How far is the regulator with, um, digital money?

Well, they're looking at making sure there are controls in place around the safekeeping of the backing assets and that, um, they're sufficient.

Maybe there's haircuts involved, so there's a, an element of over-collateralization so that if the government bond market moves in price, then some of that, you know, can be, uh, covered and corrected for and you can still redeem your stablecoin at par.

So there's almost the same kind of activity.

In the banks, we've got sufficient resilience in our balance sheet, a capital buffer so that if there were some defaults on the loans that back the deposits that we issue, there's a very similar approach being evolved in the stablecoin ecosystem, but reflecting that the backing assets are sort of generally sub one-year government bonds rather than 25-year mortgages.

So the haircut approach is slightly different.Uh, and making sure that, you know, the assets are hold bank- held bankruptcy remote so that if the stablecoin operator fails, the assets that back the issuance are still safeguarded for the beneficial owners of the stablecoin.

And that's exactly what the Bank of England, uh, the Genius Act, uh, and, um, EMICA are looking to make sure apply to the stablecoins that become regulated and material to those economies.

Uh, there is always voices like, "This will finally bring down banks," right?