well, but this won't happen tomorrow. Closely managing the transition to avoid commercial banks collapsing and starving the society of credit before alternatives are able to take over will be a challenge

Second, concentrating the power enjoyed today by commercial banks in the Central Bank (run by difficult to incentivize civil servants), on top of the huge power Central Banks already enjoy, does not appear as entirely without risks either (even if the risks would be different).

Third, advancing such an aggressive hypothesis in a serious report at this point in time, when the opponent has the strength of the current financial system, is in my opinion a tactical mistake Sun Tzu would have disapproved of.

This rather surprising chapter ends with what can be seen as vindicating the original vision of Satoshi Nakamoto:

As the fractional reserve character of the current banking system can be a major source of instability, such a disruptive change due to the introduction of a CBDC is not necessarily a bad development, but instead could finally pave the way for a more stable financial system.


Overall, this is a very good report, thoroughly researched and providing several very useful insights and recommendations to political decision makers. By design, it has the shortcoming of heavily stressing the financial and monetary aspects of the emerging blockchain world and not providing a balanced view of the many other aspects of society which blockchain technology can improve, e.g. "sovereign identity" and its use in education, or the legal system through blockchain-recorded evidence. But this partial view has explicitly been requested by the EP.

My main issue with it is in its strategic choice of using the CDBC as the intellectual spearhead of the report (thus indirectly steering the discussion in this direction). This risks stirring trouble by alerting the powerful lobby of the financial industry and leading to an even greater hostility of banks toward cryptocurrencies. When one is weak, it doesn't look wise to pick a fight with a stronger adversary ...

I am convinced the most important feature of cryptocurrencies is their potential of decreasing transaction friction thus increasing overall economic and social activity, and with it citizens' prosperity and welfare.

I would have preferred the report emphasizes this aspect. Increasing financial stability through a CDBC might be interesting but it pales when compared with the possibility of unleashing a sea of new value-adding (both "economic" and "social" value) activities (in effect: new jobs) that are currently uneconomical, constrained by the monolithic and monopolistic nature of fiat money.

If you appreciate my posts, please approve @lux-witness as a witness!

If you read this post first, here is the "Part 1":

Other posts on blockchain technology that you might enjoy:

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I am making a list of people who actively read, react to or upvote comments on their articles.
This list will be everyone that I follow (my following list).
You are actively engaged in your comment section and upvote the usefull feedback, so I have added you to this list.
I hope this will bring you and the others like you good fortune! keep it up!

If you know someone who you think should be added to this list please let me know in the comment section under the article in the link below, so far I have found around 30 authors that are worth commenting on after reading.



Thank you. Thing is, when you reach around 300 people you follow, it becomes hard - there's simply too many posts and I can't read them all and then I'm sad because I feel I let down the people I'm following by "skipping" some of their articles ...


Yes i havent really thought about that, i guess when i hit 200 I'll figure something out (deleting the least active before adding a new one or something)
Thanks for the feedback, planning ahead is always a good thing.

I agree,

Cryptocurrency may just find its place in the new world order as a means of getting rid of processing and delayed transactions apparent with current currency transactions. Reducing the friction here seems like a key component to its power.

In addition, some of the points you made about it serving as a financial stability tool was eye opening for me.

Thanks for the great content!


You are welcome, glad you found it useful. The idea that crypto could represent "competition" for the banking and financial system - thus descouraging the most egregious abuses of the latter has been aired in blockchain / crypto space quite often. But here it appears in a document bearing the EP logo ... I think it is relevant.

I think if in the future, some fusion-of-central-banking-and-crypto will happen, it's like:

-Hey I invented the wheel do you want to make a deal?




According to the report, the Swedish Riksbank (Central Bank) is already openly discussing "e-krona" and the interim report of the working group has found "no major obstacles to the introduction of an e-krona" with respect to the functioning of the monetary policy and payment markets.

The specific benefit of a CDBC is that, absent cash (which can function as a floor of 0% interest), it will be much easier for Central Banks to impose negative interest rates in a recession. A bit like extending to the whole population what the ECB has been doing to the deposits of commercial banks during the economic slump


That sounds like a step in the right direction, but to be honest I have to read up on this to make a proper statement. But thanks for sharing this information it makes me happy to hear that a monetary reform is being openly discussed.



in the end will be one winner the humans


salut Sorin , is obosit , ce se mai intampla ce e nou , oare sa facem un topic unde sa ne adunam cu idei


Ideile sunt intotdeauna binevenite pe Steemit ! I'm teeming with ideas ! ... :-) Incerc sa ma concentrez pe a realiza cele care mi se par cele mai utile si mai usor de realizat ("low hanging fruit") :-)


avem crestere economica :))


Did you watch the terminator movies?

You got a 10.92% upvote from @postpromoter courtesy of @sorin.cristescu!

Want to promote your posts too? Check out the Steem Bot Tracker website for more info. If you would like to support the development of @postpromoter and the bot tracker please vote for @yabapmatt for witness!

You have recieved a free upvote from minnowpond, Send 0.1 -> 10 SBD with your post url as the memo to recieve an upvote from up to 100 accounts!

Nice detailed information.
Thank for post it!

Congratulations @sorin.cristescu! You have completed the following achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of upvotes received

Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
SteemitBoard and the Veterans on Steemit - The First Community Badge.

Do you like SteemitBoard's project? Then Vote for its witness and get one more award!

Your post had been curated by the @buildawhale team and mentioned here:


Keep up the good work and original content, everyone appreciates it!