Digital Euro and the U.S. GENIUS Act: Opportunities and Risks for the Swiss Financial Centre

Abstract

The rapid digitalization of monetary and financial systems is fundamentally transforming the architecture of global finance. Central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), stablecoins, and tokenized financial infrastructures increasingly challenge traditional banking models, payment systems, and monetary governance frameworks. Two recent developments illustrate this structural shift particularly clearly: the European Central Bank’s Digital Euro project and the United States’ GENIUS Act, which established a comprehensive regulatory framework for dollar-backed stablecoins. Together, these initiatives reflect competing institutional approaches to the future of digital money and signal an intensifying geopolitical contest over monetary sovereignty, payment infrastructure, and financial influence.

This paper examines the strategic opportunities and risks arising from these developments for the Swiss financial centre. Drawing on contemporary literature in monetary economics, financial regulation, digital finance, and international political economy, the analysis evaluates how CBDCs and regulated stablecoins may reshape financial intermediation, cross-border settlement systems, capital flows, and the role of commercial banks. Particular attention is devoted to the implications for Switzerland as a globally integrated but politically neutral financial centre with a highly developed banking and fintech ecosystem.

The findings suggest that Switzerland is simultaneously exposed to significant disruption and substantial strategic opportunity. On the one hand, the expansion of foreign CBDCs and dollar-backed stablecoins may weaken traditional banking revenues, intensify regulatory fragmentation, and gradually erode aspects of Swiss monetary sovereignty through digital currency substitution. On the other hand, Switzerland’s institutional stability, regulatory flexibility, technological expertise, and reputation for trust position it favourably to become a leading hub for tokenized finance, digital asset custody, cross-border settlement infrastructure, and interoperable financial services.

The paper argues that Switzerland’s future competitiveness will depend on its ability to balance innovation with financial stability, maintain international interoperability, strengthen cybersecurity and operational resilience, and preserve institutional trust in increasingly fragmented digital monetary ecosystems. Ultimately, the transition toward programmable and digitally native forms of money represents not merely a technological transformation, but a broader restructuring of the global monetary order with profound implications for financial centres worldwide.

Related Papers

• Tokenized Settlement and the Future of European Financial Market Infrastructure

1. Introduction

The digitalization of financial systems has accelerated significantly over the past decade, fundamentally transforming the architecture of money, payment systems, and financial intermediation. While monetary evolution has historically occurred incrementally through institutional developments such as central banking, fiat currency systems, electronic banking, and card-based payment infrastructures, recent advances in distributed ledger technologies (DLTs), tokenization, stablecoins, and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) represent a far more disruptive shift in the foundations of monetary systems (Brühl, 2025). Unlike earlier forms of financial digitalization, contemporary digital money introduces programmability, real-time settlement, decentralized transaction infrastructures, and new forms of monetary governance that increasingly blur the distinction between public and private money (Gütschow and Lucke, 2025).

This transformation is not merely technological but also geopolitical and institutional. Monetary infrastructures have historically served as instruments of economic sovereignty and geopolitical influence. Consequently, the growing competition surrounding digital currencies reflects broader strategic struggles over the future architecture of the international monetary system. Van ’t Klooster, Martino and Monnet (2025) argue that the emergence of CBDCs and regulated stablecoins signals a transition toward “cryptomercantilism,” whereby states seek to preserve monetary sovereignty and strategic autonomy through digitally native payment infrastructures. Simultaneously, private-sector actors are increasingly challenging the traditional monopoly of sovereign monetary issuance by introducing globally accessible tokenized payment instruments.

Two recent developments exemplify this structural transformation. First, the European Central Bank (ECB) advanced the Digital Euro initiative into its implementation preparation phase, with the stated objective of ensuring readiness for a potential retail CBDC issuance by 2029. The Digital Euro is intended to function alongside physical cash and commercial bank deposits while strengthening European strategic autonomy in payments and reducing dependence on non-European payment providers (Schueffel, 2025). Second, the United States enacted the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act in 2025, establishing the first comprehensive federal regulatory framework governing stablecoin issuance, reserve management, prudential supervision, and redemption rights. The GENIUS Act represents a major institutionalization of privately issued digital dollars and reinforces the strategic role of dollar-backed stablecoins within global financial markets (Zhang, 2025).

Together, these initiatives illustrate two distinct but interconnected models of monetary digitalization. The European approach prioritizes sovereign central bank money and public monetary control through CBDCs, whereas the U.S. framework promotes regulated private-sector innovation anchored in dollar-denominated stablecoins. Both models have substantial implications for global payment systems, cross-border capital flows, and financial market infrastructures. Recent research suggests that stablecoins and CBDCs may significantly alter the economics of banking by reshaping deposit structures, liquidity management, settlement mechanisms, and the role of intermediaries within the financial system (Baeriswyl, Reynard and Swoboda, 2024).

For Switzerland, these developments are particularly consequential. The Swiss financial centre has historically derived its international competitiveness from political neutrality, institutional stability, legal certainty, sophisticated banking expertise, and strong cross-border capital integration. However, the emergence of programmable money and tokenized financial infrastructures may challenge several of these traditional competitive advantages. Stablecoins have the potential to reduce dependence on correspondent banking systems and conventional payment rails, while CBDCs may fundamentally transform cross-border settlement architectures and weaken the intermediation role of commercial banks (Nyffenegger, 2024). Moreover, increasing international regulatory fragmentation between the European Union and the United States creates strategic uncertainty for globally integrated Swiss financial institutions.

At the same time, digital monetary transformation also presents substantial opportunities for Switzerland. The country’s advanced fintech ecosystem, blockchain-friendly regulatory environment, and internationally recognized financial governance framework position it favourably to become a leading hub for compliant digital asset services, tokenized finance, and interoperable cross-border settlement infrastructures. In particular, Switzerland may leverage its reputation for trust and regulatory credibility to position itself as a neutral intermediary between competing digital currency ecosystems.

Against this background, this paper examines the strategic opportunities and risks arising from the Digital Euro and the U.S. GENIUS Act for the Swiss financial centre. It addresses the following research question:

How do the emergence of CBDCs and regulated stablecoins transform the global monetary landscape, and what strategic implications do these developments create for Switzerland’s financial sector?

To answer this question, the analysis integrates perspectives from monetary economics, financial regulation, international political economy, and digital financial infrastructure studies. The paper evaluates how emerging forms of digital money may reshape financial intermediation, monetary sovereignty, cross-border capital flows, and competitive positioning within the evolving global monetary order.

2. Theoretical Background: The Evolution of Digital Money

2.1 From Electronic Money to Programmable Money

Contemporary monetary systems are already overwhelmingly digital in operational terms. In advanced economies, the majority of money exists not as physical cash but as electronic claims recorded on commercial bank balance sheets. Central bank reserves, interbank payment systems, and digital deposit accounts have therefore long constituted the functional backbone of modern monetary economies. Nevertheless, recent developments in distributed ledger technologies (DLTs), tokenization, and cryptographic payment infrastructures represent a qualitatively different phase of monetary digitalization. Unlike earlier electronic payment systems, which merely digitized existing banking processes, emerging forms of digital money introduce programmability, decentralized validation mechanisms, tokenized ownership structures, and increasingly automated forms of financial intermediation (Brühl, 2025).

This transformation has accelerated the convergence between monetary systems and digital network infrastructures. Traditional electronic money relied on centralized ledgers controlled by banks and payment intermediaries, whereas programmable money enables transactions and contractual conditions to be executed automatically through smart contracts and distributed settlement architectures. Consequently, money increasingly functions not only as a medium of exchange and store of value but also as an operational layer within digitally integrated economic ecosystems (Allen et al., 2020).

Within this evolving landscape, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and stablecoins have emerged as the two dominant institutional models of digital money. CBDCs represent digital liabilities issued directly by central banks and are therefore extensions of sovereign monetary authority into digital environments. Stablecoins, by contrast, are privately issued digital tokens whose value is typically pegged to fiat currencies and backed by reserve assets such as government securities or bank deposits. Although both forms of digital money aim to enhance payment efficiency, settlement speed, and financial interoperability, they differ fundamentally in governance structure, legal status, monetary implications, and institutional trust foundations (Auer, Cornelli and Frost, 2020).

The distinction between public and private digital money has become increasingly important in policy debates surrounding financial stability and monetary sovereignty. CBDCs are generally justified as mechanisms for preserving public access to central bank money in an increasingly cashless economy, while stablecoins are often promoted as innovation-driven alternatives capable of improving cross-border payments and integrating financial services into decentralized digital ecosystems. According to Schueffel (2025), the Digital Euro seeks to replicate several characteristics traditionally associated with physical cash, including universal accessibility, legal certainty, and public trust. However, substantial challenges remain regarding anonymity, privacy protection, and unrestricted fungibility. In particular, concerns persist that retail CBDCs may expand state visibility into private transactions and alter the relationship between citizens, banks, and monetary authorities.

Similarly, Brühl (2025) argues that the Digital Euro introduces considerable operational and governance complexity because it must coexist with existing European banking structures while maintaining financial stability and monetary policy effectiveness. The integration of a retail CBDC into a highly fragmented banking union creates tensions between innovation, financial intermediation, and systemic risk management. Gütschow and Lucke (2025) further contend that the proposed architecture of the Digital Euro risks excessive centralization and could unintentionally weaken the role of commercial banks by shifting deposits toward central bank liabilities during periods of financial stress.

The emergence of programmable money also transforms the economic function of payment systems themselves. Payments are increasingly embedded into automated digital processes, decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols, tokenized asset markets, and machine-to-machine transactions. Smart contracts allow monetary transfers to occur conditionally and automatically based on predefined contractual logic, thereby reducing the need for traditional intermediaries. This development extends the role of money beyond passive exchange functionality toward active participation in computational economic systems (Catalini and Gans, 2020).

Moreover, tokenization enables financial assets, deposits, and even central bank liabilities to circulate within interoperable blockchain ecosystems. As a result, future financial infrastructures may become increasingly integrated, real-time, and programmable. Nyffenegger (2024) argues that next-generation CBDC architectures based on layered or rollup infrastructures could significantly enhance scalability and interoperability while enabling more sophisticated forms of programmable settlement. Such developments may ultimately redefine how liquidity, collateral, and settlement finality operate within international financial markets.

2.2 Monetary Sovereignty and Geopolitical Competition

The rapid emergence of digital currencies is not solely a technological phenomenon but also a manifestation of intensifying geopolitical competition over monetary power and financial infrastructure. Historically, control over payment systems and reserve currencies has constituted a core dimension of geopolitical influence. In the digital era, states increasingly view monetary infrastructures as strategic assets linked to economic sovereignty, sanctions enforcement, technological autonomy, and international competitiveness (Ferrari et al., 2023).

Within this context, the European Union perceives the Digital Euro as a strategic instrument for strengthening European monetary sovereignty and reducing dependence on foreign-controlled payment providers such as Visa, Mastercard, Apple Pay, and large U.S.-based technology firms. The ECB has repeatedly emphasized that excessive reliance on non-European payment infrastructures exposes the European financial system to external vulnerabilities and undermines strategic autonomy in payments (ECB, 2025). The Digital Euro therefore represents not merely a payment innovation but also a broader political project aimed at reinforcing Europe’s capacity to govern its own monetary and financial infrastructures.

Conversely, the United States has adopted a more market-oriented strategy centred on regulated stablecoins. Through the enactment of the GENIUS Act in 2025, the U.S. government effectively institutionalized private-sector dollar stablecoins as an extension of the global dollar system. Stablecoins backed by U.S. Treasury securities increasingly function as digitally native dollar instruments circulating beyond traditional banking channels. This development strengthens international demand for dollar-denominated assets while extending the global reach of U.S. financial influence into decentralized digital networks (Zhang, 2025).

Van ’t Klooster, Martino and Monnet (2025) characterize this evolving dynamic as “cryptomercantilism,” whereby states deploy digital monetary infrastructures to project geopolitical influence and preserve monetary sovereignty in an increasingly fragmented global financial system. Digital currencies thus become instruments of strategic competition comparable to payment networks, reserve currencies, and financial sanctions regimes.

The geopolitical implications of digital money are particularly significant for smaller but globally integrated financial centres such as Switzerland. Although the Swiss franc remains one of the world’s most stable currencies, Switzerland’s financial sector depends heavily on international payment connectivity, cross-border capital mobility, and interoperability with foreign financial infrastructures. If international settlement ecosystems increasingly operate through euro-denominated CBDCs or dollar-backed stablecoins, Switzerland risks becoming structurally dependent on foreign digital monetary systems.

At the same time, Switzerland may also benefit strategically from this fragmentation. Its political neutrality, advanced fintech ecosystem, and internationally respected regulatory framework position the country as a potential intermediary between competing monetary blocs. Swiss institutions could therefore play an important role in facilitating interoperability, custody, compliance, and cross-border settlement across heterogeneous digital currency systems. However, maintaining this position will require continuous adaptation to evolving international regulatory standards, technological infrastructures, and geopolitical dynamics.

3. The Digital Euro

3.1 Objectives and Design

The European Central Bank’s (ECB) Digital Euro initiative represents one of the most ambitious monetary modernization projects undertaken by a major advanced economy. Conceived as a retail central bank digital currency (CBDC), the Digital Euro aims to provide citizens and businesses with universally accessible digital central bank money that can coexist alongside physical cash and commercial bank deposits. The project reflects not only technological innovation but also broader concerns surrounding monetary sovereignty, strategic autonomy, and the resilience of European payment infrastructures in an increasingly digitalized global economy (Brühl, 2025).

The ECB has articulated several core objectives for the Digital Euro project. These include:

• preserving European monetary sovereignty in the face of growing private and foreign digital payment dominance;

• maintaining public access to central bank money in increasingly cashless societies;

• strengthening the resilience and efficiency of European payment systems;

• reducing dependence on non-European payment providers and infrastructures;

• supporting financial innovation and digital competitiveness within the European Union.

At its core, the Digital Euro seeks to ensure that sovereign public money remains relevant within an evolving digital economy increasingly shaped by private-sector payment ecosystems and global technology firms. The ECB has repeatedly emphasized that the Digital Euro is intended to complement rather than replace physical cash, thereby preserving consumer choice and financial inclusiveness (ECB, 2025).

From a technical and institutional perspective, the proposed architecture of the Digital Euro combines centralized monetary governance with partially decentralized payment functionalities. Current design proposals include features such as offline payment capability, privacy-preserving transaction mechanisms, programmable payment functionalities, holding limits, and interoperability with existing banking and payment infrastructures. Offline functionality is particularly significant because it seeks to replicate one of the defining characteristics of physical cash: usability independent of continuous network connectivity or centralized authorization systems (Schueffel, 2025).

At the same time, the Digital Euro’s design reflects an attempt to balance competing policy objectives. On the one hand, policymakers seek to promote innovation, efficiency, and strategic autonomy. On the other hand, they must preserve financial stability, maintain effective monetary policy transmission, and avoid excessive disintermediation of commercial banks. This balancing act has generated substantial debate within both academic and policy circles.

Brühl (2025) argues that integrating the Digital Euro into Europe’s fragmented banking ecosystem introduces considerable operational, legal, and governance complexity. Unlike more centralized financial systems, the euro area consists of heterogeneous banking structures, national regulatory traditions, and diverse payment infrastructures. Consequently, implementing a unified CBDC framework requires extensive coordination between the ECB, national central banks, commercial banks, payment service providers, and regulatory authorities.

Similarly, Gütschow and Lucke (2025) criticize aspects of the proposed Digital Euro architecture for potentially increasing centralization within the monetary system. They argue that the ECB’s dominant role in transaction validation, settlement, and data governance may create systemic dependencies on centralized infrastructures while simultaneously weakening the traditional intermediation role of commercial banks. In particular, widespread adoption of CBDCs could shift deposits away from commercial banks toward central bank liabilities, thereby reducing bank funding capacity and altering credit creation dynamics.

Recent literature further suggests that the Digital Euro may fundamentally reshape the relationship between money, banking, and state authority. Bindseil and Panetta (2020) contend that retail CBDCs effectively expand the role of central banks beyond monetary policy and payment settlement into direct interaction with households and firms. Such a transformation would represent one of the most significant structural changes to modern central banking since the emergence of fiat monetary systems.

Moreover, the programmability of CBDCs introduces entirely new economic and regulatory possibilities. Programmable payments could facilitate automated taxation, conditional transfers, machine-to-machine transactions, and integrated smart-contract functionality within tokenized financial markets. However, these same capabilities also raise concerns regarding governance, privacy, and state influence over economic activity (Allen et al., 2022).

3.2 Risks Associated with CBDCs

Despite their potential efficiency gains, retail CBDCs introduce substantial risks for financial stability, banking intermediation, operational resilience, and civil liberties. One of the most significant concerns relates to the possibility of large-scale deposit migration from commercial banks toward central bank-issued digital money.

Baeriswyl, Reynard and Swoboda (2024) demonstrate that retail CBDCs may transfer liquidity and credit risks from commercial banks toward central banks by encouraging households and firms to hold risk-free digital central bank liabilities instead of commercial bank deposits. During periods of financial stress, this dynamic could accelerate digital bank runs, as consumers would be able to transfer funds instantly from private banks into CBDC accounts perceived as safer stores of value. Unlike traditional bank runs constrained by physical cash withdrawals and operational frictions, CBDC-enabled runs could occur at unprecedented speed and scale.

This disintermediation risk is particularly important in Europe, where bank-based financial intermediation remains central to credit creation and economic financing. If commercial banks experience structural deposit outflows into CBDCs, their funding models may weaken, potentially increasing reliance on wholesale funding markets and central bank liquidity facilities (Brunnermeier and Niepelt, 2019).

Beyond financial stability concerns, CBDCs also generate significant cybersecurity and operational risks. Because CBDCs would likely become critical national financial infrastructures, they may constitute attractive targets for cyberattacks, technical disruptions, or geopolitical interference. Operational resilience therefore becomes a core prerequisite for CBDC implementation. Any prolonged system outage or security breach could undermine public trust not only in digital currencies but also in broader monetary institutions.

Additional concerns include:

• concentration of financial and transactional data within centralized infrastructures;

• increased vulnerability to cyberattacks and technological failures;

• operational dependence on state-controlled digital systems;

• reduced anonymity compared to physical cash;

• potential distortions in monetary policy transmission mechanisms;

• heightened systemic importance of central bank infrastructure.

Privacy remains among the most politically sensitive dimensions of CBDC design. While the ECB has emphasized that the Digital Euro will incorporate privacy protections, scholars argue that no digital payment system can fully replicate the anonymity and decentralization characteristics of physical cash (Schueffel, 2025). Even where transaction data are pseudonymized, central banks and public authorities may retain unprecedented visibility into economic activity.

This raises broader concerns regarding financial surveillance and the expansion of state power within digital monetary systems. Kiff et al. (2020) argue that CBDC governance frameworks must carefully balance anti-money laundering requirements with civil liberties and democratic accountability. Public trust may therefore depend less on technical design alone and more on the institutional legitimacy and governance credibility of issuing central banks.

Furthermore, CBDCs may alter the conduct of monetary policy itself. In theory, programmable central bank money could enable more direct and granular monetary interventions, including targeted stimulus transfers, time-limited money, or differentiated interest rates. While such tools may improve policy transmission efficiency, critics warn that they could also politicize monetary policy and blur the boundaries between central banking and fiscal governance (Bordo and Levin, 2017).

Consequently, the Digital Euro debate extends far beyond payment efficiency or technological modernization. It ultimately concerns the future relationship between states, financial institutions, markets, and citizens within increasingly digitalized monetary economies.

4. The U.S. GENIUS Act and Stablecoin Regulation

4.1 The Rise of Stablecoins

Stablecoins have emerged as one of the most significant innovations within the contemporary digital financial ecosystem. Initially developed as liquidity instruments for cryptocurrency trading and decentralized finance (DeFi) applications, stablecoins have evolved into increasingly important global payment, settlement, and value-transfer mechanisms. Unlike highly volatile cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin or Ether, stablecoins seek to maintain price stability by pegging their value to underlying reference assets, most commonly sovereign fiat currencies such as the U.S. dollar. Their relative price stability, combined with blockchain-based transferability and near-instant settlement capabilities, has enabled stablecoins to function as digitally native monetary instruments within global financial markets (Bullmann, Klemm and Pinna, 2019).

Over time, stablecoins have expanded far beyond their original crypto-market utility. They increasingly facilitate cross-border remittances, international trade settlement, tokenized asset transactions, decentralized lending, and treasury management functions. In many respects, stablecoins now operate as parallel digital payment infrastructures that bypass traditional correspondent banking networks and conventional payment intermediaries. This development is particularly significant because it represents one of the first large-scale instances of privately issued digital money achieving quasi-systemic relevance in international finance (Gorton and Zhang, 2021).

The rapid growth of stablecoins prompted substantial regulatory concern among policymakers and central banks, particularly regarding financial stability, consumer protection, anti-money laundering compliance, and monetary sovereignty. In response, the United States enacted the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act in 2025, introducing the first comprehensive federal regulatory framework specifically governing stablecoin issuance and operation.

The GENIUS Act established regulatory standards covering:

• reserve asset composition and custody requirements;

• disclosure and transparency obligations;

• prudential supervision and licensing;

• redemption rights and consumer protections;

• operational resilience and cybersecurity standards;

• anti-money laundering and compliance requirements.

The legislation represented a turning point in the institutionalization of stablecoins within mainstream financial markets. By providing regulatory clarity and legal recognition, the GENIUS Act significantly accelerated institutional participation in stablecoin markets, particularly among banks, payment providers, fintech firms, and asset managers. Stablecoins increasingly operate as tokenized representations of U.S. dollars circulating across blockchain networks, effectively extending the international reach of dollar-denominated liquidity into decentralized digital infrastructures (Zhang, 2025).

Recent research demonstrates the scale and systemic relevance of this transformation. Stablecoin transaction volumes expanded rapidly between 2023 and 2025, approaching transaction levels comparable to established global payment networks in certain market segments. Simultaneously, major stablecoin issuers became substantial holders of short-term U.S. Treasury securities, thereby integrating stablecoin ecosystems more deeply into traditional financial markets (Aronoff et al., 2026). In this sense, stablecoins increasingly resemble components of the broader shadow banking system, combining money-market characteristics with blockchain-based transfer mechanisms.

The rise of stablecoins also reflects broader geopolitical dynamics surrounding the international role of the U.S. dollar. Whereas the European Union has largely prioritized sovereign CBDC development through the Digital Euro project, the United States has adopted a comparatively market-oriented approach by supporting regulated private-sector dollar stablecoins. This strategy effectively enables private actors to extend dollar dominance within digitally native financial ecosystems while preserving demand for U.S. government securities as reserve collateral (Panetta, 2022).

From an economic perspective, stablecoins offer several potential efficiency gains. These include faster settlement speeds, lower transaction costs, enhanced programmability, improved cross-border payment functionality, and interoperability with tokenized financial assets. In particular, programmable stablecoins may facilitate automated financial transactions through smart contracts, thereby supporting the growth of decentralized finance and tokenized capital markets (Catalini and Gans, 2020).

However, these advantages also introduce new forms of systemic interconnectedness between blockchain ecosystems and conventional financial markets. As stablecoins become more deeply embedded within payment systems, treasury markets, and digital asset infrastructures, their stability increasingly depends on both technological resilience and broader macro-financial conditions.

4.2 Systemic Risks of Stablecoins

Despite their efficiency benefits and growing institutional acceptance, stablecoins introduce substantial systemic vulnerabilities that challenge existing regulatory and monetary frameworks. One of the central concerns relates to the inherent fragility of confidence-based redemption mechanisms. Stablecoins derive their value not from sovereign backing or deposit insurance but from market confidence in the issuer’s reserve assets, liquidity management, and operational credibility.

Gorton and Zhang (2021) argue that stablecoins exhibit structural similarities to historical forms of private money and money-market funds, both of which have historically proven vulnerable to runs during periods of market stress. If users lose confidence in reserve quality or redemption capacity, large-scale withdrawals may occur rapidly, triggering destabilizing liquidity pressures.

Aronoff et al. (2026) emphasize that stablecoin stability depends not only on reserve composition but also on the resilience of the broader financial infrastructure supporting these systems. Stablecoin ecosystems are increasingly interconnected with repo markets, Treasury liquidity conditions, custodial banking arrangements, blockchain networks, and digital asset exchanges. Consequently, stress within one segment of the ecosystem may propagate rapidly across both traditional and decentralized financial markets.

Key systemic risks associated with stablecoins include:

• reserve runs and sudden redemption pressures;

• liquidity mismatches between reserves and liabilities;

• operational and governance failures;

• cyberattacks and technological disruptions;

• regulatory arbitrage across jurisdictions;

• concentration risks among major issuers and custodians;

• fragmentation between incompatible blockchain ecosystems.

Liquidity risk represents a particularly important concern. Even where reserve assets are nominally high quality, rapid redemption demands may force issuers to liquidate assets under stressed market conditions, potentially amplifying volatility within short-term funding markets. This dynamic became evident during episodes of stablecoin instability such as the collapse of TerraUSD in 2022 and temporary de-pegging events involving major fiat-backed stablecoins (Gorton and Zhang 2021).

Operational resilience also constitutes a critical challenge. Stablecoins rely heavily on blockchain infrastructures, smart contracts, custodial arrangements, and third-party service providers. Technical failures, coding vulnerabilities, or cyberattacks may therefore disrupt settlement functionality and undermine user confidence. Unlike traditional banking infrastructures, decentralized systems often operate across fragmented governance structures with ambiguous accountability mechanisms.

Another major issue concerns regulatory fragmentation. Stablecoin issuers frequently operate across multiple jurisdictions with differing legal standards regarding reserves, custody, disclosure, and prudential supervision. This creates opportunities for regulatory arbitrage, whereby issuers relocate operations to jurisdictions with weaker oversight. International coordination therefore remains essential to preventing systemic vulnerabilities from migrating across borders (Financial Stability Board, 2023).

Unlike CBDCs, stablecoins also generate distinct governance challenges because issuance remains fundamentally profit-oriented rather than grounded in public monetary mandates. Whereas central banks are generally tasked with maintaining monetary stability and public trust, private stablecoin issuers are incentivized primarily by market expansion, transaction revenues, and ecosystem growth. This divergence raises important questions regarding accountability, monetary sovereignty, and the appropriate balance between public and private control over digital monetary infrastructures.

Furthermore, the growing dominance of dollar-backed stablecoins may reinforce global financial asymmetries. Because most leading stablecoins are denominated in U.S. dollars and backed by U.S. Treasury securities, stablecoin expansion effectively extends the international reach of the dollar system into blockchain-based financial networks. As a result, stablecoins may contribute to a new form of digital dollarization, particularly in emerging markets and globally integrated financial centres (Panetta, 2022).

Consequently, the GENIUS Act represents not merely a regulatory framework for digital assets but a strategic institutional response to the emergence of privately issued programmable money with potentially systemic and geopolitical significance.

5. Implications for the Swiss Financial Centre

5.1 Strategic Opportunities

5.1.1 Switzerland as a Neutral Digital Finance Hub

The emergence of CBDCs, stablecoins, and programmable financial infrastructures presents Switzerland with both strategic challenges and significant opportunities. Historically, the Swiss financial centre has derived its global competitiveness from a combination of institutional stability, political neutrality, legal predictability, sophisticated banking expertise, and strong international connectivity. In the context of monetary digitalization, these structural characteristics may position Switzerland advantageously as a trusted intermediary within an increasingly fragmented global digital monetary system.

Several factors strengthen Switzerland’s strategic position in digital finance:

• internationally recognized banking and wealth management expertise;

• a highly developed fintech and blockchain ecosystem;

• strong legal certainty and regulatory credibility;

• political neutrality and monetary stability;

• early experience with digital asset and distributed ledger regulation.

Unlike larger jurisdictions constrained by geopolitical rivalries or highly centralized monetary governance structures, Switzerland possesses the flexibility to position itself as a neutral platform connecting multiple digital currency ecosystems. This intermediary role may become increasingly valuable as the European Union advances sovereign CBDC infrastructures through the Digital Euro while the United States expands the role of regulated dollar-denominated stablecoins under the GENIUS Act.

The Swiss regulatory environment has already demonstrated comparatively high adaptability toward blockchain-based finance. Switzerland was among the first jurisdictions to introduce comprehensive DLT legislation, clarify token classifications, and permit blockchain-based securities trading infrastructures. This regulatory pragmatism has contributed to the development of a highly concentrated blockchain ecosystem centred around Zug’s “Crypto Valley,” which hosts numerous fintech firms, blockchain infrastructure providers, custodians, and tokenization platforms (Schär, 2021).

As global financial infrastructures become increasingly tokenized and programmable, Swiss financial institutions may expand into several strategically important areas, including:

• cross-border settlement infrastructure;

• tokenized asset custody and safekeeping;

• compliant stablecoin issuance and reserve management;

• blockchain-based private banking and wealth management;

• programmable treasury and liquidity services;

• digital asset compliance and interoperability solutions.

Particularly important is Switzerland’s longstanding specialization in cross-border financial services and international wealth management. Programmable money and tokenized assets may significantly increase demand for secure custody, digital identity verification, transaction compliance, and interoperable settlement mechanisms. Swiss institutions are well positioned to provide such services because they combine technological capability with internationally recognized standards of financial governance and operational trustworthiness.

Furthermore, Switzerland’s monetary credibility and relatively independent geopolitical position may strengthen its role as a bridging jurisdiction between competing monetary blocs. As international digital payment ecosystems become increasingly fragmented between sovereign CBDCs and privately issued stablecoins, neutral financial centres capable of facilitating interoperability and regulatory coordination may gain strategic relevance.

Recent literature on tokenized finance suggests that jurisdictions capable of combining technological innovation with institutional credibility are likely to emerge as key nodes within future financial infrastructures (Auer, Haene and Holden, 2021). Switzerland’s institutional characteristics therefore provide a potentially durable competitive advantage in the evolving digital monetary landscape.

5.1.2 Expansion of Tokenized Finance

The rise of programmable money is closely linked to the broader tokenization of financial markets. Tokenization refers to the representation of financial claims, securities, deposits, and real-world assets on distributed ledger infrastructures. Combined with CBDCs or regulated stablecoins, tokenized financial systems may significantly transform capital market structures, settlement processes, and liquidity management.

Swiss banks and financial market infrastructures could benefit substantially from this transition. Blockchain-based settlement systems enable near-instant transaction finality, reduced counterparty risk, lower reconciliation costs, and enhanced operational transparency. These efficiencies are particularly relevant for Switzerland, whose financial sector remains deeply integrated into international capital markets and cross-border asset management activities.

Nyffenegger (2024) argues that blockchain-integrated CBDC architectures may facilitate the emergence of entirely new financial market infrastructures characterized by programmable settlement layers, interoperable digital assets, and automated compliance functionality. Such systems could fundamentally alter traditional post-trade processes by integrating clearing, settlement, and asset custody into unified distributed infrastructures.

For Swiss institutions, this transformation creates opportunities to develop interoperable tokenized financial products and services, including:

• tokenized securities and bonds;

• blockchain-based repo and collateral markets;

• programmable investment products;

• tokenized deposits;

• smart contract-enabled treasury operations.

The Swiss National Bank (SNB) has already demonstrated significant interest in wholesale CBDC experimentation through initiatives such as Project Helvetia, which explored the settlement of tokenized assets using central bank money on distributed ledger platforms (BIS, 2021). These experiments position Switzerland at the forefront of institutional tokenization research and strengthen its credibility as an innovation-oriented financial centre.

Moreover, tokenized finance may reinforce Switzerland’s role in global private wealth management. Wealthy clients increasingly seek exposure to digital assets, tokenized securities, and blockchain-integrated financial products within regulated and secure environments. Swiss banks therefore possess an opportunity to integrate traditional private banking expertise with emerging digital asset services.

Over time, programmable finance may also reduce barriers between traditional finance and decentralized finance (DeFi). Hybrid financial architectures combining regulated institutions with blockchain-based settlement infrastructures could become increasingly common. Switzerland’s relatively open regulatory framework and strong financial governance standards position it favourably within this emerging convergence.

5.2 Strategic Risks

5.2.1 Disintermediation of Swiss Banks

Despite these opportunities, digital monetary transformation also creates substantial strategic risks for the Swiss financial sector. One of the most significant concerns relates to the potential disintermediation of commercial banks. If households and firms increasingly hold CBDCs or stablecoins directly, traditional deposit-based banking models may weaken substantially.

Retail CBDCs and stablecoins may reduce the transactional importance of commercial bank deposits by enabling direct access to digital central bank money or blockchain-based private money. As a result, banks could experience declining deposit bases, reduced payment revenues, and weakened customer relationships. Brunnermeier and Niepelt (2019) argue that widespread adoption of public digital money may fundamentally alter the role of commercial banks in credit creation and liquidity transformation.

Although Swiss private banking may remain comparatively resilient due to its specialization in wealth management and advisory services, payment and settlement activities represent an important revenue stream for many institutions. Stablecoins and blockchain-based settlement systems may bypass traditional correspondent banking networks and reduce reliance on conventional payment intermediaries.

This threat is particularly relevant in cross-border finance, where stablecoins increasingly enable near-instant global value transfers outside conventional banking infrastructures. If international trade settlement and treasury operations migrate toward blockchain-based systems, Swiss banks may face intensified competition from fintech firms, stablecoin issuers, and decentralized financial platforms.

Furthermore, increased competition from programmable financial ecosystems may compress banking margins and accelerate structural consolidation within the sector. Smaller institutions lacking technological capabilities or digital infrastructure investments may struggle to remain competitive in increasingly tokenized financial markets.

5.2.2 Regulatory Fragmentation

Another major strategic challenge concerns growing international regulatory fragmentation. Switzerland’s financial sector depends heavily on cross-border interoperability and international market access. However, divergent regulatory approaches between the European Union, the United States, and other jurisdictions may complicate compliance for internationally active Swiss institutions.

The European Union’s Digital Euro framework prioritizes sovereign monetary control, strict regulatory oversight, and centralized governance structures. By contrast, the U.S. GENIUS Act adopts a comparatively market-oriented model centred on regulated private stablecoin issuance. These differing approaches may produce incompatible technical standards, reserve requirements, supervisory expectations, and data governance regimes.

Swiss institutions operating internationally may therefore face increasing compliance complexity and regulatory uncertainty. The challenge for Switzerland lies in maintaining regulatory flexibility and innovation capacity without jeopardizing equivalence recognition or international market access.

This balancing act is particularly difficult because Switzerland is not a member of the European Union but remains deeply integrated into European financial markets. Simultaneously, Switzerland also maintains close financial and investment ties with the United States and global dollar funding markets. Regulatory divergence between these monetary blocs may therefore place Swiss regulators and institutions under growing strategic pressure.

Schär (2021) notes that regulatory clarity and technological neutrality are likely to become decisive competitive factors in global digital finance. Excessively restrictive regulation may reduce innovation and investment, whereas insufficient oversight could undermine institutional trust and international credibility.

5.2.3 Monetary Sovereignty Risks

A further long-term concern involves the potential erosion of Swiss monetary sovereignty through the growing international dominance of foreign digital currencies. If euro-denominated CBDCs or dollar-backed stablecoins become widely used in international payments, digital commerce, and cross-border settlement, the relative importance of the Swiss franc may decline over time.

This phenomenon is often described as “digital dollarization” or “digital currency substitution.” Historically, smaller open economies have faced varying degrees of monetary dependence on dominant reserve currencies. However, programmable digital currencies may accelerate these dynamics by reducing transaction frictions and enabling direct cross-border access to foreign monetary systems (Ferrari, Mehl and Stracca, 2023).

Dollar-backed stablecoins are particularly important in this regard because they effectively extend the reach of the U.S. dollar into decentralized digital ecosystems. As stablecoins become integrated into international trade, tokenized finance, and decentralized applications, they may reinforce existing global dollar dominance while weakening the monetary autonomy of smaller jurisdictions.

The ECB has similarly warned that large-scale foreign stablecoin adoption could undermine regional monetary sovereignty and reduce the effectiveness of domestic monetary policy transmission mechanisms (Reuters, 2026). Although Switzerland benefits from the credibility and stability of the Swiss franc, prolonged dependence on foreign digital payment infrastructures may nevertheless weaken the strategic autonomy of Swiss monetary governance.

In addition, widespread use of foreign digital currencies within domestic financial systems may complicate financial supervision, anti-money laundering enforcement, and macroprudential policy implementation. Monetary fragmentation across multiple interoperable digital currency systems could therefore create new systemic risks for small but globally integrated financial centres.

Consequently, Switzerland faces a complex strategic dilemma. On the one hand, it must remain open and interoperable within rapidly evolving digital monetary networks. On the other hand, excessive dependence on foreign-controlled digital infrastructures may gradually erode monetary independence and reduce long-term financial sovereignty.

6. Strategic Positioning for Switzerland

The accelerating transformation of global monetary infrastructures requires Switzerland to reassess its long-term strategic positioning within the international financial system. The emergence of CBDCs, regulated stablecoins, tokenized assets, and programmable financial architectures is reshaping competitive dynamics across banking, payments, and capital markets. In this environment, Switzerland’s future competitiveness will depend not merely on technological adoption, but on its ability to combine innovation with institutional credibility, regulatory flexibility, and operational resilience.

Historically, the Swiss financial centre has successfully adapted to major structural shifts in international finance by leveraging political neutrality, legal certainty, sophisticated banking expertise, and high levels of institutional trust. However, digital monetary transformation introduces new forms of competition that increasingly depend on technological interoperability, data governance, cybersecurity capabilities, and digital infrastructure integration. Consequently, Switzerland must develop a strategic framework capable of preserving its traditional strengths while adapting to rapidly evolving global monetary ecosystems.

The following strategic priorities are likely to become particularly important.

6.1 Regulatory Innovation

Regulatory adaptability represents one of Switzerland’s most important strategic advantages in the emerging digital financial environment. Unlike larger jurisdictions often constrained by complex supranational governance structures or geopolitical rivalries, Switzerland possesses relatively high institutional flexibility in financial regulation and innovation policy.

To remain competitive, Swiss regulators must continue developing technology-neutral regulatory frameworks that encourage experimentation and financial innovation while preserving systemic stability and market integrity. Technology-neutral regulation is particularly important because digital monetary systems evolve rapidly and may involve multiple underlying infrastructures, including distributed ledgers, tokenized deposits, smart contracts, and hybrid settlement systems. Excessively prescriptive regulatory approaches risk becoming technologically obsolete and may discourage innovation within the Swiss financial sector.

Switzerland has already demonstrated comparatively advanced regulatory pragmatism through the introduction of comprehensive distributed ledger technology (DLT) legislation and the clarification of token classifications under Swiss financial law. This proactive regulatory approach has contributed significantly to the growth of Switzerland’s blockchain and digital asset ecosystem (Schär, 2021).

Going forward, Swiss regulators may need to focus increasingly on several areas:

• legal recognition of tokenized financial instruments;

• prudential treatment of stablecoins and tokenized deposits;

• digital identity and compliance infrastructures;

• cross-border supervisory coordination;

• operational standards for programmable financial systems;

• governance frameworks for decentralized finance integration.

Regulatory clarity will become especially important as institutional investors and globally active financial institutions increase exposure to digital assets and blockchain-based financial infrastructures. Research by Auer, Cornelli and Frost (2020) suggests that jurisdictions capable of combining innovation-friendly regulation with strong supervisory credibility are likely to attract disproportionate shares of future digital financial activity.

At the same time, Swiss regulators must carefully balance innovation incentives against financial stability risks. Overly permissive frameworks may expose the Swiss financial centre to reputational risks, regulatory arbitrage, or systemic vulnerabilities, particularly in areas involving stablecoin issuance, decentralized finance, and tokenized asset markets. Consequently, Switzerland’s competitive advantage will likely depend on its ability to maintain high regulatory credibility while preserving openness to technological experimentation.

6.2 International Interoperability

In an increasingly fragmented digital monetary environment, interoperability between financial infrastructures will become a decisive determinant of international competitiveness. The future global financial system is unlikely to converge around a single dominant digital currency architecture. Instead, multiple CBDCs, stablecoins, tokenized deposit systems, and decentralized settlement networks will likely coexist across jurisdictions.

For Switzerland, whose financial sector depends heavily on cross-border capital flows and international financial connectivity, interoperability therefore becomes strategically essential. Swiss financial institutions must be capable of interacting efficiently with both sovereign CBDC systems such as the Digital Euro and privately issued stablecoin ecosystems operating on global blockchain infrastructures.

Interoperability operates at several interconnected levels:

• technical interoperability between payment and settlement systems;

• legal interoperability across regulatory jurisdictions;

• operational interoperability for compliance and identity verification;

• liquidity interoperability across currencies and tokenized assets.

Failure to achieve interoperability could marginalize Swiss institutions within future digital payment ecosystems by increasing transaction costs, reducing settlement efficiency, and limiting market access. Conversely, institutions capable of facilitating seamless cross-border integration between heterogeneous digital monetary systems may acquire significant strategic importance.

Recent BIS research emphasizes that cross-border interoperability is one of the primary challenges facing the global development of CBDCs and tokenized financial markets (Auer, Haene and Holden, 2021). Fragmented standards and incompatible infrastructures may otherwise lead to inefficiencies, liquidity fragmentation, and regulatory complexity.

Switzerland is relatively well positioned in this regard because of its internationally oriented banking sector and extensive experience operating across multiple legal and monetary systems. The Swiss National Bank’s participation in wholesale CBDC experiments such as Project Helvetia demonstrates a strategic awareness of the importance of interoperable tokenized settlement infrastructures (BIS, 2021).

Over time, Switzerland may further strengthen its position by specializing in interoperability services, including:

• cross-border digital asset settlement;

• multi-currency liquidity management;

• tokenized collateral infrastructure;

• compliance and digital identity orchestration;

• programmable treasury interoperability solutions.

Such services may become increasingly valuable as digital monetary systems remain geographically and politically fragmented.

6.3 Institutional Trust

Trust has historically constituted the core comparative advantage of the Swiss financial centre and will likely become even more important in the era of programmable money and tokenized finance. Digital monetary systems fundamentally depend on confidence in technological infrastructures, legal enforceability, reserve backing, cybersecurity protections, and institutional governance.

In fragmented digital financial ecosystems characterized by competing currencies, decentralized infrastructures, and rapidly evolving regulatory frameworks, institutions capable of providing reliability, operational security, and legal certainty may gain disproportionate strategic importance.

Switzerland benefits from several trust-related advantages:

• long-standing financial and political stability;

• internationally respected legal institutions;

• strong property rights protections;

• sophisticated compliance and governance standards;

• reputation for operational reliability and discretion.

These characteristics are particularly relevant as concerns surrounding stablecoin governance, cyber vulnerabilities, digital fraud, and platform concentration intensify globally. While blockchain systems may reduce reliance on certain intermediaries, they do not eliminate the need for trusted institutions. Instead, trust increasingly shifts toward areas such as custody, compliance verification, identity management, dispute resolution, and infrastructure governance (Catalini and Gans, 2020).

Swiss financial institutions may therefore strengthen their competitive positioning by focusing on high-trust digital financial services, including:

• institutional-grade digital asset custody;

• compliant tokenization platforms;

• regulated stablecoin infrastructure;

• secure cross-border settlement services;

• digital wealth management for tokenized assets.

Moreover, institutional trust may become a key differentiator between sovereign CBDC systems and private stablecoin ecosystems. While stablecoins may offer speed and programmability advantages, concerns regarding reserve transparency, governance accountability, and issuer incentives remain significant. Swiss institutions capable of combining innovation with strong governance standards may therefore occupy a strategically valuable intermediary role within global digital finance.

Importantly, trust in digital monetary systems extends beyond financial institutions themselves. Public confidence also depends heavily on the credibility of regulators, central banks, and legal systems. Switzerland’s relatively high levels of institutional trust may therefore provide a durable competitive advantage within increasingly complex and politically contested digital financial ecosystems.

6.4 Cybersecurity and Operational Resilience

As money becomes increasingly digital, programmable, and network-dependent, cybersecurity and operational resilience become central pillars of financial stability. Future monetary systems will rely heavily on interconnected digital infrastructures, cloud computing environments, distributed ledger technologies, smart contracts, and real-time settlement architectures. Consequently, cyber risk evolves from a purely technical concern into a systemic financial stability issue.

CBDCs, stablecoins, and tokenized financial systems may become critical national and international infrastructures whose disruption could have severe macroeconomic consequences. Cyberattacks targeting payment systems, digital asset custodians, smart contracts, or central bank infrastructures could undermine confidence in monetary systems and trigger widespread financial instability.

Operational resilience therefore becomes strategically essential for Switzerland’s financial sector. Swiss institutions must invest heavily in:

• cybersecurity infrastructure and monitoring capabilities;

• resilient payment and settlement architectures;

• secure digital identity systems;

• redundancy and recovery mechanisms;

• smart contract auditing and verification;

• operational continuity planning.

Research increasingly highlights that digital financial systems create new forms of systemic interdependence between financial institutions, technology providers, cloud infrastructures, and blockchain networks (Arner, Auer and Frost, 2020). Concentration risks associated with cloud service providers, blockchain validators, or infrastructure operators may therefore generate previously unfamiliar vulnerabilities.

In addition, programmable financial systems may introduce unique operational risks associated with software vulnerabilities, coding errors, and automated transaction execution. Smart contract failures within decentralized financial ecosystems have already demonstrated the potential for rapid and large-scale financial losses.

For Switzerland, cybersecurity resilience is especially important because the country’s financial sector plays a disproportionately large international role relative to the size of the domestic economy. Any major cyber incident affecting Swiss financial infrastructures could therefore have significant reputational and systemic consequences.

The strategic importance of cybersecurity also intersects with geopolitical considerations. As monetary infrastructures become increasingly digitalized, cyber capabilities may become instruments of geopolitical competition and financial coercion. Protecting financial infrastructures from state-sponsored cyber threats, technological dependencies, and digital espionage will therefore become a core dimension of financial sovereignty.

Ultimately, Switzerland’s future role within the global digital monetary order will depend not only on its capacity for innovation but also on its ability to provide secure, resilient, interoperable, and trustworthy financial infrastructures in an increasingly uncertain technological and geopolitical environment.

7. Conclusion

The emergence of CBDCs, stablecoins, and programmable financial infrastructures represents one of the most significant transformations of the international monetary system since the transition to fiat money and electronic banking. Digital monetary innovation is no longer confined to experimental fintech applications but is increasingly becoming integrated into mainstream financial systems, payment infrastructures, and geopolitical strategy. The European Central Bank’s Digital Euro initiative and the United States’ GENIUS Act illustrate two distinct institutional models of monetary digitalization: one centred on sovereign public money and central bank control, the other on regulated private-sector innovation anchored in dollar-denominated stablecoins.

This paper has demonstrated that these developments create both major opportunities and substantial risks for the Swiss financial centre. The rise of programmable money and tokenized financial infrastructures may fundamentally alter the economics of banking, payment settlement, and cross-border finance. Commercial banks face increasing risks of disintermediation as consumers and firms gain direct access to digital central bank money or blockchain-based stablecoins. At the same time, stablecoins and CBDCs may weaken traditional correspondent banking systems, compress payment revenues, and intensify global competition in financial services.

Nevertheless, Switzerland possesses several structural advantages that may enable it to adapt successfully to this transformation. Political neutrality, legal certainty, institutional trust, sophisticated banking expertise, and an advanced blockchain ecosystem position Switzerland favourably within the evolving digital monetary landscape. In particular, Switzerland may emerge as a strategically important intermediary connecting sovereign CBDC systems, regulated stablecoin networks, and tokenized capital markets.

The analysis further suggests that future competitiveness will depend increasingly on interoperability, regulatory adaptability, cybersecurity resilience, and the ability to provide trusted financial infrastructure in fragmented digital ecosystems. Switzerland’s existing strengths in wealth management, cross-border finance, and financial governance may therefore remain highly relevant, provided that Swiss institutions continue investing in digital infrastructure, operational resilience, and innovation-oriented regulatory frameworks.

At the same time, important strategic vulnerabilities remain. Growing dependence on foreign digital currencies and payment infrastructures may gradually reduce aspects of Swiss monetary autonomy and increase exposure to geopolitical fragmentation between major monetary blocs. Regulatory divergence between the European Union and the United States may further complicate compliance and market access for internationally active Swiss institutions. Consequently, maintaining competitiveness will require careful balancing between openness, sovereignty, innovation, and stability.

Ultimately, the digitalization of money represents not merely a technological evolution but a broader reconfiguration of global economic power, monetary governance, and financial intermediation. For Switzerland, the challenge is therefore not whether digital monetary transformation will occur, but how effectively the country can position itself within the emerging international monetary order. The strategic decisions taken over the coming decade may significantly shape the future role of the Swiss financial centre in an increasingly programmable and geopolitically contested financial system.

8. Glossary

Bank disintermediation The reduction or elimination of the traditional role of banks as intermediaries between savers and borrowers, often due to the emergence of alternative financial systems such as CBDCs, stablecoins, or decentralized finance.

Blockchain A distributed ledger technology that records transactions across a decentralized network of computers in a secure, immutable, and transparent manner.

CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) A digital form of central bank money issued and backed by a monetary authority. CBDCs may be designed for retail use (general public) or wholesale use (financial institutions).

Crypto-dollarization (Digital dollarization) The process by which dollar-denominated stablecoins or digital assets become widely used in non-U.S. economies, reducing the relative influence of domestic currencies.

Cryptomercantilism A geopolitical framework in which states use digital monetary infrastructures (CBDCs, stablecoins, payment systems) to project economic influence and preserve monetary sovereignty.

Digital Euro A proposed retail CBDC issued by the European Central Bank, intended to complement cash and provide a sovereign digital payment instrument within the euro area.

Digital money Any monetary form that exists in electronic or tokenized form, including bank deposits, CBDCs, and stablecoins.

Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) A technological infrastructure that enables the decentralized recording and validation of transactions across multiple nodes without a central authority.

Fiat currency Government-issued currency that is not backed by a physical commodity but derives its value from legal tender status and public trust.

Interoperability The ability of different financial systems, infrastructures, or payment networks to communicate, exchange data, and execute transactions seamlessly.

Monetary sovereignty The ability of a state or monetary authority to issue and control its own currency and monetary policy without external dependency.

Programmable money Digital money embedded with software-based rules (e.g., smart contracts) that enable automated execution of payments under predefined conditions.

Retail CBDC A central bank digital currency designed for use by households and firms, typically intended as a digital equivalent of cash.

Smart contractSelf-executing code deployed on a blockchain that automatically enforces contractual terms when predefined conditions are met.

Stablecoin A privately issued digital asset designed to maintain a stable value relative to a reference asset, typically a fiat currency such as the U.S. dollar.

Tokenization The process of representing real-world or financial assets as digital tokens on a blockchain or distributed ledger system.

Tokenized finance A financial system in which assets, money, and financial instruments exist in tokenized digital form and are traded on programmable infrastructures.

Wholesale CBDC A central bank digital currency restricted to financial institutions for interbank settlement and large-value transactions.

Yield-bearing stablecoin A stablecoin that provides returns to holders by investing reserve assets or integrating yield-generating mechanisms, subject to regulatory constraints.

9. References

Allen, F., Gu, X. and Jagtiani, J. (2020) ‘A Survey of FinTech Research and Policy Discussion’, Review of Corporate Finance, 2(3), pp. 259–339.

Arner, D.W., Auer, R. and Frost, J. (2020) ‘Stablecoins: Risks, Potential and Regulation’, Bank of International Settlements Working Papers, No. 905.

Aronoff, D., Calabia, F.C., Brownworth, A., Samuel, A. and Narula, N. (2026) ‘The Hidden Plumbing of Stablecoins: Financial and Technological Risks in the GENIUS Act Era’, arXiv.

Auer, R., Cornelli, G. and Frost, J. (2020) ‘Rise of the central bank digital currencies: drivers, approaches and technologies’, BIS Working Papers, No. 880.

Auer, R., Haene, P. and Holden, H. (2021) ‘Multi-CBDC arrangements and the future of cross-border payments’, BIS Papers, No. 115.

Baeriswyl, R., Reynard, S. and Swoboda, A. (2024) ‘Retail CBDC purposes and risk transfers to the central bank’, Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, 160(7), pp. 1–17.

Bank for International Settlements (BIS) (2020) Project Helvetia: Settling tokenised assets in central bank money. BIS Innovation Hub, Swiss National Bank and SIX Group.

Bindseil, U. and Panetta, F. (2020) ‘Central Bank Digital Currency Remuneration in a World with Low or Negative Nominal Interest Rates’, Journal of Payments Strategy & Systems, 14(2), pp. 110–121.

Bordo, M.D. and Levin, A.T. (2017) ‘Central Bank Digital Currency and the Future of Monetary Policy’, NBER Working Paper, No. 23711.

Brühl, V. (2025) ‘How will the digital euro work? A preliminary analysis of design, structures, and challenges’, Electronic Markets, 35(78), pp. 1–19.

Brunnermeier, M.K. and Niepelt, D. (2019) ‘On the Equivalence of Private and Public Money’, Journal of Monetary Economics, 106, pp. 27–41.

Bullmann, D., Klemm, J. and Pinna, A. (2019) In search for stability in crypto-assets: are stablecoins the solution? ECB Occasional Paper Series No. 230.

Catalini, C. and Gans, J.S. (2020) ‘Some Simple Economics of the Blockchain’, Communications of the ACM, 63(7), pp. 80–90.

European Central Bank (ECB) (2025) Progress on the preparation phase of a digital euro. Frankfurt am Main: ECB.

Financial Stability Board (2023) High-level recommendations for the regulation, supervision and oversight of global stablecoin arrangements. Basel: FSB.

Ferrari, M.M., Mehl, A. and Stracca, L. (2023) ‘Central bank digital currency in an open economy’, Journal of Monetary Economics, 139, pp. 54–68.

Gorton, G. and Zhang, J. (2021) ‘Taming Wildcat Stablecoins’, University of Chicago Law Review, 90(4), pp. 909–960.

Gütschow, M. and Lucke, B. (2025) ‘The proposed design of the digital euro: A critical analysis’, Digital Finance, 8(7), pp. 1–22.

Kiff, J., Alwazir, J., Davidovic, S., Farias, A., Khan, A., Khiaonarong, T., Malaika, M. and Monroe, H. (2020) ‘A Survey of Research on Retail Central Bank Digital Currency’, IMF Working Paper, No. 20/104.

Nyffenegger, R. (2024) ‘A proposal for a layer-2 CBDC on a rollup’, Digital Finance, 6, pp. 543–571.

Reuters (2026) ‘ECB rebuffs proposals to boost euro stablecoins as too risky’, 22 May.

Schär, F. (2021) ‘Decentralized Finance: On Blockchain- and Smart Contract-Based Financial Markets’, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 103(2), pp. 153–174.

Schueffel, P. (2025) ‘Can CBDC Mimic Cash? A Deep Dive into the Digital Euro Case’, Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 18(7), p. 394.

Stöckel, M. (2025) ‘Digital but not crypto: possible design pitfalls and rebound effects for green monetary policy using central bank digital currency’, Eurasian Economic Review, pp. 1–24.

Panetta, F. (2022) ‘The present and future of money in the digital age’, ECB Speech Series, 5 December.

Van ’t Klooster, J., Martino, E.D. and Monnet, E. (2025) ‘Cryptomercantilism vs. Monetary Sovereignty’, European Banking Institute Working Paper Series, No. 200.

Zhang, L. (2025) ‘SoK: Stablecoins for Digital Transformation – Design, Metrics, and Application with Real World Asset Tokenization as a Case Study’, arXiv.

Contact

Reach out via email for inquiries.

Email

Subscribe to newsletter

info@grcadvisory.ch

© 2025. All rights reserved.