News & Development

The White House General Framework on Digital Assets: A Quick Breakdown
Explainer, News & Development

RAK DAO introduces comprehensive DAO Regulations

RAK DAO introduces comprehensive DAO Regulations INTRODUCTION Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (“DAOs”) have de facto existed within the blockchain and digital asset space for some time, driving innovation and decentralized governance. However, these entities were largely bereft of legal recognition, operating in a regulatory void without a defined legal personality. As a result, DAOs have been unable to fully realize their potential within traditional legal frameworks, lacking the legal standing typically afforded to corporate entities. With the introduction of the DAO Association Regulations (“Regulations”) by the Ras Al Khaimah Digital Asset Oasis Authority (“RAK DAO” or “Authority”), DAOs can now establish themselves as formal corporate entities within the RAK DAO region. This legal framework grants DAOs legal sanctity by adding features such as structural clarity, governance mechanisms, and enhanced accountability. These provisions allow DAOs to operate more effectively within the traditional legal system, while still retaining the digital, decentralized characteristics that define their unique operational model. A brief summary of the Regulation is provided as below-mentioned: What is the legal structure of a DAO under the Regulations? The legal personality of a DAO, once incorporated under the Regulations, is that of a body corporate with its own name and distinct legal existence from its members and token holders, and is regarded as a DAO Association. From the date of incorporation, a DAO is capable of exercising all functions of an incorporated entity, entering into legally binding obligations, acquiring and disposing of assets, and bearing its own liabilities. Under the current regime, two categories of DAOs have been envisaged, i.e.,  Alpha DAO Association; and  Start-up DAO Association.  It is yet to be notified what shall constitute the parameters to be considered for a DAO to fall under either of the categories, however, a brief distinction can be made on the following basis: What all categories of members a DAO has?  Under the scope of the Regulations, a DAO essentially has three categories of members: (i) Founding members- who are responsible for the incorporation of DAO; (ii) Council members- who are responsible for overseeing the operations and taking final decisions by voting for the DAO; and (iii) Governance Token Holders- who are responsible for taking internal decisions for the DAO including appointment of council members. What all categories of members a DAO has?  Under the scope of the Regulations, a DAO essentially has three categories of members: (i) Founding members- who are responsible for the incorporation of DAO; (ii) Council members- who are responsible for overseeing the operations and taking final decisions by voting for the DAO; and (iii) Governance Token Holders- who are responsible for taking internal decisions for the DAO including appointment of council members. How can a DAO be formed?  Any application may be made for incorporation of a DAO and registering it as a DAO Association under the Regulations by providing the documents and information required under Clause 9 of the Regulations, which broadly includes:  Founding Members: At least two Founding Members must apply for the incorporation of the DAO, and provide necessary documents in relation to them and furnish the Guarantee as prescribed by the Registrar.  Essential Information: The application shall include inter alia the following details: The proposed name and nature of activities of the DAO. Governance structure, including decision-making rights and dispute resolution mechanisms. Details of the Founding Members (both natural persons and corporate entities), along with the roles of key individuals such as Council Members and Managers. Information on the DAO’s token mechanisms, treasury management policies, and the use of smart contracts. Compliance and Business Plan: The application must also include a business plan and a compliance note, confirming adherence to the Regulations and that the DAO will operate within the scope of its intended activities and trade license. Can a DAO issue tokens?  A DAO registered with the Authority can issue a new class of tokens after submitting a white paper (or equivalent document) to the Registrar, outlining the structure and characteristics of the proposed tokens, including distribution, vesting, supply, and utility or governance features. Additionally, the DAO must provide a legal opinion confirming that the token complies with all applicable UAE laws, does not qualify as a security token under UAE federal law, and that the DAO’s activities comply with relevant regulations. A cybersecurity audit of the smart contracts related to the operation or distribution of the tokens is also required, along with any other documents the Registrar may prescribe.  How will a DAO be governed ?  Internal Constitution The DAO shall have its own constitution, Memorandum of Association and DAO Association register which shall govern the internal governance and shall be approved by the Registrar.  Governance token holders The rights  and duties of the members of the DAO shall be conferred on the basis of the governance token holding. The holders of the governance tokens of the DAO shall the rights related including but not to implementation and amendment of Smart Contracts, election and removal of Council Members, appointment of Alternate Council Members, approval of Governance Proposals without a General Meeting, appointment of a Manager or Registered Agent (if not a Startup DAO), amendment of the Constitution, and voting rights of Governance Tokens. The governance token holders are also entitled to initiate any proposal which may relate to the subjects envisaged under the constitution of the DAO and may include initiation of a new project, termination of an existing project, manage of funds, protocol development, etc.  Council Members Council members shall convene a general meeting at the request of any governance token holder eligible under the constitution to take up a governance proposal.  Can a DAO issue tokens other than governance tokens? Yes, a DAO can also issue miscellaneous tokens which can relate to operations, administration, provision of service or maintenance of DAOs. Striking off and Winding Up.  The registrar may strike off the name of the DAO from the register for the reasons provided in the Regulation. The DAO registered with the Authority may also choose to voluntarily wind up

The NFT Royalties Debate Explained
Explainer, News & Development

The NFT Royalties Debate Explained

The NFT Royalties Debate Explained What is the NFT Royalties Debate and Why is it Important? The NFT Royalties Debate is an ongoing discussion about the potential for creators to receive royalties from the sale of their Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs). This debate is important because it has the potential to revolutionize the way creators are compensated for their work. NFTs are digital assets that are unique and cannot be replicated, making them ideal for digital art, music, and other creative works. If creators are able to receive royalties from the sale of their NFTs, it could provide them with a new source of income and help to ensure that they are fairly compensated for their work. This could also help to create a more equitable and sustainable creative economy. How Can Artists Benefit from NFT Royalties? NFT royalties are a great way for artists to benefit from their work. By creating an NFT, artists can receive royalties from the sale of their artwork, as well as from any subsequent sales of the NFT. This provides artists with a steady stream of income, allowing them to focus on their craft and create more art. NFT royalties are also beneficial for artists because they can be used to fund future projects. By receiving royalties from the sale of their artwork, artists can use the money to purchase supplies, hire assistants, or even invest in marketing and promotion. This can help them reach a wider audience and increase their chances of success. Finally, NFT royalties can help artists build a reputation and establish themselves as professionals in the art world. By receiving royalties from their artwork, artists can demonstrate their commitment to their craft and show that they are serious about their work. This can help them gain recognition and respect from other artists and art collectors. Overall, NFT royalties are a great way for artists to benefit from their work. By receiving royalties from the sale of their artwork, artists can receive a steady stream of income, fund future projects, and build a reputation in the art world. What Are the Pros and Cons of NFT Royalties? Pros of NFT Royalties: 1. Increased Revenue: NFT royalties offer creators a new way to generate revenue from their work. This can be especially beneficial for independent artists who may not have access to traditional royalty streams. 2. Transparency: NFT royalties are transparent and easy to track, allowing creators to know exactly how much they are earning from their work. 3. Ownership: NFT royalties give creators ownership over their work, allowing them to control how it is used and distributed. Cons of NFT Royalties: 1. High Fees: NFT royalties come with high transaction fees, which can eat into creators’ profits. 2. Limited Reach: NFT royalties are still relatively new and not widely adopted, meaning that creators may not be able to reach as many potential buyers as they would with traditional royalty streams. 3. Volatility: The value of NFTs can be volatile, meaning that creators may not be able to predict how much they will earn from their work. What Are the Legal Implications of NFT Royalties? The legal implications of NFT royalties are complex and varied. It is important to understand the legal implications of NFT royalties before entering into any agreement. NFT royalties are typically paid to the creator of the NFT, and the terms of the agreement will determine how the royalties are paid. Generally, royalties are paid in the form of a percentage of the sale price of the NFT. The creator of the NFT will also typically receive a portion of the proceeds from any subsequent sales of the NFT. In addition to the payment of royalties, the creator of the NFT may also be entitled to certain rights, such as the right to control the use of the NFT, the right to receive a portion of any profits generated from the sale of the NFT, and the right to receive a portion of any profits generated from the sale of derivative works based on the NFT. It is important to note that the legal implications of NFT royalties may vary depending on the jurisdiction in which the agreement is made. It is therefore important to consult with a qualified attorney to ensure that all legal requirements are met. Additionally, it is important to ensure that all parties involved in the agreement are aware of their rights and obligations under the agreement. Recent Developments The battle between zero-fee non-fungible token (NFT) marketplace Blur and leading competitor OpenSea has intensified as both platforms vie for market share among NFT creators. Recently Blur published a blog post aimed at NFT creators that laid out the differences in royalty payment options between its platform and OpenSea.In November, it expanded royalties to permission NFTs and a month later began enforcing a minimum royalty fee of 0.5%. The platform said that because of conflicting rules, artists can’t earn royalties on both OpenSea and Blur simultaneously and that it recommends that creators block their tokens from being listed on OpenSea. (Cam Thompson, Feb 2023) Today, creators can’t earn royalties on Blur and OpenSea at the same time. OpenSea sets royalties to optional on these collections, and Blur enforces minimum 0.5% royalties (the seller can opt-in to higher royalties as well). Option 3 (Recommended) – Block OpenSea: Our preference is that creators should be able to earn royalties on all marketplaces that they whitelist, rather than being forced to choose. This option will only be recommended until Option 4 becomes available.Option 4 – Don’t block either Creators that whitelist both OpenSea and Blur should be able to earn royalties on both platforms. Maintaining price competitiveness is critical to prevent traders from shifting to fully zero royalty marketplaces. (Blur Blog, Feb 2023) The nonfungible token (NFT) marketplace Blur has seen its trading volumes and total sell-side liquidity skyrocket since conducting an airdrop on Feb. 14. Blur’s incentive program and advanced NFT trading features are causing users to

The Deemed Data Protection Bill 2022
News & Development, Opinion

The Deemed Data Protection Bill 2022

The Deemed Data Protection Bill 2022 The Boring Part: DPB 2019 The Data Protection Bill 2019 (DPB 2019) was introduced in the lower house of the Indian parliament, the Lok Sabha, on December 11, 2019. It sought to provide a framework for the regulation of data processing activities in India. It was criticized by privacy advocates for its weak protections for data subjects and its failure to address key concerns related to data governance. The bill was pending before a parliamentary committee, but was withdrawn on August 3, 2022. The DPB 2019’s (promised) key features were: Critics were quick to point out many issues with the DPB 2019. For instance, it did not require companies to get consent from individuals before collecting, using or sharing their personal data. It also did not place any restrictions on how companies could use or share individuals’ biometric data, or even require companies to disclose data breaches to affected individuals. It did not give individuals the right to know what personal data is being collected about them (which makes sense given they were classified as data ‘subjects’). Fast forward to 2022: the government seems to have taken heed of some these concerns while drafting the Data Protection Bill 2022. Or it least it says so. The Brief Story of a Failed Rebranding: DPB 2022 On November 18, 2022 the legislature proposed a new bill which is now under civil society review (yes, I do secretly hope this CSR catches on). Its USP is that it would require data handlers (not a legal term yet) to take steps towards the protection of personal data of Indians and would give individuals the right to know what personal data is being collected about them, the right to change their consent for the collection and use of their personal data, and the right to file a complaint if they feel their rights have been violated. And since no Indian legislation is complete unless it sets up its own governing authority, the DPB 2022, just like its predecessor, promises to establish a data protection authority to oversee the implementation of the law. But relax, it’s called a ‘board’ now. And remember the data ‘subject’? She’s been rebranded as the data ‘principal’. Hare Krishna! What could possible go wrong? In a word…lawyers. The government is a disguised army of lawyers (I’ll rant about this some other time because it has to do with HLA Hart). As tweefolk have already started noticing, the DPB 2022 plays the ambiguity card well. It tries to preserve the real rule-making powers to itself through transparency-deferral-devices such as ‘deemed consent’ and ‘as may be prescribed’. The long and short of it is that the DPB 2022 guarantees nothing on any of its key promises. In fact, it seems to tilt the scales more heavily in favour of big tech than previously. Sample this, there are new obligations on data principals for inaccurate information, and a total cap of 500cr INR (Zuck’s revenue from India last year was worth almost thrice this amount) for breaches by data fiduciaries. Moreover, there are explicit provisions permitting the free global transfer of data with little to no protection (PWC say that data localisation principles have been ‘eased out’). There’s a lot more detail but I think you get the big picture. My favourite part? ‘consent managers’, go figure. Whataboutery Blockchain So if GDPR is the gold standard in terms of data protection laws, we can firmly say that the DPB 2022 is swiggy – promising much, delivering nothing. Seriously, this was the government’s chance to showcase that Digital India is a forward looking venture, not some back-office-hack-job for big tech. There is zero mention of leveraging new or emergent technologies for protecting personal data. Instead, the government chose to bury or defer all the important decisional criteria and facilitate a market for Indian citizens’ personal data. Does this have any direct implications for the blockchain industry? Sure. Depending on the protocol and its function, it may incur obligations, liabilities, and rights of data processors or fiduciaries. Conceptually speaking, if it is fully decentralised, then these obligations would be hard to pin down on one person. And just like in the Ooki DAO case, the Data Protection Board may find itself chasing a bunch of code. What I find truly surprising/distressing is the lack of coordination between government departments, and their mutual blindness. On the one hand, ethical AI and blockchain technologies are being promoted, while on the other its genuine potential to create public good is being overlooked. Let there be no confusion about this, the DPB 2022 is not badly drafted, it is just anachronistic. Its aim is to resuscitate big tech in an age when we should be giving it some more milk of the poppy. RECENT BLOGS Read More Explainer Lessons from the FTX Collapse Lessons from the FTX Collapse The FTX collapse is a major blow to the crypto industry. It is a reminder that the industry is still in its early stages and February 3, 2024 Read More Explainer De-freezing bank accounts of crypto P2P traders: A Legal primer De-freezing bank accounts of crypto P2P traders: A Legal primer Introduction Peer-to-Peer (P2P) crypto transactions executed by Indian traders have reportedly increased significantly in the last few years. These P2P transactions February 3, 2024 Read More Explainer FIU Registration of VDA Service Providers FIU Registration of VDA Service Providers Introduction Regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies i.e. virtual digital assets (VDAs) has significantly evolved in India in the last two years. Though a VDA specific January 23, 2024 Read More Uncategorized Are Payment gateways ‘reporting entities’ under PMLA? Are Payment gateways ‘reporting entities’ under PMLA? Introduction Should a word or a phrase defined similarly in two different statutes be interpreted differently? Hon’ble Delhi High Court has answered this July 28, 2023 Read More Explainer An Overview of DAO Legal Wrappers An Overview of DAO Legal Wrappers Exploring the Benefits of DAO Legal Wrappers for BusinessesBusinesses are increasingly turning

RBI’s Concept Note on Indian CBDCs
News & Development, Explainer

RBI’s Concept Note on Indian CBDCs

RBI’s Concept Note on Indian CBDCs The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has released a concept note on Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), referred to as Digital Rupee, in India. The Government of India announced the launch of the Digital Rupee from the financial year 2022-23 in its last budget and consequently the RBI constituted an internal high-level Committee to study various aspects of CBDC. Based on the deliberations of the committee, the RBI has issued this concept note which broadly captures benefits, motivation, design features, technology choices, privacy aspects, and risks associated with CBDC in India.  Though the concept note only identifies and highlights important aspects of CBDCs which must be understood, deliberated and decided, it also subtly conveys the policy stand that the RBI is likely to take on some of the issues discussed in the note.  The Concept Note’s Core Ideas The concept notes contain several pages justifying the need to create a digital rupee and even elaborately distinguish the proposed CBDC from the existing payment infrastructure which is already significantly digitized. Among the key motivations, the concept note names many benefits including a reduction in operational costs, innovation in payments, cross-border payments, and financial inclusion. CBDC vs. Cryptocurrency Interestingly, one of the ‘motivations’ for CBDC, as per the concept note is as follows:  “It is the responsibility of the central bank to provide its citizens with a risk-free central bank digital money which will provide the users the same experience of dealing in currency in digital form, without any risks associated with private cryptocurrencies.“ RBI seems to conceive CBDC as an alternative to cryptocurrencies to “meet the public’s need for digital currencies”.  Wholesale and Retail CBDC CBDCs have been classified into two broad categories: Retail (general purpose) CBDCs will be utilised by private entities, non-financial businesses, and consumers; Wholesale CBDCs will be restricted for use by select financial institutions. Central banks intend to use both mediums in the Indian economy since Retail CBDCs address financial inclusion. At the same time, Wholesale CBDC has the potential to transform the settlement systems for financial transactions undertaken by banks to ensure efficiency and security in terms of the utility of collateral, operational costs, and liquidity management. Such a system would then complete reconciliation, confirmation, and finally, completion of the transaction by ensuring fund transfer between bank accounts.  Single-tier or Two-tier Model  The direct or single-tier model of CBDC involves the direct interaction of businesses or individuals with the central bank which will not require any intermediaries. However, if this model is adopted, the RBI will be responsible for the customer onboarding, KYC, and related operational aspects of the CBDC.  The indirect CBDC is a typical Central Bank Digital Currencies type with considerable similarities to existing retail payment processes. Individuals would need an intermediary layer of financial institutions like commercial banks etc. to access and use CBDC. Such intermediaries oversee onboarding and communications with businesses and individuals and send payment messages to financial institutions.  Considering the operational obligations required on the part of RBI, the concept note concludes that the indirect or two-tier model is the most suitable architecture for retail CBDC in India. Therefore, RBI will only create and issue tokens and the banks, exchanges, or other Token Service Providers (TSPs) will take care of the user onboarding, KYC, and other procedural compliances.  Should CBDCs bear interest? RBI has highlighted that if the CBDC bears interest, it will shift away from having cash-like attributes to a “deposit-like” attribute which could lead to a massive “disintermediation in the financial system”. Such disintermediation will cause a loss of deposits to the banks and will impede the bank’s credit creation capacity. On the other hand, if CBDC is not interest bearing then it will only be used as a payment instrument, but will not remain attractive as a store of value. The concept note does not select a winner here and rather suggests a possible middle path by imposing a limit on the amount of CBDCs that can be held by consumers for transactional purposes. RBI has emphasized that CBDC should be introduced in a way that is least disruptive to the existing banking systems and, therefore, it is less likely that CBDCs would be bearing any interest.  Token-based v Account-based Model Token CBDCs are bearer instruments where whoever holds the tokens at a given point will be presumed to own them. However, an account-based system requires a check of the record of balances and transactions of all holders of the CBDC and indicates the ownership in accordance with it. RBI has recommended utilizing a token-based system for retail CBDCs and an account-based system for wholesale CBDCs. The wholesale CBDCs will be issued in account-based form since it attempts to offer instant settlements and facilitates transactions. The retail CBDCs will comply with a token-based system to ensure universal access to the digital rupee, enabling the detection of token counterfeiting and potentially restoring value if an individual loses the device. Under such a regime, users could withdraw digital tokens from banks like they withdrew physical cash. Anonymity vs. AML/KYC  Retail CBDC must-have traits similar to currency/cash to attract customers. The concept note highlights the following traits: Cash offers significant anonymity to users which may be difficult to adopt in the design of the digital rupee. CBDC being a digital form will invariably leave transactional footprints. Though RBI seems to be in favor of allowing anonymity, at least for transactions up to certain threshold limit, it also highlights the importance of balancing between allowing anonymity and following customer identification compliances. Few Other Considerations The concept note has also identified a few broader technical considerations while deciding the technical design and platform for the Indian CBDC, but does not answer the much-awaited question – of whether CBDC will be based on Blockchain. The note mentions that the platform can either be a distributed ledger or a centralized system. Broader technical principles highlighted by the RBI include – cyber security, technical stability, scalability, rate of

The White House General Framework on Digital Assets: A Quick Breakdown
Explainer, News & Development

RAK DAO introduces comprehensive DAO Regulations

The White House General Framework on Digital Assets: A Quick Breakdown The “First-Ever Comprehensive Framework for Responsible Development of Digital Assets,” which encompasses a joint fact sheet on six key directives formulated by federal agencies for cryptocurrency regulations in the nation, has been released by the American government. The framework pertains to an executive order the president issued in March calling for several U.S. government entities to develop a trajectory on cryptocurrencies and present their findings. Thus, it summarizes the content of nine separate reports submitted to the president to articulate a comprehensive framework for developing effective digital assets that would enable U.S. firms to get a footing in regional and international markets. Similar to the executive order, the “Comprehensive Framework” does not establish any new legislation but offers a clearer picture of U.S. cryptocurrency regulation. Nonetheless, the current regulators, like the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, are harnessed for resilience by the new directives. They have been encouraged to “aggressively pursue investigations and enforcement actions against unlawful practices in the digital assets space.” The fact sheet, which was published on the official website of the White House on September 16, 2022, is categorized into seven sections: (1) Protecting Consumers, Investors, and Businesses; (2) Promoting Access to Safe, Affordable Financial Services; (3) Fostering Financial Stability; (4) Advancing Responsible Innovation; (5) Reinforcing Our Global Financial Leadership and Competitiveness; (6) Fighting Illicit Finance; and (7) Exploring a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Although the framework is extensive, it does not address the cryptocurrency market’s fundamental question, as reinforced by CoinDesk—what exactly qualifies a crypto token as a security, and which should be subject to commodity regulation? Here are some of the significant points in Biden’s framework, which does examine the central bank’s digital currency to cryptocurrency innovation. Firstly, it is essential to recognize that the division of regulatory responsibilities has not been done because the government wants to consider the entire spectrum. Digital assets “offer significant opportunities to reinforce US leadership in the global financial system and remain at the technological forefront,” according to the Biden Administration. This statement only highlights how challenging it is to change the perspectives of some elected officials and other decision-makers who have a clear animus toward the developing digital asset ecosystem. Safeguarding Individuals and Companies The framework considered the rising annual financial losses from digital assets, preparing to take action against the cryptocurrency market’s high volatility, noting a 2018 Wall Street Journal article regarding disclosure and transparency issues with offerings of digital assets. These strategies include strengthening efforts to monitor complaints, conducting investigations and enforcement against illegal actions “aggressively,” and providing assistance to deal with current and emerging risks. To ensure that each agency’s initiatives are as successful as possible, they will be urged to share their data on consumer complaints involving digital assets. Finally, to foster more rational decisions and investments in cryptocurrencies, the Financial Literacy Education Commission (‘FLEC’) will raise public knowledge of the risks associated with digital assets and how to mitigate them. Combating Illicit Finance The escalating unlawful activities occurring in the industry are highlighted in the White House’s new framework. The measures suggested to halt them seem to have an effective force of power. The administration enforces stringent security measures, amending the Bank Secrecy Act, anti-tip-off statutes, and laws against unlicensed money transmission to explicitly apply to companies that provide services for digital assets, including exchanges and platforms for nonfungible tokens. The government intends to monitor the progress of cryptocurrencies, examine them, and make any necessary adjustments. The president has urged Congress to raise the penalties for unauthorized money transmission and to amend specific federal legislation such that the Department of Justice may pursue cases involving digital assets in any jurisdiction where a victim of those crimes is discovered. Additionally, Biden directed the Treasury to complete an assessment of the decentralized financial sector concerning illicit finance by the end of February 2023 and an evaluation of NFTs by July 2023. Ensuring Financial Stability The framework makes mention of stablecoins’ potential for instability and warns that, without the right regulation, they might lead to disruptive runs. The White House fact sheet states, “Digital assets and the mainstream financial system are becoming increasingly intertwined, creating channels for the turmoil to have spillover effects.” The Treasury will coordinate with agencies to analyze new strategic risks, the administration said, and engage with financial institutions to optimize their ability to evaluate and address cybervulnerabilities. These initiatives will also be coordinated with international allies, such as the Financial Stability Board and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (‘OECD’). The Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) is anticipated to release a study in October that examines the risks to financial stability posed by digital assets and identifies any corresponding regulatory gaps. Exploring a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency The framework asserts that the digital currency issued by the U.S. central bank (CBDC) “may enable a payment system that is more efficient, offers a foundation for further technical innovation, facilitates speedier cross-border transactions, and is ecologically friendly.” According to the White House, an official digital currency could increase financial inclusion, protect from cyber vulnerabilities, and reduce the risks associated with illicit financial transactions. It should be noted that there are various forms of digital US dollars, ranging from the electronic US dollars found in commercial institutions to the abundance of stablecoins that are pegged to the USD. The Federal Reserve’s version of a CBDC is the hypothetical digital dollar. It is essentially the digital equivalent of the U.S. Dollar, fully regulated by a central authority and supported by the nation’s central bank. The report continues, “It could promote financial inclusion and equity by enabling access for a broad set of consumers.” The framework outlines the government’s policy objectives for a U.S. CBDC system, but the administration has urged the Federal to continue its current analysis, trial, and evaluation of a CBDC.“To support the Federal Reserve’s efforts and to advance other work on a

Scroll to Top