The existence of fraud, perpetrated for some time, appears to have been demonstrated. Consequently, high-tech firms participating in banking activities can pose risks similar to those entailed in banking. As has been proven, the technological complexity may actually hinder the detection of potential instances of fraud. Furthermore, these examples suggest that the financial supervision and regulation architecture may not be up to addressing the risks that these emerging players pose. Once again we should remember the “same activity, same regulation” principle, since they may entail equivalent risks. The volume of business and interconnectedness are other factors to bear in mind. These require us to adopt a global view. If companies grow too much, conduct significant cross-border business or have critical interdependencies, we must also consider the same systemic dimension as we already do for the banking sector. For decades we have been demanding that banks manage conflicts of interest, stressing the importance of appropriate governance arrangements, and requiring transparent corporate structures, compliance with legislation at consolidated level based on uniform criteria, coordination among supervisors focusing on the same corporate structure, etc. Let us not therefore make the same mistakes as in the past. If a new crisis takes us by surprise, it should at least be original. Allow me to clarify that we, the supervisors and regulators, are not against innovation or it being spearheaded by new players. Innovation is what drives us forward. Without it, the changes reflected in the report presented today wouldn’t be occurring. True, regulation often hinders the development of innovative solutions.
It is therefore a trailblazing piece of legislation at global level, aiming to avoid regulatory fragmentation across Member States vis-à-vis cryptoassets not qualifying as financial instruments or currencies. The regulation aims to improve transparency in relation to issuance, operation, organisation and governance of cryptoasset service providers; bolster consumer protection; and incorporate measures to prevent market abuse. It also aspires to cover the wide range of existing cryptoassets, including the aforementioned stablecoins. Let me conclude by thanking you once again for this invitation. The report published today accurately diagnoses the situation facing our financial sector. I think it is fair to point out that banks share this diagnosis and, broadly speaking, they are aware of what lies ahead. This does not make the challenge any less difficult, but is a necessary first step towards turning their intentions into actions. As I stated during another appearance, any challenge can be viewed from two opposing standpoints: either as a threat or as an opportunity. Whether it is perceived as one or the other often depends on the attitude adopted and the willingness deployed. Thank you. 5/5  BIS central bankers' speeches