Quote
“Many central banks are working on it; we are working on it, supporting them,” he said.
“And it might be that it is sooner than we think that there is a market and we need to be able to provide central bank digital currencies.”
The comments struck a curious note with many, coming just months after Carstens emphatically advised against issuing such digital currencies. In a speech in March, he listed various risks for banks considering doing so, arguing innovation should not come too fast.
“And it might be that it is sooner than we think that there is a market and we need to be able to provide central bank digital currencies.”
The comments struck a curious note with many, coming just months after Carstens emphatically advised against issuing such digital currencies. In a speech in March, he listed various risks for banks considering doing so, arguing innovation should not come too fast.
I think that the BIS's vision is entirely different from what this article is trying to suggest.
Their stance is probably still quite anti-decentralization, given their obvious affiliations with the world's central banks all over. Which means that what they are probably focusing on are blockchain projects (presumably, ones on a national scale) that utilize blockchain technology to facilitate faster international settlement, which is one of their primary functions.
I don't necessarily think that their stance has shifted significantly on currencies like bitcoin. While the article makes it seem like that they are eyeing BTC as potentially a reserve currency in the future, they are likely referring to some central bank issued digital currency. I.e., reserve accounts, except cryptographically secured.
