-
The U.S. crackdown on Liberty Reserve is stoking fears that the government may effectively cut off digital currencies like Bitcoin as banks sever ties with businesses in this growing field.
May 29 -
Public officials talk as if facilitating anonymous financial transactions is in itself somehow nefarious. But there are legitimate reasons to keep online purchases and other activity private.
May 30 -
"Digital currencies are exciting because of the innovation," but "being a financial institution comes with certain responsibilities," says Fincen Director Jennifer Shasky Calvery in a Q&A.
May 30 -
To survive, Bitcoin businesses will have to do more than "de-anonymize" their operations. They will also have to cope with the loss of the digital currencys most fundamental characteristic: irrevocability.
June 5 -
It's not just the anonymity. Like cash and Bitcoin transactions, Liberty Reserve transfers were non-reversible, and that's important to certain merchants.
June 6 -
While the banking industry was recovering from a global financial crisis and reacting to the prospects of new regulations, smart entrepreneurs were finding new and better solutions to people's problems.
January 21
Spare a Ripple? Got change for a Bitcoin? Want to buy a PPCoin?
Like it or not, it seems that digital and virtual currencies are starting to gain traction. But not everyone is jumping in with two virtual feet; most banks have valid concerns and are waiting to see how the upstart currencies will fare and what opportunities they create for banks operating in the "real" banking sector.
First, it's important to note that there are major differences between most of the more popular digital or virtual currencies now in circulation. Bitcoins, for example, are generated (or "
But in many ways, it is digital currencies' differentiating factors that will create the greatest challenges to the fledgling system, in particular the current lack of regulatory oversight. In fact, many regulators have been watching the evolution of the sector with concern, citing not only lack of control should the system fail, but also that the systems may be vulnerable to money laundering, terrorism financing and fraud.
Not surprisingly, the U.S. regulators were the first to move. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network published guidance that attempted to clarify how digital currencies would be governed. Since the U.S. regulator often sets the precedent for other regulators around the world, it seems likely that many virtual currencies will soon be forced to align to the same rules that apply to their traditional competitors.
The virtual nature of the currencies also creates unique opportunities and challenges. A virtual exchange system if properly managed could greatly
Users are also concerned about the safety and security of their personal and private data since many of these currencies operate on a peer-to-peer level and are therefore perceived (rightly or wrongly) as being less secure. Bitcoin exchange servers have already been subject to the dreaded
Those virtual currencies that essentially operate as "floating currencies" have also come under pressure recently with many pundits claiming that, without the backing of government debt or equity, these currencies are prone to market bubbles and volatility.
Some of these concerns are well founded. In April, the value of a bitcoin plunged from $260 to just $130 before regaining some of its strength. At one point, a (now infamous) Bitcoin user paid 10,000 bitcoins for two pizzas which at $260 per coin must go down as the world's most expensive fast food purchase (of course, the value of a bitcoin was a mere one-quarter of one cent at the time of purchase).
However, I also believe that the strength and popularity of virtual currencies are directly correlated to the strength and perceived value of the U.S. dollar. What this means is that if inflation remains low and the dollar stays strong, virtual currencies will likely fade away into the annals of failed experiments. If, however, inflation starts to rise, we will likely see much more interest in alternative currencies.
So how should the traditional financial services sector respond to these new kids on the block? So far, banks have broken into three camps. The first camp is reactive: accounts belonging to exchange operators have allegedly been
The third and vastly largest camp is firmly in wait-and-see mode. In my opinion, this is likely the most prudent camp for the traditional banking sector; much must still be clarified with respect to the new currencies and few have developed viable or secure business models that warrant defensive movement from the traditional banking sector just yet.
In particular, banks taking a wait and see approach will want to pay close attention to how the currencies are treated by U.S. regulators over the coming year, study any new business models that may emerge from the more innovative banks and monitor the extent to which the currencies are buffeted by volatility.
That is not to say that the sector can be blithely ignored for the next few years. Virtual currencies have come a long way in a very short time and should therefore be kept on the horizon for those banks considering how their business model might change in the not-so-distant future.
Mitch Siegel is an advisory principal in KPMG's financial services practice.