Breaking news

IMF Warns Tokenisation Could Create New Financial Stability Risks

The International Monetary Fund has warned that tokenised finance could make the global financial system more efficient and resilient or introduce new vulnerabilities, depending on how regulators respond.

More Than A Technological Upgrade

Tokenisation is often presented as a faster and cheaper way to move money and assets. The IMF argues its impact could be far broader. By moving financial assets and liabilities onto shared digital ledgers, tokenisation could reshape market structures, redistribute risk and require regulators to rethink how financial systems are supervised.

In traditional markets, execution, clearing and settlement take place sequentially through multiple intermediaries. Tokenised systems can combine those functions into a single software-driven process, allowing transactions to be executed, transferred and settled almost simultaneously.

While that could improve efficiency, it would also shift where risk is concentrated. Instead of remaining primarily with banks, brokers and investment funds, risk could increasingly move to the digital platforms and infrastructure providers operating tokenised markets.

Speed Brings Efficiency And Exposure

Faster settlement, lower transaction costs and programmable assets are among tokenisation’s key advantages. However, the IMF warns that the same features could remove safeguards built into the current financial system.

Delays in settlement, reconciliation and liquidity management create costs, but they also give financial institutions time to detect errors, absorb shocks and respond during periods of market stress. Tokenised finance compresses those timelines.

As a result, liquidity pressures could emerge immediately, collateral calls could be triggered automatically, and disruptions could spread more quickly than firms or regulators can respond. Markets may become more efficient, but also more continuous, more automated and potentially less resilient during periods of stress.

The Battle Over Settlement Assets

One of the IMF’s main concerns is the future of settlement assets, the money used to complete financial transactions. While central bank money remains the safest settlement asset, tokenisation introduces several digital alternatives.

Tokenised bank deposits would largely fit within existing regulatory frameworks and could improve liquidity management through programmable, simultaneous settlement. However, continuous settlement would leave banks with less time to respond to unexpected disruptions, increasing the need for real-time liquidity support.

Stablecoins offer programmability and global reach, but their reliability depends on the quality of their reserves and the resilience of their issuers. Even fully backed stablecoins have come under pressure during periods of market stress.

Tokenised central bank reserves would eliminate credit risk from the settlement asset itself, but would also require central banks to operate or oversee new programmable infrastructure, expanding their role beyond traditional payment systems.

Banks Will Not Disappear, But Their Role Will Change

The IMF expects tokenisation to reshape rather than replace banks. Tokenised deposits could combine payments, settlement and treasury operations on shared ledgers, while tokenised lending could automate interest calculations, collateral management and risk controls through smart contracts.

In capital markets, tokenised securities could integrate issuance, trading, settlement, custody and compliance into a single workflow, reducing counterparty risk and speeding up processing. However, automated margin calls and redemption mechanisms could amplify stress during periods of market disruption.

Concentration Creates A New Systemic Risk

Shared permissioned ledgers could reduce fragmentation by consolidating activity on fewer platforms, making operational resilience, cybersecurity and governance increasingly important.

If digital infrastructure becomes central to market activity, operational failures could become systemic risks. The IMF also stresses that interoperability between platforms will be critical to prevent liquidity from becoming trapped across separate systems.

Regulation Must Move Into The Code

The IMF says tokenisation will require regulators to oversee not only financial institutions but also the software executing transactions. Smart contracts could become critical market infrastructure, increasing the need for transparency, governance and oversight.

Legal certainty will also be essential. Market participants must know whether tokenised records represent legal ownership, when settlement becomes final and which jurisdiction applies to cross-border transactions.

Why Emerging Markets Face A Bigger Trade-Off

For emerging and developing economies, tokenisation could improve cross-border payments, broaden market access and modernise settlement systems.

However, faster-moving tokenised assets could also accelerate capital flight, currency substitution and pressure on monetary sovereignty, particularly if privately issued global stablecoins become widely used for payments. The IMF says domestic regulation should remain the first line of defence, supported by international coordination.

The Policy Choices Will Determine The Outcome

The IMF says tokenisation is neither inherently beneficial nor inherently risky. Its impact will depend on the regulatory, legal and operational frameworks governing it.

According to the fund, the most resilient model combines private-sector innovation with risk-free settlement assets, clear legal frameworks and internationally coordinated oversight.

Cyprus Crypto Users Face New Risks As MiCA Rules Take Effect

Why Investors Need To Check The Company Behind Their Crypto Platform

Crypto users in Cyprus are being urged to verify exactly which company holds their assets after the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) transition period ended on July 1, 2026.

MiCA rules for crypto-asset service providers have applied since December 2024, but Cyprus allowed companies operating under its previous national framework to continue temporarily. CySEC required providers wishing to remain in the market to apply by February 27, 2026.

The end of the transition means that appearing on an old national register is no longer enough. Investors must check the specific legal entity providing the service and the activities it is authorised to perform.

Two Regulatory Routes

CySEC maintains separate registers for providers authorised under Article 63 and companies using the Article 60 notification route.

The lists should not simply be treated as a count of licensed crypto exchanges. Providers have different regulatory statuses and may be authorised for different services, including custody, transfers, exchanges or operating trading platforms.

Companies authorised elsewhere in the EU can also serve Cypriot customers through MiCA passporting. Investors should therefore check the wider ESMA register.

Familiar Brands Can Still Be Used In Scams

MiCA authorisation applies to a specific legal entity, not automatically to every website, subsidiary or service using the same brand. Fraudsters can copy a legitimate company’s name, logo and licence number while changing its website or payment details.

The regulatory transition creates another opportunity for scammers. They can imitate legitimate notices about account closures or transfers and claim that customers must urgently move their assets to a new “regulated” platform.

In its July announcement, CySEC warned that customers using unauthorised providers do not receive MiCA protections and advised investors to verify providers through ESMA.

A Wider European Shake-Up

The changes affect the broader European crypto market. VASPnet estimated that more than 1,700 unlicensed crypto companies could face closure, relocation or restructuring after the transition period.

ESMA’s register contained 323 authorised providers at the end of July, while TRM Labs identified 1,343 operating providers in the European Economic Area on July 1, including 281 with MiCA authorisation. The different figures reflect different methodologies, but point to a substantial number of providers operating without the new authorisation.

ESMA instructed unauthorised companies to stop accepting new EU customers, opening accounts and marketing their services, while allowing limited activity needed for an orderly withdrawal.

What Investors Should Check

MiCA introduces common requirements for areas such as governance, disclosures and safeguarding client assets, but it does not make crypto investments risk-free.

For Cyprus users, the key questions are which legal entity provides the service, what it is authorised to do and whether the website or contact details are genuine.

Requests to transfer assets urgently, pay recovery fees, reveal private keys or install remote-access software should be treated as red flags. MiCA may bring greater clarity to the market, but the transition has also created a new opportunity for criminals to exploit a very real regulatory change.

The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties
eCredo
Uol
Aretilaw firm

Become a Speaker

Become a Speaker

Become a Partner

Subscribe for our weekly newsletter