A number of banks, for instance in China, have already started testing digital currencies. We may talk of a global technological revolution in central banks which will create a new form of money. What are the differences between a digital ruble and the currently existing cash and non-cash money forms? Firstly, a digital ruble is an obligation of the Central Bank, and not of commercial banks, which makes it similar to cash rubles. For those holding digital rubles, this implies that they will preserve this money, whatever happens to their banks. Secondly, a digital ruble enables faster and more reliable payments and settlements. We are currently exploring several models to design a digital ruble which organise the interaction between customers, the Central Bank and commercial banks differently, but all the models have these advantages. These are faster, reliable and secure payments. To a certain extent, a digital ruble also blurs the distinction between cash and non-cash payments. We are studying the option of launching offline payments with digital rubles via special-purpose wallets, but this is a challenging issue. This will enable people to pay with digital rubles even where there is no internet connection and they do not have cash. For companies operating in such localities, in remote areas, this option will reduce cash turnover costs. Of course, a digital ruble may also create new risks, and we are closely exploring them.
We do understand that it is rather difficult for small businesses to receive financing even in normal conditions, and in challenging times small and medium-sized enterprises are those who are affected the most. It is hard for small businesses to achieve favourable terms and protect their interests in the course of negotiations with banks. In addition, small, just as medium-sized enterprises are certainly on a budget and they need to have access to both loans and daily financial transactions. Normally, we closely monitor SME lending trends. This year, we also put a special focus on loan restructuring since it became highly requested when many companies really lost their revenues and customers. Not all companies had safety cushions; and even large corporates do not always have them. Moreover, it is rather hard for small and medium-sized businesses to maintain safety cushions for challenging times. I should stress that this period still differs from the 2014–2015 crisis, for instance. SME lending plummeted in 2014–2015, while this year the trend is generally positive. Of course, it may not fully offset all the hardships small and medium-sized enterprises have to face. Nonetheless, the loan portfolio has expanded by nearly 15%, specifically 14.7%, since the beginning of the year. The number of borrowers has increased by 63.6% since early 2020, to exceed 450,000 companies.