Snippings

xxx

I was flicking through the New Scientist magazine from 29th November 1956 when I came across a very interesting article on the digitisation of banking, a subject of great current interest. The article has a very useful diagram for those of us who wonder how exactly it is that banks manage customers’ accounts using computers.

From: (7) Ledgers and innovation in banking – by David G.W. Birch.

xxx

As Rich Turrin succinctly frames the issue, agents will treat every transaction as an optimization problem, picking the cheapest path across cards, bank transfers, instant networks, and yes, stablecoins.

xxx

NIST’s draft practice guide SP 1800-42A outlines how financial institutions could use mobile driver’s licenses (mDLs) for online customer identification.
The document is voluntary and does not require banks to accept mDLs. However, it provides a reference architecture for incorporating state-issued cryptographic credentials into existing Customer Identification Program processes.

From: AI fraud accelerates US’ shift toward cryptographic digital identity | Biometric Update.

xxx

xxx

Then Stuart introduces an overlooked monetary asset: tokenized money market funds (TMMFs). These don’t directly represent dollars, although they are similar in form and value to a stablecoin backed by cash and short-term government debt. But they aren’t stablecoins, which means they can earn a yield. And they can sit next to stablecoins in digital wallets, holding and remunerating idle balances.

Regular readers will know that I’ve written about this often before: in my view, stablecoins shouldn’t earn yield as that distorts incentives, and they won’t need to once tokenized money market funds become more accessible to all.

From: Tokenized money market funds, deposit tokens, gold market infrastructure.

xxx

xxx

The order directed the Fed to, within the next 120 days, “conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the legal, regulatory, and policy framework governing access to Reserve Bank payment accounts and payment services by uninsured depository institutions and non-bank financial companies, including those engaged in digital assets and other novel financial activities.”

From: Trump issues EO to revisit Fed master accounts for fintechs | American Banker.

xxx

xxx

Perhaps more significant, it would also establish a basis for a payment network that did not rely on the solvency of bank loans. Stepping back and zooming out, this could potentially enhance the resilience of the US economy. In the event of another banking crisis, payments could continue to flow unimpeded through non-bank institutions.

From: Stablecoins: separating payments from credit.

xxx

xxx

According to Federal Reserve research cited in its announcement, roughly $64 billion in stablecoins sits in inactive or rarely used wallets, earning little or nothing. Why leave money in a non-interest-bearing stablecoin when it could earn 4.40% in an FDIC-insured account until it’s needed?

From: SoFi’s Tokenized Deposit Strategy Doesn’t Need Tokenization.

xxx

 

Then Why Did SoFi Tokenize Deposits?

A couple of possibilities:

Marketing. Being the first nationally chartered bank to offer tokenized deposits to consumers might resonate with crypto investors in ways that another high-yield savings account wouldn’t.
Tech stack. Another possibility is that SoFi is building infrastructure for future products that conventional deposit systems would struggle to support.

Ron Shevlin, someone I always pay attention to, argues that tokenized deposits are primarily an efficiency play for banks, improving how money moves and transactions are processed, rather than an effectiveness play that attracts customers, generates revenue or drives growth. I agree, it seems clear that they are a defensive strategy.

xxx

European financial regulators are questioning Google after a cloud computing outage on 20 October disrupted banking services for millions of customers. Revolut, HSBC and Lloyds were among those affected, with customers experiencing problems accessing accounts, making card payments and withdrawing cash.
Google attributed the disruption, which lasted several hours, to a power failure at a third-party facility supporting its London cloud infrastructure. The European Banking Authority (EBA) has requested information about the incident and its impact on financial institutions. UK regulators are also examining the disruption.

From: The Week in Review – Behind Fintech / 24 October 2026.

xxx

Well if that’s all it takes (a power failure at one facility) to bring down banks, I imagine that Russian cyber strategists, North Korean ransomware specialists and mischief-makers of all kinds will be rubbing their hands with glee. Who knew that despite stress testing and risk analysis and DORA and everything else that the financial sector is on such thin ice?

xxx

CMA wants to loosen Apple’s grip on contactless technology
Lowering fees and easing technical barriers could help challengers to innovate and compete, according to the competition regulator

From: CMA wants to loosen Apple’s grip on contactless technology.

xxx