The FPC made clear last year that to deliver that regulatory outcome “regulatory safeguards will be needed for a non-bank systemic stablecoin to ensure that the coin issuance is fully backed with high quality and liquid assets, alongside loss absorbing capital as necessary, to compensate coinholders in the event that the stablecoin fails”[9]. It also made clear that in the absence of deposit protection for coinholders, other elements of the regime would need to be strengthened to deliver the necessary level of assurance. The consultation will set out in more detail how the coinholders’ claims on the stablecoin issuer and wallets should be structured to deliver redemption at par in line with commercial bank money, how the backing assets should need to be managed to ensure they are always available to meet redemptions and, more generally the requirements for corporate structure, governance, accountability and transparency necessary to meet the standards we expect in other parts of the financial system that carry out the same functions. The FTX example underlines how important these aspects are. The legislation covers the use of crypto technologies for the payments function. The Treasury intends to consult in the near future on extending the investor protection, market integrity and other regulatory frameworks that cover the promotion and trading of financial products to activities and entities involving crypto assets. At present, in the UK, it is, to a large extent, only the anti-monetary laundering regulatory framework which applies to these activities and entities.
The broader concept of the “home market” should be developed further. One of the challenges will be to ensure strong competition in retail markets so that the benefits of integration could be felt by consumers across the region. Fostering sustainable growth in the region requires us to take a systemic view when designing harmonized regulation for the financial sector, and this is where the quality and proactivity of macro-prudential supervision becomes so important. The Nordic-Baltic dimension adds two nuances to the design of macro-prudential policies. First, our own experience of the past decade was a stark reminder of the particular challenges of managing capital flows in highly integrated economies and financial sectors. Second, most of the large Nordic banking groups have been considered as too big to fail in almost all countries in the region. BIS central bankers’ speeches  1  Diversity in the financial sector structures is a challenge for cross-border cooperation As I said earlier, the economies and financial sectors of the Nordic-Baltic region are diverse as well as closely integrated. Different countries in the region have opted for different policy frameworks; the structure of the financial sector also differs by country. It turns out that in a region of only eight countries, some of which are very small, one needs to tackle very much the same array of problems that make the coordination of financial sector policy and supervision so challenging in Europe. There are home and host countries; there are non-EU member states, EU member states, and euro area member states.