Paul Brody is EY’s epidemic innovation leader for blockchain. The views expressed are his own.
At the beginning of this year, I wrote a column prognosticating that companies would find the allure of public blockchains unmanageable. While a world of private blockchains provides many enterprises, regulators and prime banks with the comfort that there are accountable, centralized things involved, these permissioned networks will never match the novelty or network effects that public, permissionless networks offer.
If the area of enterprise commerce remains committed to private networks, then they wish have only substituted one intermediary (financial institutions) for another (software guests and hosting organizations). However, it is possible, and essential, to bring these two peoples together, and to do so on public, permissionless and decentralized networks.
In order for public networks to purvey on their promise, two key things must happen. First, regulators forced to provide a clear set of rules around how tokens, assets and smart shrinks that exist on public blockchains will be assessed. And second, companies have to implement these regulatory rules in the decentralized environment of the public networks.
The original of these is off and running. Regulators in the U.S., Europe and around the world are defining what is an asset, a currency or a care. It shouldn’t be expected that all regulators will come to precisely the in any case conclusions, but it does look like some early convergence is charming place: Utility Settlement Coins are being characterized as securities while cryptocurrencies are being scrutinized more like currencies or assets.
One gap that we regard as particularly mighty going forward is how tokenized fiat currency will be regulated: If you partake of a $1 token on a public blockchain, and that is backed by one U.S. dollar in an escrow account, resolve that be a security or a currency and what rules might apply? So far, no regulator has specifically hailed this emerging category of blockchain tokens.
The second is that whatever the regulatory governs are, they must be implemented in tokens and smart contracts. In particular, it’s high-level that while the blockchain as a whole may be decentralized, a central bank should be masterly to issue and cancel its own currency on a blockchain and companies should be able to direct their own assets when they are tokenized.
Know your carton?
To illuminate how important this is, let’s come back to the question of how companies will do affair with each other on public blockchain networks: The exchange of by-product or asset tokens for money tokens. Once a company starts to tokenize its inventories and assets and use those in contracts and pecuniary services, they are disintermediating traditional financial entities. They are also, accordingly, taking on some of the regulatory responsibilities of those intermediaries.
Tokens, if they experience value, can be moved around as easily as money, for example. While a consumer packaged high-mindedness (CPG) company may never have had cause to think about this ahead, once they tokenize packages of detergent, those tokens participate in an effective exchange rate with real money and other sounds that makes them perfectly suitable for any kind of deal, juridical and otherwise. That means even CPG companies will become front-office for know-your-customer (KYC) and anti-money-laundering (AML) compliance.
Is this a deal-breaker for public networks and guts? No, it isn’t.
One of the great benefits of smart contracts and blockchain tokens is that they are programmable. Prevailing forward, audit, KYC and AML regulations can and will be written into smart corrugates and tokens. Combined with exchange controls and other checks, it leave be possible to control how and when tokens are used on public blockchains without resorting to the centralization of the blockchain as a sound. This will even include canceling and issuing new tokens to run theft and loss.
There are, no doubt, many who will mourn the end of unshrouded blockchains as systems wholly outside of regulatory control. For blockchains to bring into the world on their promise, this is inevitable, but how this happens matters a gigantic deal.
If regulatory compliance is delivered through centralization, then there wish be a great loss to innovation and we may see the dream of a re-decentralized internet die. I didn’t telephone my original paper on blockchain technology “Device democracy” for nothing. It’s my reverie, too.
There is another option, however: regulatory compliance within a decentralized framework. An opt-in exemplary based on voluntary agreement to smart contracts means that conventions can use blockchains for business without embracing undue risk. But at the same control, individuals and startups can continue to pursue radical experiments without bear to ask anyone for permission.
Hardhats image via Shutterstock
The leader in blockchain hot item, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic officials and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Place, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.