EMIR HRNJIC
  • Home
  • OPINION PIECES
  • Media
  • Case Studies
  • Publications
  • Exec Ed
  • Teaching
  • Presentations
  • Events
  • Block'N'White Consulting

Development of Facebook’s Libra expedited amid Covid-19 (as published in The Edge on June 15, 2020)

6/12/2020

0 Comments

 
Development of Facebook’s Libra expedited amid Covid-19
By Emir Hrnjic

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, experts warned that the virus could spread via physical money as the monetary notes and coins may carry viruses and up to 3,000 types of bacteria. In March, the World Health Organisation confirmed that banknotes may carry the coronavirus for several days and recommended the use of e-payments to mitigate the risk of contagion. 

Moreover, the widespread national lockdowns highlighted the need for people to transact from the comfort of their own home. Thus, a heightened virus awareness and a more urgent need for contactless payments might have expedited the development the digital currency of Facebook, Libra.

Libra’s development was further highlighted by the pilot launch of digital yuan in four cities across China. Even though digital yuan may not be a direct competitor to private digital currencies such as Libra, its upcoming rollout threatens to affect Libra’s potential market. 

More recently, Libra made the headlines again as Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund Temasek joined Libra Association and became its first Asia-based member as well as the first member with state backing. After the departure of several prominent members such as Visa, MasterCard and PayPal, Temasek’s backing breathed new life into the digital currency. 

Regulatory Issues
On May 7, the Libra Association appointed Stuart Levey, former chief legal officer of HSBC, as its first CEO. The hiring of a legal expert to run the digital currency clearly signalled Libra’s priorities after intense regulatory scrutiny from US lawmakers triggered massive exodus from the Association last year.

While cryptocurrencies have great potential, they are notorious for widespread scams, frauds and hacks. Thus, scepticism towards Libra has been expected. US Congresswoman Maxine Waters went as far as to request a moratorium on the development of Libra, comparing it to “starting a bank without going through any [regulatory] steps”.

Regulatory response around the world will differ due to diverse regulatory philosophies. While China is expected to ban Libra, Singapore will likely have a much more accommodating approach. Even though Ravi Menon, Managing Director of Monetary Authority of Singapore, expressed concern that Libra raises global financial risk, Temasek’s involvement signals that the Singapore government has decided to focus on potential benefits. 

Libra has the potential to be a game–changer in digital payments thanks to Facebook’s 2.5 billion active users. While one of the major problems with existing cryptocurrencies is slow and insufficient adoption, Libra wallets will likely ease and accelerate Libra’s adoption, thus creating an immediate advantage over existing cryptocurrencies.

One could argue that a single digital currency – or perhaps very few of them – will dominate the global market, while the overwhelming majority will fail. In this “winner-takes-all” market, contenders are incentivised to move early and aggressively, and Libra’s start seems like the step in the right direction. 

Libra 2.0
Libra was initially designed as a stablecoin fully backed by a basket of bank deposits and treasuries denominated in stable international currencies, comprising the US dollar, euro, Japanese yen, pound sterling and Singapore dollar. This backing would ensure a stable exchange rate in contrast to the overwhelming majority of existing cryptocurrencies with extremely volatile prices. 

After the strong pushback from the regulators around the world, Libra was recently revamped in the initiative allegedly aimed at minimising disruption to the global monetary system. 

Libra 2.0 will comprise several stablecoins – each backed by a single currency such as the US dollar or Singapore dollar – separate from the Libra coin. The Libra White Paper added that “each single-currency stablecoin will be fully backed by… cash or cash equivalents and very short-term government securities denominated in that currency.” 

Libra coin will be a “digital composite” of some of those coins – most likely the initial five currencies – and could potentially operate as a settlement coin in cross-border transactions as well as in countries without a single-currency stablecoin on the Libra network. 

In a further attempt to satisfy regulators, Libra reemphasised its commitment to financial compliance, including strict enforcement of measures against money laundering, terrorism financing, sanctions compliance, and the prevention of illicit activities. 

In the first stage of Libra rollout, Unhosted Wallets will not be allowed on the Libra network and their eventual inclusion will have limited balance and number of transactions. As Unhosted Wallets are, loosely speaking non-institutional developments and thus crucial for financial inclusion, crypto enthusiasts criticised this deferral. 

In another major change, the Libra Association will vet any wallet launched on the network. While the first Libra White Paper vowed to transition Libra to a permissionless system, Libra 2.0 backed out of this promise. Hence, Libra 2.0 will lack censorship resistance, disappointing cryptocurrency devotees who consider the absence of censorship a very important feature of cryptocurrency. 

While Libra’s initial idea was to become a global digital currency with permissionless network and censorship resistance that would have an easy adoption by Facebook’s massive user base, Libra 2.0 has significantly scaled back from its initial promise and made uneasy compromises to satisfy regulators. In an attempt to please both crypto enthusiasts and regulators, it seems that Libra 2.0 has not satisfied either side. Time will tell. 
0 Comments

As China's digital currency moves ahead, can Facebook's Libra match up? (as published on ThinkChina.sg on June 2, 2020)

6/2/2020

0 Comments

 
As China's digital currency moves ahead, can Facebook's Libra match up?
By Emir Hrnjic

The People’s Bank of China recently started pilot-testing a digital RMB in Shenzhen, Suzhou, Chengdu and Xiong’an New Area. Will this development threaten the US dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency in the future? Meanwhile, Facebook and the non-profit Libra Association headquartered in Switzerland have been working towards launching a revolutionary cryptocurrency since June 2019. Although the shape of the project has changed, what will Libra be adding to the mix?

In late April, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) started a pilot test of the digital RMB in Shenzhen, Suzhou, Chengdu and Xiong’an New Area, and thus China became the first major economy to roll out a central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Digital currency is money that exists in electronic form. While deposits in commercial banks are also digital, they are a liability of the bank. In contrast, China’s CBDC is a liability of the state. 

China had already become a global leader in e-payments with its market surpassing those of the US, the UK, Japan, and Germany combined. Notably, the world’s largest FinTech company Ant Financial — the China-based company behind mobile payment app Alipay — is valued at US$150 billion. Remarkably, the capitalisation of this private company is roughly equal to those of Citigroup and Goldman Sachs combined. Additionally, the launch of the digital RMB aims to further cement China’s leadership in e-payments.

Domestic impact 

A recent report from the Bank for International Settlements mentioned “scalability, accessibility, convenience, resilience, and privacy” as desirable features that a CBDC needs. The challenge, the report argued, is to “design a CBDC that combines the virtues of a direct claim on the central bank with the convenience offered by intermediaries”.

Even though this may facilitate the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, tracing may also enable the close surveillance of cash flow movements in the economy and invade people’s privacy.

Notably, the PBOC created a two-tier system whereby it creates the digital currency and passes it on to China’s large financial institutions and largest state-owned banks which are supposed to further distribute it to the retail population. As the digital RMB will be used for settlement of transactions, it may increase the transparency of the Chinese banking system and create more stability. 

On the other hand, CBDC enables the PBOC to trace transactions. Even though this may facilitate the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, tracing may also enable the close surveillance of cash flow movements in the economy and invade people’s privacy. While the PBOC has promised to balance concerns about privacy against the objective of halting illicit transactions, it remains unclear how it can achieve balance between these opposing objectives. 

International impact

The launch of the digital RMB may signal China’s ambition to unsettle the global monetary system. China is already ahead of the US in the digital payments market and one can argue that digital RMB may pose a distant threat to the dollar’s supremacy as an international means of payment. 

Even though nearly 90% of international transactions were settled in US dollars in 2019, whereas RMB controlled only 2% of the market, a Foreign Affairs article by the executive director and co-director of the Belfer Center, Harvard Kennedy School notes that “the failure to check the influence of China’s digital RMB and develop a competitive American alternative could significantly hinder the United States’ global influence in the information age”. 

Current sentiment in China may give credence to this theory. Recently, a former Bank of China president, Li Lihui, delivered a talk, opining how China’s digital currency may restructure the global monetary system. Furthermore, a recent opinion piece in China Daily by Daryl Guppy, an equities and derivatives trader and columnist, said: “A sovereign digital currency provides a functional alternative to the dollar settlement system and blunts the impact of any sanctions or threats of exclusion both at a country and company level.”

Finally, most cross-border payments are facilitated by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (S.W.I.F.T.) while a large fraction is routed through US banks. Even though S.W.I.F.T. is headquartered in Belgium, many argue that the US yields a disproportionate influence including the ability to exclude countries under sanctions from cross-border transactions. This implies that the digital RMB may weaken the power of US sanctions and its ability to track illicit financial flows. 

How will the world react?

Intuitively, the best response to the digital RMB would be the digital dollar. In that spirit, the early versions of the US stimulus bill included the development of a digital US dollar to provide payments to people and businesses hit by the economic downturn. According to the reports, the Fed was supposed to offer bank accounts to all Americans — FedAccounts — which would bypass commercial banks. 

The digital dollar would likely combine the economic strength of the US dollar with the convenience of digital technology. It was unlikely that a new digital dollar would use blockchain, but, nevertheless, the idea was scrapped and did not make it to the final version of the stimulus bill. Moreover, while more than 50 central banks around the globe have been experimenting and researching digital currency space for years, the US Fed is lagging behind the rest.

While Libra, the digital currency proposed by Facebook, is facing a regulatory pushback and scrutiny in the US and is being reconfigured, ironically, it may be America’s second-best response to potential challenge to its global monetary dominance. In his testimony to US Congress, Mark Zuckerberg, the Facebook CEO noted that increased regulatory scrutiny over Libra impedes its development, which would benefit China that was working on a similar project. While being grilled in Congress, Zuckerberg tried to convince US lawmakers that the choice is not Libra versus no Libra, but rather Libra versus digital RMB.

In fact, Li Lihui spent half of his talk discussing Libra and described it as a “supranational digital currency”. Even though the two currencies widely differ, Libra and CBDC may yet compete on the international scene.

Moreover, Mark Carney noted in a speech in August 2019 when he was still governor of the Bank of England that the US dollar has played a dominant role in the world order for much of the past century and discussed the need for a new international monetary and financial system. 

While he opined that neither RMB nor Libra were in a position to take over from the dollar yet, Carney suggested several possible replacements to the dollar, including a digital currency supported by an international coalition of central banks co-insuring each other. 

Carney added that a “SHC [synthetic hegemonic currency] could dampen the domineering influence of the US dollar on global trade. If the share of trade invoiced in SHC were to rise, shocks in the US would have less potent spillovers through exchange rates...” 

Notwithstanding all of the above, we should keep in mind that the deliberate process of developing China’s CBDC lasted six years and its early focus will likely be on ironing out the wrinkles in the domestic banking system before it makes a leap on the international scene.

While digital RMB represents a major milestone and China may have the ambition to unsettle the global monetary system in the distant future, it seems that this process will be slow and deliberate. However, if digital RMB takes off sooner than expected, ironically, the best defence in preserving the dominance of the US dollar may be a dominant private cryptocurrency such as Libra as it was earlier envisioned or a multinational digital currency issued by a coalition of central banks.
0 Comments

Did Covid-19 spur digital currency development? (as published in The Edge on May 22, 2020)

5/23/2020

0 Comments

 
Did Covid-19 spur digital currency development?
By Emir Hrnjic

With people observing social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, a serious concern has emerged. Can the virus spread via physical money? One research seems to suggest so – tests conducted found that some notes and coins may carry as much bacteria as those present on the soles of shoes or even toilet seats. 

In March, the World Health Organization confirmed that banknotes may carry the coronavirus for several days and advised the use of contactless payments instead. Amid the heightened hygiene awareness, digital currencies came to focus Improbably, the Covid-19 crisis might have prompted central banks to expedite this development.

Recently, the head of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub Benoît Cœuré said “the [COVID-19] crisis has exposed the value of technologies which enable the economy to operate at arm’s length and partially overcome social distancing… The current discussion on central bank digital currency also comes into sharper focus.”

China leading the way
While the rest of the world has been discussing and analysing the benefits and costs of digital currency, China’s central bank—the People’s Bank of China (PBOC)— had seized the moment and started a pilot test of the digital yuan, the electronic form of the renminbi with value equivalent to the paper notes and coins in circulation. It has since become the first major economy to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDC), rolling out the pilot test in three cities, including Shenzhen, Suzhou, and Chengdu, as well as in the Xiong’an New Area.

Also known as “DC/EP (Digital Currency/Electronic Payments),” the digital yuan transactions can be made through smartphone–based NFC technology (Near Field Communication). The technology enables the phones to interact with each other when in close proximity and, thus, allows the digital currency to be exchanged without the internet.

Mobile cashless payments – like Alipay or WeChat pay – have become a part of daily life in China. But the launch of digital yuan – coupled with a recent President Xi Jinping’s call for China to focus more on blockchain – exemplifies China’s continuous push to become the world’s leader in digital currency space. Moreover, digital yuan may even pose a threat to the dollar’s supremacy as an international means of payment. Mainland based English newspaper China Daily went as far as to claim that “[China’s] digital currency provides a functional alternative to the dollar settlement system and blunts the impact of any sanctions or threats of exclusion both at a country and company level… It may also facilitate integration into globally traded currency markets with a reduced risk of politically inspired disruption.”

Pros and cons
While it may be too early to evaluate China’s experiment, central banks around the world are paying great attention to this development while carefully observing pros and cons of digital currency. 

The truth is, central banks have been studying the use of blockchain technologies for years. The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) views potential CBDCs favourably as they would be backed by the government, and the money supply would be controlled by the central bank. Furthermore, the early versions of the US stimulus bill flirted with the development of a digital US dollar to disburse economic stimulus payments, while The European Central Bank recently released a working paper analysing merits of its potential digital currency.

The pros are there. A Bank of England’s study in 2016 on the feasibility of digital currency pointed out that it could increase Growth Domestic Product (GDP) “by as much as three percent.” The usage could also “improve the central bank’s ability to stabilise the business cycle.” 

Following the rise of cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, the secure digital transfer of money has become paramount. While Bitcoin’s extreme volatility and low transaction processing capacity hinder its ambition to become a global medium of exchange, digital currency issued by a central bank has a far greater potential to become a trusted medium due to inherent low volatility as well as potential for greater efficiency, lower transaction costs, and large scale.

CBDCs would likely help monetary policy targeting money supply and enable access to real-time data regarding money demand. At the same time, blockchain could support faster, auditable, and in general more transparent interbank settlement systems at decreased settlement costs, while avoiding issues like single point of failure.

As societies become immersed in digital payment, central banks which roll out digital currency could gain the first-mover advantage. Any central bank ignoring the role of digital currency could risk losing relevance in the global economy. 

Challenges to overcome
However, the transition to digital currency adoption needs to be carefully managed. One challenge to overcome is the potential shortfall in credit. As the head of Germany’s Bundesbank, Jens Weidmann once argued, in uncertain economic times, people may choose to put their money as digital currency in central banks, instead of deposits in commercial banks as the former is more secure and holds lesser risk. With reduced deposits also comes a severe contraction of consumer credit which would clearly harm the real economy. As central banks’ digital currency looks set to take on a bigger role in future, commercial banks would have to find alternative sources to replace the deposits. 

The PBOC are aware of this shortcoming: They did not want digital yuan to become a threat to the retail banking system. For this reason they did not make it available directly to the public. Instead, the digital yuan will be used by the PBOC and commercial banks for settlement of transactions which may increase transparency of the Chinese banking system and create more stability. 

PBOC’s playbook calls for implementation of a two-tier system – the central bank will create the digital currency and issue it only to large financial institutions and four largest state-owned banks that will further distribute it to China’s 1.4 billion citizens, just like the issuance of cash. 

Another major challenge is privacy. Digital currency enables digital tracing of all digital cash in circulation and, thus, a person’s use of finances. While this considerably helps authorities to fight money laundering, terrorist financing, and even tax evasion, it also facilitates close surveillance and control of individuals’ transactions. In countries where privacy is a great concern, this may lead to serious public opposition. 

Even though PBOC promised to keep the balance between privacy and supressing criminal transactions, it remains unclear how it can achieve balance between these diametrically opposite objectives. Early reports hint at limits in the frequency and amounts involved in anonymous transactions.

As an improbable consequence of COVID-19 crisis, CBDCs were brought in focus and governments might have been prompted to expedite their development. Seizing the moment, China’s central bank made major steps toward becoming the first major economy to issue a CBDC. How other central banks follow suit will be something that markets will play close attention to. 
0 Comments

Digital Currency Can Impact Monetary Policy (as published in Business Times on May 14, 2020)

5/23/2020

0 Comments

 
By Emir Hrnjic

The People’s Bank of China (PBOC) has reportedly begun a pilot test of the digital yuan in April, thus, becoming the first major economy to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The experimental trials started in three cities, including Shenzhen, Suzhou, and Chengdu, as well as in the Xiong’an New Area and digital yuan became part of the monetary system.

Together with President Xi Jinping’s recent appeal for greater urgency in the development of blockchain, the pilot launch of digital yuan epitomizes China’s ambition to become the digital currency leader. Moreover, state-media outlet China Daily claimed that “[China’s] digital currency provides a functional alternative to the dollar settlement system.”

While China was the only major economy that made a daring step toward a major milestone, governments and central banks around the world have been experimenting with blockchain and digital currencies for years. The early versions of the US stimulus bill included the development of a digital US dollar, while The European Central Bank recently released a working paper analyzing merits of its potential digital currency.

Indeed, as central bankers around the world are increasingly showing interest in blockchain technologies and the global adoption of digital currencies continue, they could eventually challenge and partially replace fiat currencies, thus, creating significant monetary policy implications. 

In agreement, a recent report of G7 working group on as a subset of digital currencies known as stablecoins stated that “stablecoins that reach global scale could pose challenges and risks to monetary policy.”

THE IMPACT OF CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCIES

CBDC would likely help monetary policy targeting money supply and enable access to real-time data regarding money demand. It would also likely be a direct liability of the central bank, while blockchain-based interbank settlement systems would be faster, auditable, and more transparent.

In general, central banks influence monetary policy by changing the short-term interest rate. Additionally, monetary authorities reduce long-term interest rates by buying long-term government bonds. This process, also known as quantitative easing, increases the money supply.

CBDC could help with targeting of money supply since citizens would have direct access to the central bank’s base money. It would also enable governments’ access to real-time data on money demand.

Indeed, a recent research study by the Bank of England concluded that a central bank digital currency might “strengthen the transmission of monetary policy changes to the real economy.” 

Bitcoin supporters glorify its fixed issuance schedule with no discretionary influence of central banks or any other institution. They often present past evidence of central banks in several countries abusing their discretionary power and printing money for the benefit of various interest groups. 

In the case of CBDC, the central bank’s commitment problem could be potentially solved by using smart contracts to predetermine the issuance rate of the currency when predefined conditions are met.

However, the pre-determined currency issuance implies that money supply would by default ignore future market factors and, hence, the future quantity of money would not be able to respond to future market conditions.

THE IMPACT OF PRIVATE CRYPTOCURRENCIES

When Facebook and its partners in Libra Association announced the development of cryptocurrency with a potential user base of 2.4 billion active users last June, the possibility of a private cryptocurrency replacing sovereign currency became a reality.

At the Congress Hearing organized a few weeks later, Facebook’s executive David Marcus stated that The Libra Association has “no intention of competing with any sovereign currencies or entering the monetary policy arena.” However, if Libra becomes a widely adopted private currency as its founders hope, it will inevitably have monetary policy implications regardless of the founders’ intentions.  

Libra will be fully backed by the basket of currencies comprising the US dollar, euro, Japanese yen, pound sterling, and Singapore dollar, and, thus, it will effectively follow the monetary policies of the five central banks that issue these currencies. As regulators around the world expressed concerns that Libra could interfere with their national currencies and monetary policies, Libra was recently redesigned, and a new White Paper describes single-currency stablecoins separate from the Libra coin.

Notwithstanding these changes, Libra could eventually partially replace some sovereign currencies, especially in countries with high inflation and unstable banking system. According to BIS’ report, private cryptocurrencies backed by tech giants could “rapidly establish a dominant position in global finance and pose a potential threat to competition, stability and social welfare.” 

Furthermore, the potential dominance of Libra or any other private cryptocurrency in a specific country would severely undermine the effects of monetary policy of that country and jeopardize its economy. If citizens start using cryptocurrency rather than local currency, weak demand would cause local currency’s depreciation. As inflation of local currency increases, it will affect even non-adopters of the cryptocurrency.

In this respect, the effect of cryptocurrencies would be analogous to the dollarization – the impact of the US dollar on local currencies in some developing countries. For example, demand for local currencies in countries such as Zimbabwe or Cambodia is affected by lack of trust in the currency and, thus, locals use the US dollar as a medium of exchange. This currency substitution causes local monetary authorities to lose a set of monetary policy tools that can affect macroeconomic outcomes.

On the other hand, libertarians and free market devotees claim that competition from private currencies may impose market discipline on central banks, which should improve the quality of sovereign money. Currency competition, they argue, can reduce inflation and prevent the central bank’s manipulation of interest rates.

Moreover, monetary policy typically affects the real economy via central banks’ short-term interest rate, which has an impact on the bank funding cost and, thus, bank lending rates. This monetary policy pass-through is limited by the relatively strong market power that banks have over depositors. In layman’s terms, deposit rates are not very responsive to policy rate changes. 

However, an improved blockchain-based payment system would likely increase competition and, as a result, competitive pressures on depository system would increase the responsiveness of deposit rates to policy rates.

As global adoption of cryptocurrencies continues to accelerate, policy makers expect that they will challenge and even partially replace fiat currencies in future. Central banks’ digital currencies are likely to strengthen the transmission of monetary policy and help monetary policy targeting money supply.

Dominant private cryptocurrencies, on the other hand, would severely undermine the effect of monetary policy. Furthermore, they could also lead to diminishing relevance of some sovereign currencies, the loss of their value, and high inflation. 

0 Comments

Prospect of Cryptocurrencies in Islamic Finance (as published in the Jakarta Post on February 24, 2020)

2/24/2020

0 Comments

 
Prospect of Cryptocurrencies in Islamic Finance
By Emir Hrnjic and Nikodem Tomczak

In May of this year a mosque in London announced it would begin to accept donations in cryptocurrency form.

Although many were skeptical, the mosque received four times more donations in cryptocurrency during the month of Ramadan than in traditional cash.

Even before the mosque’s experiment, debate has been raging about the permissibility of cryptocurrencies under Islamic law as religious scholars deliberate the issue of sharia compliance. 

Some religious scholars in Egypt, Turkey, and India for example have directly opposed the use of cryptocurrencies citing various issues such as their use in illegal activities, widespread speculation and price volatility. Others, however, have declared bitcoin sharia compliant, paving the way for Islamic institutions to start accepting cryptocurrencies. 

Considering that the worldwide Islamic finance market recently surpassed U$2 trillion, the issue of sharia compliance has huge economic significance. Muslims make up almost a quarter of the world’s population and Muslim countries account for approximately 10 percent of global GDP. 

To comply with sharia, financial products should avoid interest, speculation, and excessive uncertainty. They should also be ethical and underlying contracts should be transparent, whilst Islamic financial instruments should be backed by real economic activity or a physical asset. 

Against these benchmarks, concerns have been raised about widespread speculation and the extreme price volatility of cryptocurrencies. Furthermore the majority of cryptocurrencies have no underlying economic activity or physical asset. 

However, taken to an extreme, strict interpretations of Islamic finance disapprove even of traditional fiat currencies – especially so after the gold standard was abandoned in 1971 and money lost its “real” value. 

As a solution, some have argued for the creation of Islamic gold dinar and Islamic silver dirham currencies, backed by gold and silver, saying that such a system would alleviate several problems of modern economies such as inflation and recurring financial crises.

Whilst the ambiguity about sharia compliance has kept many devout Muslims on the sidelines, companies across the Islamic world have started incorporating blockchain and cryptocurrencies into their business models. 

Among ASEAN countries, Malaysian government formed partnership with Hong Kong’s iSunOne which specializes in digital banking services to develop the blockchain–based Islamic financial network and to establish a blockchain–based Islamic bank. 

In Indonesia, Blossom Finance offers Smart Sukuk Tokens which represent an ownership in the sukuk used in funding microfinance projects. The platform is able to reduce the cost of sukuk issuance by automating much of the legal, accounting, and payment cost.

Meanwhile in the Middle East, a crypto token for money transfers received sharia certification from an advisory agency licensed by the Bahrain’s central bank, while Saudi Arabia’s monetary authority signed a partnership with blockchain firm Ripple to use the company’s platform for cross-border payment settlements. In April, Saudi British Bank (SABB) launched an instant cross-border transfer service based on Ripple’s blockchain technology.

One crypto solution that seems tailor-made for sharia compliance is stablecoin – a cryptocurrency backed by a stable commodity such as gold or silver. 

Since the concepts of the Islamic gold dinar and Islamic silver dirham represent ideals of Islamic finance, a stablecoin backed by gold or silver provides an opportunity for an emergence of a “digital Islamic gold dinar” or “digital Islamic silver dirham.” 

The market value of a stablecoin theoretically equals the value of its underlying collateral deposited in a crypto company’s bank account. Hence, a stablecoin should have a stable value regardless of the ups and downs of the rest of the crypto market. This should avoid excessive volatility fueled by speculation and market manipulation, although of course gold and silver are not completely immune from these.

Recently, a stablecoin issued by a Swiss firm and backed by a basket of eight fiat currencies and gold received sharia certification from a leading consultancy and audit firm in Bahrain. 

However, a concern for collateralized coins is that they require intermediaries including the token issuer guaranteeing redeemability of the stablecoin and the banks safekeeping of the collateral. In this case credibility of an authenticator of the commodity held in reserves would be an issue. Furthermore, the presence of intermediaries renders such schemes effectively centralized, and as a result subject to a single point of failure.

Along with their impact on Islamic finance, truly resilient stablecoins would profoundly impact the cryptocurrency world in various ways. For example, enabling crypto-based loans with significantly reduced volatility risk would make a large impact on lending and borrowing markets. Moreover, stablecoins could be used for payments, remittances, salaries and many other purposes.

If stablecoins prove resilient, they will unlock the blockchain potential to its fullest with the potential to even rival bitcoin as they become a truly global medium of exchange. 

Islamic investors and entrepreneurs are increasingly aware of the seemingly endless opportunities. 

While the debate over the permissibility of cryptocurrencies is still ongoing among Muslim scholars, governments must decide whether to back cryptocurrencies or risk being ostracized from the new economies. 

Furthermore, central banks in Muslim countries should embrace opportunities offered by the growing importance of cryptocurrencies. 

In that spirit, development of stablecoins backed by gold or silver will revitalize a “digital Islamic gold dinar” or “digital Islamic silver dirham” providing a tailor-made solution for sharia compliant cryptocurrencies. 

Marrying the cryptocurrencies with key principles of Islamic finance may finally bring the needed stability and scale to Islamic finance. 
0 Comments

Beware of Risks in Blockchain–Based Smart Contracts (as published in South China Morning Post on November 16, 2019)

11/16/2019

0 Comments

 
Beware of Risks in Blockchain–Based Smart Contracts
By Emir Hrnjic and Nikodem Tomczak
 
Among the many technological advances enabled by blockchain technology, such as the emergence of cryptocurrencies, smart contracts have attracted significant attention due to their potential transformative power in business and finance.
 
Digital contracts, much like traditional contracts, outline the terms of an agreement between two or more parties but the terms are in the form of computer code residing and executed on a blockchain. The “smart” aspect of these contracts comes supposedly from their ability to automatically enforce and execute the contract provisions on the blockchain when preset conditions are met.
 
The self-verifying, self-executing and self-enforcing nature of smart contracts removes the need for any central authority or intermediaries for the contract execution, drastically reducing the cost of doing business.
 
Transacting parties can easily audit the smart contract code, while the blockchain technology theoretically provides a tamper–proof record of the contract code and of every transaction executed by that code, minimizing risk and greatly improving transparency and accountability.
 
However, these contracts are arguably neither “smart” nor “contracts.”
 
The code describing the contract provisions is not necessarily legally binding.
 
For its obligations to be legally enforceable the transacting parties may also need real-world legal agreements to facilitate the resolution of potential disputes that would arise from human-made errors in the smart contract code.
 
Appropriate legislation needs to be passed to recognize the legal effect of smart contracts when conducting electronic business transactions. To this end, many jurisdictions have recently passed relevant bills recognizing the legal effects of smart contracts, helping to pave the way for their wider acceptance.
 
Smart contracts have widely proliferated on different blockchain platforms and currently underpin the emerging decentralized finance sector that facilitates funding and servicing of loans, digital securities trading, as well as initial coin offerings.
 
Furthermore, they are poised to transform businesses by drastically cutting overhead costs, increasing efficiency by automating many business tasks, and accelerating financial transactions by reducing the likelihood of disputes.
 
However, smart contracts are relatively new, and to achieve wider adoption, some key hurdles need to be overcome.
 
Since a smart contract is as good as the underlying computer code, vulnerabilities and hacking that would result in loss of funds are major concerns that may force potential adopters to stay on the sidelines.
 
In one infamous example of smart contract vulnerability, a weakness in the smart contracts code underpinning a blockchain-enabled venture capital fund, caused a loss of 3.6 million Ether (the equivalent of roughly US$50 million at the time) in 2016.
 
The recovery of the funds came at a major reputational cost to the blockchain security and governance.
 
Despite regulatory efforts around the world, unscrupulous developers remain a danger to the industry, while the legal uncertainties of conducting business on blockchain platforms across different jurisdiction significantly increase the risk.
 
Before smart contracts achieve wider adoption, the code vulnerabilities and the legal frameworks need to be properly addressed. In the meantime, entrepreneurs should figure out what role smart contracts can play in defining the future of their business and factor in the risks involved.
0 Comments

Blockchain path to more inclusive world (as published in Jakarta Post on October 4, 2019)

11/7/2019

0 Comments

 

Blockchain path to more inclusive world 
By Emir Hrnjic and Nikodem Tomczak

Some 2 billion people in the world and unbanked and lack access to useful and affordable financial services. According to the World Bank, this is one of the major barriers to reducing extreme prverty and social inequality. 

Yet, of these 2 billion, approximately two thirds have access to a mobile phone with internet connection. This enables access to emerging blockchain technologies, offering in turn some unique and promising solutions to create a more equal and inclusive world.

Blockchain is an open and decentralized technology that enables electronic transfer of value without intermediaries. By design it is transparent, inclusive and censorship resistant. Because it is decentralized it empowers individuals, institutions, and governments to build democratic technological solutions that are resilient and less prone to manipulation. 

As a result the technology has the potential to eliminate divisions across caused by social, age, and gender gaps, erase geographical, cultural, and jurisdictional restrictions and build economic resilience. At the same time, it provides a platform for near real-time settlement of trades and retrieval of critical assets over a secure network at much lower cost than traditional financial solutions.

One of the main causes of financial exclusion is that many of the world’s poor  lack proper personal identification and documented property rights. Blockchain technology can help to overcome this by storing tamperproof personal information, unlocking access to financial services while reducing the risk of fraud. 

In developing countries, the ability to register and retrieve property rights should increase social mobility and improve living standards.

Meanwhile, on a global level, blockchain technologies should increase transparency and fraud detection, potentially reducing corruption and poor management of resources. 

This will be of even greater importance in the era of global projects, such as the China-led One Belt One Road Initiative spanning dozens of underdeveloped countries, which demand improved coordination of economic activities. In these contexts, promoting accountability and transparency can reduce problems with trade disputes while lowering barriers to entry for parties from many different countries.

Many developing nations have near-universal access to 3G mobile networks. Coupled with high mobile phone ownership rates this offers the potential to enable many underserved people to interact with blockchain technology and boost financial participation.

Since the cost of traditional money transfer can be as high as 20 percent, bypassing the banking system significantly reduces transaction costs and allows rural people to send and receive payments at near zero cost. 

An example of this is Kenya’s M-Pesa mobile payment system which has opened access to banking and financial services to anyone with a mobile phone and helped lift almost 200,000 Kenyan households out of extreme poverty. 

International organizations, such as the United Nations, have already launched several networks and programmes that use blockchain to increase participation, lower transaction costs and reduce fraud. This is particularly important for over 1 billion people who lack proper identification documents, many of them refugees from war-torn countries. 

For example, the World Food Program has integrated blockchain to eliminate third party fees and to improve its assistance programmes by using the technology to store refugees’ IDs. A recent smart city project in Phnom Penh saw residents issued a digital passport which includes a digital wallet function. Individuals can sign up for utilities services with their digital identities within minutes and skipping middlemen agencies. However, the impact of blockchain on financial inclusion is not without potential pitfalls. 

Running the decentralized blockchain can be costly, demanding dedicated equipment and high electricity consumption to secure the network. And of course it’s important to bear in mind that technology alone does not have supernatural powers to heal the ills of modern societies. Blind belief in “solutionism” that blockchain technology offers would be a mistake. Similar prophecies were made about the internet and the idea that the ability of computers to send data between each other would magically deliver a more just and equal society.

Furthermore, a full understanding of how the technology works may be necessary to build up a true trust-based relationship. 

While the technology may allow us to minimize trust in people and intermediaries, trust in the technology itself needs to be built through education. This clearly presents an obstacle to financial inclusion as underprivileged communities usually also have the largest educational gaps. 

Finally, if blockchain is to become a vehicle for financial inclusion, there must be internationally agreed regulations. Specifically, regulatory safeguards for a smooth transition would have to be established in order to minimise risk of a sudden disruption to current financial networks. 

Blockchain is a foundational technology that could potentially redefine economic systems and lead us to a more equal and financially inclusive world while mitigating risks and lowering transactional cost. At the same time its transparent and tamperproof characteristics can improve public oversight and strengthen economic resilience while increasing citizens’ confidence in the distribution of public resources. However, the full social impact of the technology will depend on its adoption rate; and that – to a large extent – will depend on our ability to bridge existing educational gaps.

0 Comments

PBOC Keeps Faith in Digital Currency (as published in South China Morning Post on September 21, 2019)

9/21/2019

0 Comments

 
PBOC Keeps Faith in Digital Currency
By Emir Hrnjic and Nikodem Tomczak

Deputy director of the People’s Bank of China’s (PBOC) payments division, Mu Changchun, recently announced that the issuance of China’s central bank digital currency (CBDC) is imminent. China’s CBDC will partially replace cash in circulation which will likely help forecasting targets for money supply and enable access to real-time data regarding money demand. This, in turn, would help PBOC to effectively tighten control over the monetary policy with the objective, according to Mr. Mu, to “protect [China’s] monetary sovereignty and legal currency status.”

China’s CBDC would partially rely on a distributed ledger technology (DLT) and will be primarily designed to handle large transaction volumes expected in a country with the world largest population. In fact, PBOC believes that the DLT would not be able to support a volume of simultaneous transactions such as the volume on Singles’ Day – the largest online shopping day in the world. 

In a proposed two-tier system, the central bank will create the digital currency and financial institutions such as Alibaba, Tencent, UnionPay and four largest state-owned banks will be involved in its distribution to country's 1.4 billion citizens. Eventually, the new digital yuan will be made available to customers outside China. Alibaba owns the Post.

The distributed ledger technology is heavily researched by most of the world’s central banks. A study by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance predicts that more than a third of these organisations would have active DLT applications within 10 years.

The emergence of cryptocurrencies and the underlying DLT have opened up new possibilities for the secure digital transfer of money. The typical features of cryptocurrencies – the public ledger, immutability, and its decentralised nature – are hard to be incorporated into centralised banking.

A central bank digital currency powered by DLT would nonetheless support faster, auditable, and more transparent interbank settlement systems. 


However, not all countries support the introduction of a CBDC. Australia, New Zealand and South Korea have raised concerns about its effect on the stability of the financial system. In their argument against CBDC, they cited risks associated with “credit, liquidity and legal management” and “significant implications for the [central] bank's financial stability mandate.”

Indeed, introduction of CBDCs available directly to the public could lead to unintended consequences during economically uncertain times. For instance, credit contraction could be exacerbated by commercial bank customers transferring their funds to a more secure and risk-free CBDC, starving the commercial banks of access to deposits. This, in turn, would lead to a large contraction of consumer credit, harming the real economy.

The mainland's digital currency, however, will not be available directly to the public and will not compete with commercial bank deposits. It will be used by the PBOC and commercial banks for settlement of transactions. This may increase transparency of the Chinese banking system and create more stability.

Reuters reported that the mainland's digital currency would “strike a balance between allowing anonymous payments and preventing money-laundering.” In fact, tracing digital currency transactions on an effectively centralised ledger should be simple and effortless. Hence, a China’s digital currency will enable the central bank to track money laundering, terrorism financing, and other illegal activities.

On the other hand, this represents another potential drawback of a China’s digital currency as it will give a central bank the power to observe and control individuals’ finances and transactions, including those happening on China’s successful mobile payments applications.

Nonetheless, the Bank of England’s study concluded that CBDC issuance “could permanently raise GDP by as much as three percent… [and] could substantially improve the central bank’s ability to stabilise the business cycle.”

As DLT and regulations mature, central banks may need to implement digital currencies or risk losing relevance in the global economy. Commercial banks have to react to successful CBDCs too, and plan to replace deposits with other sources of funds. 

Central banks need to bear in mind that, in the transition to the central bank issued digital currencies, they must not lose sight of their primary role – maintaining trust in money.
0 Comments

Decentralised Finance in a centralised world (as published in Business Times on July 25, 2019)

7/29/2019

0 Comments

 
Decentralized Finance in a Centralized World
By Emir Hrnjic and Nikodem Tomczak

The growth of global financial markets has created enormous wealth, especially benefitting a few players who are closely connected to the world’s main financial centres. 

The centralized nature of the industry has enabled these powerful intermediaries to position themselves in the middle of the system and thus extract rents from other participants. 

This oligopolistic structure has stifled competition and decreased efficiency, while increasing the cost of financial services. 

Reflecting on this, Vitalik Buterin, one of the leading crypto gurus and co-founder of Ethereum, recently stated that moving money between accounts using banks is “insanely inefficient” and “international payments… [are] even worse.” 

The rapid development of blockchain technologies, however, combined with the spread of low–cost mobile internet access is disrupting this model. Together they are opening the way to exciting innovations and the emergence of the Decentralized Finance movement. 

Known as DeFi this rapidly growing movement aims to revolutionize existing financial services by creating decentralized applications on top of peer–to–peer networks, such as Bitcoin, that operate without intermediaries. 

One of its main objectives is disintermediation and disempowerment of rent–extracting middlemen by enabling direct peer-to-peer transactions. 

LOW TRANSACTION COST

In 2015 Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, predicted that “Silicon Valley start-ups were coming to eat Wall Street’s lunch.” DeFi could be the manifestation of his prophecy.

After blockchain developers struggled to design a killer application, DeFi looks poised to transform the finance sector by automating payments and loans. 

For example, Bitcoin enables peer–to–peer payments at very low transaction cost and very refined price granularity. A case in point is the recent purchase of an art piece for U$0.00000004143 which was transferred almost instantaneously using a payments network built on top of Bitcoin. To put this amount in perspective, consider that one billion of these pieces would cost just U$41.43. 

This shows DeFi’s potential for improving facilitation of micropayments, microloans, and opening up new monetization strategies used in pay–per–use subscription, gaming and online advertising.  

With DeFi, transaction costs typically do not scale with transaction amounts, allowing for transfers of tens of millions of dollars for less than a dollar - a rate unthinkable in the current centralized financial systems with numerous intermediaries. 

In addition, transactions can also be finalized much more quickly than traditional financial institutions allow.

On the lending side, even though peer–to–peer crypto lending applications are in the nascent stage, their popularity has been growing at a rapid pace. 

DeFi lending taps into the blockchains’ ability to settle transactions using smart contracts instead of an intermediary, significantly reducing counterparty risk and cost. At the same time, typical annual percentage rates are lower than those available from traditional lenders. 

Moreover, since no credit checks are performed on some platforms, DeFi–enabled lending has the potential to reach many more people – especially in developing markets. 

BUILDING ON BITCOIN

The impact of DeFi on financial services then is potentially vast. 

DeFi benefits from the disruptive spirit that has driven innovation in Bitcoin, helping to build strong relationships between people and financial service providers.
 
Bitcoin, for example, has enabled the electronic transfer of value without middlemen. The trust element of Bitcoin is gained through open access to its public ledger, which does not depend on an intermediary to protect and secure its records which are instead guarded by cryptography. 

As a result, DeFi, just like Bitcoin, is less prone to manipulation and, hence, more resistant to censorship. 

Openness and public access to the ledger implies improved transparency and inclusiveness – two principal factors that strengthen and democratize financial relationships between individuals, corporations, and government organizations. 

DeFi can simplify access to financial products regardless of where people live or how wealthy they are, opening up the potential to contribute to finance at every level of society.  

Furthermore, open–source code of the underlying technology and permissive copyright licenses encourage continuous innovation. 

For example, smart contracts – pieces of code that reside on the blockchain and enable decentralized financial applications – automatically execute essential tasks. 

This predictability reduces the cost of doing business, while transparent recording of transactions and auditable contract code decrease the likelihood of disputes. 

GROWING PAINS

There are however certain trade-offs associated with building decentralized applications on top of public blockchains, among them low transaction processing rates and the high cost of maintaining a secure ledger. 

Currently, there are relatively few crypto custody services which are important for those investors who are not technologically savvy enough to directly use DeFi applications.

Furthermore, the notoriously poor user experience in the blockchain space urgently needs attention. Better product design and user-friendly apps would go a long way towards building wider adoption.

Then there are specific issues related to different applications. For example, whilst many crypto investors have raved about crypto–lending leader MakerDAO, some borrowers have been shocked by its sudden spike in interest rates – from an annual rate of 0.5 percent to almost 20 percent. 

Finally, as with all revolutionary technologies, regulatory uncertainty has haunted blockchain technologies since their inception. Conflicting messages from regulatory bodies regarding licensing requirements for exchanges will continue to slow down DeFi adoption. 

Overall DeFi is a novel and promising development that has a potential to transform the current financial systems by overtaking rent–extracting intermediaries and, thus, reducing costs of services. 

More specifically, it appears that DeFi is poised to impact payments and lending, while posing a serious competitive threat to traditional finance firms. 

DeFi undoubtedly has huge potential in improving financial inclusion. However, its technical complexity and many moving, interacting parts require careful assessment. 

Whilst the promised benefits are substantial, a treacherous path toward widespread adoption lies ahead.

0 Comments

Challenges ahead for Facebook’s Libra (as published in The Business  Times on July 4, 2019)

7/4/2019

0 Comments

 
The Business Times

Challenges ahead for Facebook’s Libra

Emir Hrnjic and Nikodem Tomczak
 
Facebook’s recently unveiled digital currency, Libra, has drawn much excitement over its potentially transformative impact.
 
Facebook’s 2.5 billion users around the world and the firm’s extensive experience in developing user-friendly apps undoubtedly provides Libra with a huge head start. Users will be able to use Libra to purchase goods, transfer money, as well as for in-app purchases on the Facebook Marketplace, WhatsApp, Instagram, and other affiliated platforms.
 
This gives Facebook an unrivalled ready market through which to accelerate Libra’s early adoption.
 
One crypto insider tweeted that Facebook’s announcement would “go down in history as THE catalyst that propelled digital assets… (including bitcoin) to mass global consumer adoption.”
 
Yet despite all the breathless excitement, achieving Facebook’s high ambitions for Libra will not be without challenges. Critics have warned that Libra will effectively be Facebook’s private currency and financial regulators have been cautious at best in their response to the news.
 
The Financial Times proclaimed that Libra was “nothing more than a brazen attempt to override national monetary sovereignty by creating a global-scale Federal Reserve equivalent.”
 
So is Libra really the game changer some have suggested? Here are three main challenges Facebook’s new cryptocurrency needs to overcome.
 
DATA PRIVACY
 
Libra will be pseudonymous like Bitcoin. All transaction data will only be available to and tracked by the members of the consortium who have access to its network. Facebook says it will not be available to the public.
 
The social network’s business model centres on collecting droves of personal data that allows advertisers to accurately target their marketing efforts. However, following some major data privacy scandals – think Cambridge Analytica as just one example – the firm has been under huge pressure from regulators to be more stringent about how this data is used.
 
Facebook faces an uphill task of convincing the public that Libra will be serious about data protection. Since Facebook’s official position is “there is no expectation of privacy” with Facebook data, it is not clear whether that culture will be reflected in Libra’s policies in the future.
 
Additionally, while Facebook’s wallet, Calibra, may not share its user data with Facebook, there is nothing preventing this or other apps built on the Libra Blockchain from having access to Facebook’s data. In fact, it would be very advantageous for these apps to tap into Facebook data for credit scoring and advertising purposes, for example.
 
Indeed, access to Facebook’s personal data trove and its potential misuse or manipulation is what many regulators fear.
 
REGULATORY PUSHBACK
 
While cryptocurrencies have a great potential, they have a very bad reputation due to widespread scams, frauds, and hacks that have cost investors billions of dollars. As regulators are trying to protect average consumers, their scepticism toward Libra is justified.
 
Anticipating regulators’ reluctance, Facebook discussed the launch of its cryptocurrency with central banks, including the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. Mark Zuckerberg reportedly met with the Governor of Bank of England, Mark Carney.
 
After the currency was announced, while Mr Carney publicly stated that the Bank would have “an open mind” about Libra, he also called for “strict regulations” if it takes off. What these might be remains to be seen.
 
In the US meanwhile, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, chair of the House Financial Services Committee, requested a moratorium on the development of Libra, comparing it to “starting a bank without going through any [regulatory] steps.” She also announced that Congress would hold a hearing on Libra.
 
And in France Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said that “it is out of question [that Libra will] become a sovereign currency,” citing concerns about privacy, money laundering, and terrorism financing.
 
DISTRIBUTED BUT CENTRALIZED
 
Economist and former US presidential advisor Nouriel Roubini, a famous crypto sceptic, stated bluntly that “[Libra] has nothing to do with blockchain [since it is] fully private, controlled, centralized, verified and authorized by a small number of permissioned nodes.”
 
Indeed, Libra is centralized and controlled by traditional financial intermediaries such as PayPal, Visa, and Mastercard. Tech giants including Uber, Lyft, and eBay have also invested at least U$10 million each to join the Libra Association. As of now, there are 28 founding members, with plans to expand to 100 members by the Libra Blockchain launch next year. These founders will act as “nodes” to continuously verify and add transactions to the Libra ledger.
 
While the transacting parties in Bitcoin and other decentralized cryptocurrencies do not need to trust each other, financial participants will have to trust Libra and the validating node operators. Indeed, trusting financial institutions proved disastrous to many customers prior to the financial crisis of 2007-2008. Moreover, blockchain purists denounce Libra for going against decentralization and trust-less nature in favour of centralized consensus protocols.
 
While cryptocurrencies aim to eliminate powerful intermediaries, Libra’s concept puts intermediaries back in the middle of the system enabling them to make excessive profits and capture valuable data.
 
At its development conference in May this year, Mark Zuckerberg said one of Facebook’s key development areas was to “make it as easy to send money to someone as it is to send a photo.” He identified payments and private commerce as “one of the areas we're really excited about.”
 
In fact, Facebook seems eager to build on its vast social media user base to dominate financial services. A parallel could be the case of Alibaba’s Alipay in China.
 
In order to reach that goal, Facebook will have to overcome significant hurdles. Whilst investors seem excited and optimistic about Libra – as evidenced by the five per cent increase in Facebook’s share price – it faces an arduous task ahead.

0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • Home
  • OPINION PIECES
  • Media
  • Case Studies
  • Publications
  • Exec Ed
  • Teaching
  • Presentations
  • Events
  • Block'N'White Consulting