Cryptocurrencies are here to stay but are unlikely to be considered a credible alternative to money anytime soon.
Cryptocurrencies are here to stay. Coin Market Cap,
a popular information site on all things crypto, lists close to 10,000
of them. The name suggests that they are currencies and most of them
are, in that they have a value and are accepted as a means of payment.
But they cannot be considered good alternatives to money for three main reasons.
First, they are not accepted universally.
You cannot use cryptocurrencies for daily expenses. It is unlikely you
will be able to pay with a cryptocurrency for holidays or flights, or to
buy a cinema ticket. You might be able to buy a house with bitcoin, for
example, but only in very few places. However, if you operate across
borders, cryptocurrencies become more interesting because they are very
convenient to use and do not need an intermediary.
Second, cryptocurrencies are not a good store of value. The price of bitcoin has been extremely volatile,
making it very inappropriate for trade or saving for a rainy day, or
for retirement. A second generation of cryptocurrencies, known as
stablecoins, has tried to solve this issue of high volatility by linking
the cryptocurrency to a basket of more conventional assets. Although
more stable in principle, these coins are not without their own set of problems.
Third, cryptocurrencies are private
currencies. There is no state behind them to either manage their price
(which is what central banks do by managing inflation) or to guarantee
payments will be honoured. Take the case of bitcoin, where the identity
of the inventor remains a mystery. We know that their intention was to
make only 21 million bitcoins available in total, after which no new
bitcoins will ever be minted. We are currently at 18.5
million and a decreasing number of coins are minted every day, such
that it will take another 120 years before the last bitcoin is minted.
The rationale for this might have been
that value comes from scarcity and therefore there must be a limited and
finite number of bitcoins, not unlike raw materials such as oil and
gold. But the decision of how many coins to supply to the market is not
based on economic criteria, but is arbitrary. This makes it
inappropriate for storing value or for payments, as the supply cannot be
used to manage the demand. Hence a cryptocurrency’s price is subject to
bubbles and hence be very volatile.
But if you are prepared to accept that
cryptocurrencies are more like an asset rather than a means of payment,
they offer another type of investment, albeit a very risky one. This
raises the question of the extent to which consumers need to be
protected from excessive risk-taking.
This is where the issue of regulation of cryptocurrencies arises. There are many questions to consider here
including, first and foremost, the classification of the various types
of crypto assets available. For now, these assets are very small in
terms of economic value and therefore something going wrong will still
not have a systemic effect.
The situation would be very different if
Facebook had been able to launch its Libra stablecoin. Facebook has 2.8
billion users today. If Libra had been created, Facebook would
automatically have had access to 2.8 billion clients, equivalent to
twice the population of China. Libra therefore did have the potential to
become immediately very popular. Coupled with the many doubts about the
way Facebook handles privacy issues, consumer protection would have
become very relevant.
Financial regulators were very quick to appreciate that. The European Council and Commission said in November 2019 that “no
global stablecoin arrangement should begin operation in the European
Union until the legal, regulatory and oversight challenges and risks
have been adequately identified and addressed”. This discouraged investors that were going to finance Facebook’s initiative, effectively killing the idea.
But if cryptocurrencies are not good money
and involve high risks, what is the craze about? Part of it is to do,
no doubt, with the thrill of gambling and the chance of big winnings. If
only I had invested in bitcoin… Part of it however, has to do with some
very exciting technology behind cryptocurrencies. This includes the
decentralised ledger that has allowed removal of intermediaries,
guaranteeing digital anonymity and providing unique identification. The
possibilities that this technology opens up are only starting to emerge –
and that includes recent central bank initiatives around the world to
launch their own digital currencies.
There remains a very big issue that makes
decentralised ledger cryptocurrencies problematic, that is just how
energy inefficient this technology can be. The global energy that
bitcoin mining consumes in a given year is greater than annual energy consumption of Argentina. There is still room for improvements in this cryptomania.
Bruegel
© Bruegel
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