Countries are moving fast toward creating digital currencies. Or, so we hear from various surveys showing an increasing number of central banks making substantial progress towards having an official digital currency.
But, in fact, close to 80 percent of the world’s central banks are either not allowed to issue a digital currency under their existing laws, or the legal framework is not clear. To help countries make this assessment, we reviewed the central bank laws of 174 IMF members in a new IMF staff paper, and found out that only about 40 are legally allowed to issue digital currencies.
Not just a legal technicality
Any money issuance is a form of debt for the central bank, so it must
have a solid basis to avoid legal, financial and reputational risks for
the institutions. Ultimately, it is about ensuring that a significant
and potentially contentious innovation is in line with a central bank’s
mandate. Otherwise, the door is opened to potential political and legal
challenges.
Now, readers may be asking themselves: if issuing money is the most
basic function for any central bank, why then 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.
Building a case for digital currencies
To legally qualify as currency, a means of payment must be
considered as such by the country’s laws and be denominated in its
official monetary unit. A currency typically enjoys legal tender status, meaning debtors can pay their obligations by transferring it to creditors.
Therefore, legal tender status is usually only given to means of
payment that can be easily received and used by the majority of the
population. That is why banknotes and coins are the most common form of
currency.
To use digital currencies, digital infrastructure—laptops,
smartphones, connectivity—must first be in place. But governments cannot
impose on their citizens to have it, so granting legal tender status to
a central bank digital instrument might be challenging. Without the
legal tender designation, achieving full currency status could be
equally challenging. Still, many means of payments widely used in
advanced economies are neither legal tender nor currency (e.g.,
commercial book money).
Uncharted waters?
Digital currencies can take different forms. Our analysis focuses on
the legal implications of the main concepts being considered by various
central banks. For instance, where it would be “account-based” or
“token-based.” The first means digitalizing the balances currently held
on accounts in a central banks’ books; while the second refers to
designing a new digital token not connected to the existing accounts
that commercial banks hold with a central bank.
From a legal perspective, the difference is between centuries-old
traditions and uncharted waters. The first model is as old as central
banking itself, having been developed in the early 17th
century by the Exchange Bank of Amsterdam—considered the precursor of
modern central banks. Its legal status under public and private law in
most countries is well developed and understood. Digital tokens, in
contrast, have a very short history and unclear legal status. Some
central banks are allowed to issue any type of currency (which could
include digital forms), while most (61 percent) are limited to only
banknotes and coins.
Another important design feature is whether the 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, being therefore their traditional
“clients.” Allowing private citizens’ accounts, as in retail banking,
would be a tectonic shift to how central banks are organized and would
require significant legal changes. Only 10 central banks in our sample
would currently be allowed to do so.
A challenging endeavor
The overlapping of these and other design features can create very
complex legal challenges—and could 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, property, contracts, and
insolvency laws; payments systems; privacy and data protection; most
fundamentally, preventing money laundering and terrorism financing. If
they are to be “the next milestone in the evolution of money,”
central bank digital currencies need robust legal foundations that
ensure smooth integration to the financial system, credibility and broad
acceptance by countries’ citizens and economic agents.
IMF
© International Monetary Fund
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article