The Bank for International Settlements' Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures published an analysis on 29 October of how central banks should approach an increasingly diverse payments system. It examines fast-payment networks, tokenised bank deposits, stablecoins, non-bank service providers and programmable platforms. The paper is a policy analysis, not an immediately effective licence, capital requirement or cross-border permission for any named payment provider.[1][2]
Its core distinction is between central-bank money, which underpins trust and settlement in systemically important arrangements, and private means of payment that can support innovation and competition. Private money is not thereby guaranteed to exchange at par or to have the same redemption, legal or liquidity status as central-bank liabilities. Those conditions depend on the applicable claim, settlement route and regulation.[1][2]
Four roles, with different tools
The CPMI's four central-bank functions
| Role | Possible decision area | Broker or payment-provider relevance |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Who accesses central-bank money and accounts | Quality and eligibility of settlement assetSource 1 |
| Operator | Modernise or build payment infrastructure | Operational resilience and accessSource 1 |
| Overseer | Assess system-like functions and risks | Governance, cyber and systemic exposuresSource 1 |
| Catalyst | Coordinate standards and stakeholders | Interoperability and collective-action problemsSource 1 |
The CPMI identifies central banks as issuers, operators, overseers and catalysts. The issuer role raises questions about access to central-bank accounts and eligibility. As operator, a central bank may modernise an existing settlement system or build infrastructure. The overseer tests whether a new arrangement performs functions similar to a payment system and whether its governance and resilience warrant supervision. As catalyst, it can promote common standards and coordinate parties whose individual incentives might otherwise obstruct interoperability.[1]
These functions matter to brokerages that rely on stablecoin funding or tokenised collateral. An application can move tokens in seconds without establishing final discharge of an underlying obligation. Liquidity availability, customer-asset segregation, redemption timing, operational resilience and the entity that owes the payment remain separate questions.[2]
Settlement quality is more than transfer speed
The study weighs efficiency gains against credit, liquidity, operational and cyber risks. Its four-role framework gives central banks several responses: adapt access to settlement money, modernise infrastructure, oversee system-like activities and coordinate standards. International cooperation matters where a payment arrangement connects institutions and legal systems across borders.[1][2]
For firms assessing a payment rail, the practical test is to identify the legal settlement asset, contractual redemption rights, insolvency treatment and governance of the operator. The document supplies a framework to ask those questions; it does not certify any particular crypto exchange, broker or stablecoin arrangement as safe.[2]
Sources & further reading
- CPMI publishes analysis on central bank roles in evolving payment systems BIS CPMI · 29 Oct 2026 · Accessed 30 Oct 2026
- The roles of central banks and central bank money in the evolving payment system BIS CPMI · 29 Oct 2026 · Accessed 30 Oct 2026