Animoca Indicates Fund Interest From Console Makers

India is strategically navigating the development of its digital rupee, with the Reserve Bank (RBI) actively addressing privacy concerns through technological solutions in its central bank digital currency (CBDC) pilot programs. According to a recent report by CoinDesk, a senior official with insights into these initiatives revealed that while progress is evident, the RBI is proactively exploring ways to ensure privacy in the use of the digital rupee.Photo by Julian Yu on UnsplashPursuing mechanisms to maintain anonymityThe RBI has introduced a new dimension to the discourse on privacy concerns associated with CBDC usage. The central bank official suggested that the RBI may seek legal backing from India’s finance ministry to enact legislation allowing customers to delete transactions for the purpose of maintaining anonymity. New-found urgencyPublic statements from the RBI suggested a lack of urgency in implementing a full-scale retail CBDC, coupled with a reluctance to provide a specific timeline. However, recent events indicate that an underlying sense of urgency may be emerging. In the past month, the retail CBDC achieved a notable milestone, processing one million transactions in a single day, with support from various banks. Several banks, including HDFC Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank, Axis Bank, Canara Bank, IDFC First Bank and Union Bank of India, reportedly encouraged their employees to deposit funds in CBDC instead of fiat currency, contributing to this achievement. The official overseeing the CBDC development emphasized the necessity for experimentation and substantial efforts to ensure the security of the digital currency. While the settlement aspect is considered straightforward, addressing latency remains a priority for the RBI. No mandate on taxThe RBI, historically known for its opposition to crypto both domestically and globally, clarified that crypto taxation is not within its mandate. This clarification suggests that the RBI might not object if the Indian government decides to reduce the stringent taxes currently imposed on cryptocurrencies. The central bank clarified that it lacks the mandate to express a viewpoint on reducing a contentious tax that has stirred debate within the crypto industry. The RBI has been a driving force behind the adoption of wholesale and retail CBDC since late 2022 when it initiated pilot programs. The official emphasized that taxation matters fall under the government’s purview, reinforcing the RBI’s focus on its designated responsibilities. Similarly, the country’s judiciary recently turned down a plea to have it formulate a crypto regulatory framework, outlining that this too is up to the government to address. The central bank has a historical context of attempting to ban cryptocurrencies, with effective prohibitions in place between 2018 and 2020 until a Supreme Court order overturned the ban. Since then, the RBI has consistently expressed concerns about cryptocurrencies in various forums, including the Group of 20, where India played a leading role in coordinating global regulation in the crypto space. Recent utterances from the RBI governor, Shaktikanta Das, suggest that the regulator is disinterested in seeing the offering of spot crypto exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in India despite that eventuality coming to pass last month in the United States. Das also spoke positively recently about the tokenization of real-world assets using blockchain technology.

Singaporean Regulator Proposes Framework for Digital Money UseThe Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has released a White Paper that outlines proposed standards for the use of digital assets. The aim is to establish a common protocol and conditions for the utilization of these assets.While the paper identifies the potential digital assets bring in streamlining transactions and promoting financial inclusion, it also outlines challenges that need to be addressed before digital money can be successfully implemented.Photo by Pixabay on PexelsPurpose Bound Money (PBM)MAS’s White Paper, which was published on Wednesday, provides requirements to protect the use of digital assets as a medium of exchange and offers a technical overview of Purpose Bound Money (PBM). PBM allows the sender of digital money to specify certain conditions such as validity periods or how the money can be spent.The covered digital monies include central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), tokenized bank deposits, and potentially well-regulated stablecoins, excluding digital assets that it considers volatile such as Bitcoin. These digital monies are generally pegged to real-world currencies, commodities, or financial institutions, making them more stable.MAS highlights that PBMs utilize a common protocol compatible with different ledger technologies and forms of money. This protocol enables money to be directed toward a specific purpose without requiring the money itself to be programmed. It functions as a secure two-layered delivery vehicle, with funds held as collateral in a “wrapper” until specific conditions are met for its release.Standardized formatThe standardized format outlined in the White Paper will allow users to access digital money using their preferred wallet provider. By establishing these standards, the prospects for digital money to become a significant component of the future financial and payments landscape are enhanced. Standardization and regulated use of PBMs can unlock economic value, facilitate efficient and inclusive digital transactions, and provide additional consumer protection.One notable application of PBMs is in protecting online payments, such as e-commerce transactions and prepaid packages. With PBMs, advance payments can be securely held until the service is fulfilled, ensuring that the product or service is delivered before funds are released. This benefits both consumers and merchants, assuring consumers of product delivery and allowing merchants to verify payment before delivering.PBMs can also aid businesses in mitigating risks associated with international trade transactions, ensuring secure and efficient payments while reducing the potential for fraud or non-payment.InteroperabilityTo ensure the safety and usability of digital monies, MAS highlights considerations that will impact PBM implementation. Interoperability across different platforms is crucial to avoid fragmentation and excessive fees. The choice of underlying digital currencies also affects usability and value, with CBDCs, tokenized bank liabilities, and stablecoins offering varying levels of guarantees and regulatory oversight. Additionally, privacy, digital readiness, and the impact on users need to be carefully assessed.MAS acknowledges that the regulatory landscape for digital monies is still evolving globally, which may lead to varying regulatory treatment of PBMs across jurisdictions. It believes that policy considerations should be thought through when designing PBM-based solutions, including decisions regarding issuance, distribution, and conditions for use.

BitMEX CEO Calls for an End to Internal Market MakersIn a recent interview, Stephan Lutz, the acting CEO and group CFO of 100x Group, the parent company of Seychelles-headquartered global crypto exchange BitMEX, expressed his belief that crypto exchanges should phase out their internal market-making teams.Photo by Joe Roberts on UnsplashProp trading desks unnecessarySpeaking with The Block, Lutz argued that with the growth of institutional liquidity providers and high-frequency traders (HFTs) in the market, proprietary trading desks are becoming unnecessary.Lutz stated: “You have enough HFTs out there and prop shops that can perform that function.” He was referring to the role of liquidity providers in filling gaps in the market. He made these comments in response to the emergence of information earlier this week that raised questions about internal trading practices at Crypto.com, a Singapore-based exchange.BitMEX, once the world’s largest crypto derivatives exchange, also used to employ internal traders who acted as market makers. However, Lutz explained that BitMEX’s internal trading team, named Arrakis Capital, now functions primarily as a “treasury desk.” He sees this transition as a natural evolution for crypto exchanges in a market that has matured and attracted more institutional liquidity providers.Arrakis Capital currently performs limited functions, including converting commission fees earned in Bitcoin into fiat currency for operational purposes, hedging BitMEX’s exposure to tokens held as inventory, and making markets for BitMEX’s token $BMEX. Lutz clarified that Arrakis’s market-making activities are limited because external market makers find the token’s liquidity insufficient.Regarding profitability, Lutz stated that Arrakis earns “very minor returns” of up to $100,000 per month from holding T-Bills, but it incurred losses last year. He noted that Arrakis used to play a more significant market-making role when BitMEX dominated the crypto futures market. However, he assured that the trading desk was always segregated, despite accusations in the past.Fee structuresLutz acknowledged that exchanges with internal trading teams have faced increased scrutiny since the controversies surrounding Alameda Research and FTX. To differentiate between benign internal trading teams and hedge fund-like operations, Lutz highlighted several factors, including the separation of client funds and house funds, access to sensitive data, and the ability to move markets on their own exchange. Fee structures also play a role, with low or no transaction fees potentially signaling a market-making motive rather than serving as a counterparty.Lutz’s perspective suggests that crypto exchanges should rely on external liquidity providers and HFTs rather than maintaining internal market-making teams. He argues that the market has evolved. At this point he feels that these teams are no longer necessary, due to the presence of established players within the digital assets space.As regulatory scrutiny grows, ensuring transparency and avoiding conflicts of interest become crucial for maintaining trust within the crypto exchange ecosystem. The digital assets industry is far from arriving at a mature stage in its development. While many in the industry have found the stance taken by regulators to be unhelpful, the industry itself must also demonstrate its ability to iteratively move towards best practice, without that being a knee-jerk response to regulatory enforcement.