#crypto

11 04, 2022

Karen Petrou: Why the Gerontocracy is Right about DeFi Risk

Arezou Rafikian2023-03-02T11:37:03-05:00April 11th, 2022|The Vault|

When we started our own analyses of technology-based finance’s stability and equality implications in 2019, we were among the first to focus on disclosures, conflicts of interest, and even self-dealing. Still, we had no idea how many sides of a trade someone could quietly be on if he or she builds out something that purports to be decentralized finance (DeFi) but is anything but. Although regulators have yet to do much about it, their first in-depth DeFi report details a raft of risks they should quickly remedy. Odds are that they won’t until innocent investors and bank customers lose many of their millions, but this too-many-rules-far-too-late habit is particularly dangerous when it comes to fast-moving DeFi.

First and foremost, DeFi isn’t nearly as decentralized as those touting it represent. If DeFi were truly decentralized, then it would be a lot harder for hackers to make off with everything in a DeFi platform in one swipe, but this has a nasty habit of happening over and over again. As a result, at its most essential, DeFi exposes counterparties and customers to loss of assets even if nothing else goes amiss.

And much else could. As the report from the International Organization of Securities Commissions details, DeFi is not only often centralized, but also not even all that digital. Non-digital and centralized aspects of DeFi include not just graphical interfaces with customers and fiat-currency transactions with counterparties, but also very traditional forms of finance such as leveraged trading and rehypothecation …

29 03, 2022

FedFin: Global Securities Regulators Diss DeFi

Arezou Rafikian2023-03-27T15:46:19-04:00March 29th, 2022|The Vault|

As promised, this report provides an in-depth analysis of IOSCO’s new paper on decentralized finance, one sure to advance the FSB’s efforts to bring DeFi systems under greater regulatory scrutiny due to the findings we here detail. In the U.S., President Biden’s crypto-focused executive order (see FSM Report CRYPTO26) highlights DeFi’s risk with regard to illicit finance. IOSCO’s work on this report was headed by the SEC, suggesting rapid U.S. action not only on this concern, but also on many other risks by the Commission, as well as the FSOC and other U.S. agencies…

The full report is available to retainer clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here.…

21 03, 2022

Karen Petrou: How to Set Course to a Digital Future

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-03T13:18:42-04:00March 21st, 2022|The Vault|

Last week, we laid out the macrofinancial implications of the Ukraine crisis – i.e., its impact on the global financial-and-regulatory order. Some of this analysis is founded on President Biden’s digital-asset executive order, which also has profound and immediate impact on critical macroprudential issues at the border of innovation and regulation to which we now turn. To forecast how digitalization will come upon us, the digital-asset order must be read in the Administration’s broader context in which high-impact political issues, such as racial equity, weigh at least as heavily as the complexities of CBDC or even the benefit of a future financial crises foregone.

Administration policy based on Democratic politics is set not only by the digital-asset order, but also by other White House directives that will define the boundaries of what Treasury and the agencies – the Fed included at least to a point – will do. To forecast digital-asset policy, one must thus also divine the outcome of two other executive orders.

First, there’s the President’s competition directive. Every critical consumer-protection question under the CFPB’s purview is now considered first and foremost in terms of competition, with the agency’s director making it manifestly clear that almost anything done by any big bank is a target for structural reform. Director Chopra doesn’t like fintech or biotech much better than most banks do, but his approach to digital assets is likely only to squelch big banks as much as he can and thus to drive cryptoassets further into …

14 03, 2022

Karen Petrou: The Collapse of the Global Financial Order and What’s to Come

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-03T15:09:21-04:00March 14th, 2022|The Vault|

The Great Depression’s role sparking the Second World War led the victors to create the Bretton Woods agreement establishing stable reserve assets under-girding a world prosperous and peaceful enough to prevent another conflagration. After 2008, the world reinforced another set of global norms, setting cross-border financial standards over the next fifteen years by newly empowered transnational financial agencies. Now, what was left of Bretton Woods is in ashes and national geopolitical interests will again dictate critical financial requirements. Although it’s of course possible that Russia’s devastating invasion will end without still more cataclysmic carnage, it has done irreparable damage to the largely frictionless cross-border finance on which it and its oligarchs relied. China should take a lesson.

To be sure, this globalized and increasingly financialized construct was imperfect even for the hegemonic states and systemic financial companies in whose interests it worked the best. As Rana Foroohar pointed out last week, it was premised on the optimistic “end of history” reasoning that expected an interdependent world to be all-for one and one-for-all. Quite simply, if you must go through someone else’s space to get where you want to go, then you are more likely to abide by the rules applicable in that space to ensure you get there. Over time, this creates a macrofinancial system in which currencies, payments, assets, and risks moved with few speedbumps from one end of the earth to the other. Even where rules might slow all of this down, safe-haven states constructed high-price bypasses. This, …

7 03, 2022

Karen Petrou: Why Armies Now March on Their Wallets

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-04T12:29:27-04:00March 7th, 2022|The Vault|

Napoleon famously said that armies march on their stomachs. Now, it’s clear that armies also march on their wallets.

The dollar’s blitzkrieg triumph isn’t due to any love of the greenback — even America’s closest allies have long hoped to counterbalance US. economic dominance with rival payment systems able to operate unscathed regardless of U.S. sanctions. However, the EU, U.K., and Japan have never gotten much past dreaming about payment-system challenges because the embedded dollar-based system has become essentially friction- and risk-free. That’s hard to beat.

China might still have a shot at a yuan-based substitute, but it would have to ensure liquidity (essentially impossible when a currency isn’t freely convertible) as well as political neutrality. China’s decision suddenly to mount de facto nationalization of what was once a thriving, privately-owned digital-commerce sector will at the least give pause to those whose funds would move through a Chinese-dominated system.

Any nation that wants to replace the dollar also has to have sovereign obligations readily understood to be a safe haven under acute stress that are issued in amounts sufficient to absorb extreme shock. China and the EU has no single issuer of sovereign bonds in quantity and quality sufficient to substitute for Treasury obligations. Most market participants think China is more likely to be the cause of a shock than ever to serve as a shock absorber, ruling out its sovereign debt even if it grows large enough to mount a challenge to the U.S. Treasury.

And, finally, there’s the …

28 02, 2022

Karen Petrou: What’s to Come as SWIFT Sanctions Take Hold

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-04T14:58:10-04:00February 28th, 2022|The Vault|

A few years back, I gave a speech at SWIFT’s annual meeting knowing little of what it did beyond the speakers I was invited to join. While the meeting was in a cavernous conference center, the off-hours discussions in magnificent chateaus were small, serious, and — at least for me — insightful as to the awesome power of a seemingly-simple “messaging system”. Now, of course, the world knows why Swift matters– indeed, Vladimir Putin is taking this so seriously that we’re all reminded of the literal meaning of the “nuclear option.” Putin is right –America’s “soft” economic power gives it a weapon of formidable might.

Will it backfire? One of the questions I’ve repeatedly gotten over the weekend is whether U.S. banks can withstand market disruptions now or under even greater stress if sanctions expand to still more Russian banks and thereafter also to those still doing business with them. In short, there is no doubt that banks in the U.S. will withstand near-term stress and even less-resilient ones in the EU and Japan will do the same.

The reason for this is the demonstrable certainty that central banks will intervene to ensure dollar liquidity across the world and financial-market liquidity wherever it seems threatened. Unlike 2008 and 2020 when Fed windows were opened too wide and too long, this geopolitical crisis is of no financial firm or central bank’s making. What all this new money might do to already-bloated financial markets is yet to be known, but central banks …

15 02, 2022

FedFin: Stablecoin Legislative Consensus in Sight, But from a Distance

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-04T15:59:02-04:00February 15th, 2022|The Vault|

Despite fierce partisan fighting over pending Fed nominations, today’s Senate Banking hearing on stablecoin regulation was considerably more bipartisan that last week’s HFSC session (see Client Report CRYPTO24). Both Chairman Brown (D-OH) and Ranking Member Toomey (R-PA) are in broad agreement on a two-tier structure in which stablecoins are issued either by banks or by nonbanks subject to strict reserve-asset, AML, and related regulation.

The full report is available to retainer clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here…

14 02, 2022

Karen Petrou: Two Regulatory Decisions That Will Define the Future of Money

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-04T16:07:43-04:00February 14th, 2022|The Vault|

Like all of you, we at FedFin spend a lot of time watching the U.S. Congress, but I’m increasingly wondering why. Sure, there’s the blood and guts. Watching Congressional deliberations is more and more like being a spectator at a hockey game for the fights or NASCAR races for the next fiery crash. Does any of this carnage really matter? Not much when it comes to vital, urgent financial policy questions such as what money has come to be in the United States. With Congress mired in a never-ending cock fight, regulators hold the fate of finance mostly in their own fierce grip. Even without deployment of the Fed’s nuclear CBDC option, two developments last week show clearly how much power regulators have to redefine U.S. digital currency.

First, there was outgoing FDIC Chair McWilliams’ offhand suggestion in her final remarks that stablecoins have all the characteristics of fiat currency deposits and thus could be eligible for FDIC insurance under current law. As soon as he took the helm, Acting FDIC Chairman Gruenberg demanded tough cryptocurrency regulation, but he didn’t rule out deposit status for at least some stablecoins if the agency was satisfied with their stability.

The impact of an FDIC decision deeming at least some stablecoins to be deposits is hard to over-estimate. As I detail in my book, what’s actually in a bank deposit isn’t what most people think they hold, i.e., a virtual pile of dollars. In fact, money in the bank is …

14 02, 2022

Karen Petrou: Two Regulatory Decisions That Will Define the Future of Money

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-04T16:07:34-04:00February 14th, 2022|The Vault|

Like all of you, we at FedFin spend a lot of time watching the U.S. Congress, but I’m increasingly wondering why. Sure, there’s the blood and guts. Watching Congressional deliberations is more and more like being a spectator at a hockey game for the fights or NASCAR races for the next fiery crash. Does any of this carnage really matter? Not much when it comes to vital, urgent financial policy questions such as what money has come to be in the United States. With Congress mired in a never-ending cock fight, regulators hold the fate of finance mostly in their own fierce grip. Even without deployment of the Fed’s nuclear CBDC option, two developments last week show clearly how much power regulators have to redefine U.S. digital currency.

First, there was outgoing FDIC Chair McWilliams’ offhand suggestion in her final remarks that stablecoins have all the characteristics of fiat currency deposits and thus could be eligible for FDIC insurance under current law. As soon as he took the helm, Acting FDIC Chairman Gruenberg demanded tough cryptocurrency regulation, but he didn’t rule out deposit status for at least some stablecoins if the agency was satisfied with their stability.

The impact of an FDIC decision deeming at least some stablecoins to be deposits is hard to over-estimate. As I detail in my book, what’s actually in a bank deposit isn’t what most people think they hold, i.e., a virtual pile of dollars. In fact, money in the bank is …

8 02, 2022

FedFin: Partisan Impasse Suggests Small Chance for Stablecoin Statutory Change

Arezou Rafikian2023-04-05T12:06:36-04:00February 8th, 2022|The Vault|

Today’s HFSC hearing on stablecoins makes it clear that the bipartisan legislation Chairwoman Waters (D-CA) prefers is at best a long way off. Democrats generally agreed with the President’s Working Group stablecoin report (see Client Report CRYPTO21), with Under-Secretary Liang today not only describing its findings but reinforcing the need for rapid regulatory intervention in concert with substantive statutory change.

The full report is available to retainer clients. To find out how you can sign up for the service, click here.…