WSJ - Top IMF Official Urges China to Heed Complaints on Unfair Trade

The Wall Street Journal runs this article quoting IMF official David Lipton as saying the some of the US complaints on unfair trade are legitimate and should be listened to.  While he suggests the US would be better served by handling their complaints in a less confrontational way, it is interesting that he points out at Davos that blindly dismissing the US view on this will "make it really hard to have a globalization that's durable."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A top International Monetary Fund official said some Trump administration complaints about unfair trade are valid, as he urged the rest of the world, in particular China, to take note.

David Lipton, the number two official at the IMF, said while there’s nothing inherently wrong with bilateral trade deficits, “unwarranted” deficits driven by “distortive” or “unfair” trade practices are a problem.

“The U.S. is making the complaint that there are such undesirable policies. As a complaint that deserves to be heard.” He noted that in both the U.S. and Europe, unhappiness with globalization has generated political upheaval. “The rest of the world, whose future really depends on openness and integration, had better be open to dealing with those concerns and complaints or else it will be really hard to have a globalization that’s durable.”

President Donald Trump’s confrontational approach to trade . . . . .   click here to read the full article in the WSJ
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My added comments: This comment by an official like David Lipton at the IMF will not go unnoticed. Even non financial analysts like Brit Hume were pointing it out on Twitter.

Dr. Lawrence White - How a Bitcoin System is Like and Unlike a Gold Standard

A thank you to a blog reader who pointed me to this recent article by Dr. Lawrence White of George Mason University. He offers a comparison of Bitcoin and Gold for those who may be interested in this kind of analysis. 

As he points out in the introduction, many people are making a comparison between gold and Bitcoin in one way or another. So he delves into that comparison and offers his view on how they are similar and how they are different. Below are a couple of excerpts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Lawrence White

Many commentators have compared Bitcoin to gold as an investment asset. “Can Bitcoin Be Gold 2.0?,” asks a portfolio analyst. “Bitcoin is increasingly set to replace gold as a hedge against uncertainty,” suggests a Cointelegraph reporter.

Economists, by contrast, are more interested in considering how a monetary system based on Bitcoin compares to a gold-standard monetary system. In a noteworthy journal article published in 2015, George Selgin characterized Bitcoin as a “synthetic commodity money.” Monetary historian Warren Weber in 2016 released an interesting Bank of Canada working paper entitled “A Bitcoin Standard: Lessons from the Gold Standard,” which analyzes a hypothetical international Bitcoin-based monetary system on the supposition that “the Bitcoin standard would closely resemble the gold standard” of the pre-WWI era. More recently, University of Chicago economist John Cochrane in a blog post has characterized Bitcoin as “an electronic version of gold.”

In what important respects are the Bitcoin system and a gold standard similar? In what other important respects are they different?"  . . . . .  read here for his answers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My added comments: I always try to point out that Dr. Lawrence (Larry) White are not related in any way that I know of even though we share the same name. Dr. White has a PhD in Economics from UCLA and is a highly respected contributor to economic thought.

US Clarifies its Weak? Strong? Indifferent? US Dollar Policy

Various US officials attempted to make it crystal clear what the US position is on the US dollar. Below we have listed these efforts with links to various articles quoting US officials and even providing the President's position on this issue. Readers can take a look at these articles and decide how well they did clearing up any confusion that may exist.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First up was Treasury Secretary Mnuchin who explained that a weaker US dollar is obviously good for US trade:

"Obviously a weaker dollar is good for us as it relates to trade and opportunities,” Mnuchin told reporters in Davos. The currency’s short term value is "not a concern of ours at all,” he said.

"Longer term, the strength of the dollar is a reflection of the strength of the U.S. economy and the fact that it is and will continue to be the primary currency in terms of the reserve currency," he said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When the US dollar started falling sharply after these comments were published, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross jumped in to clarify things with these comments:

"Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross took issue Wednesday with media characterizations that the U.S. is departing from its historically strong dollar policy.       . . . . . .

Ross said in a "Squawk Box" interview from Davos that Mnuchin "was not advocating anything" in terms of the dollar. "I think what he exactly said is the dollar, just like the Treasury bond market, is a huge market, a very liquid market. It's not something we worry a lot about day by day," Ross argued."

The comments by Secretary Ross seem to say that the earlier comments by Secretary Mnuchin should not be interpreted to mean the US favors a weaker US dollar and that actually the US doesn't really pay much attention to the US dollar anyway. Despite that lack of concern, apparently The White House felt the need to further clarify things later in the day:

"The White House declined Wednesday to echo Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin's comment that a weaker dollar helps the United States.

Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters that the dollar is "stable" and reflects a "strong" American economy. When pressed if President Donald Trump supports a stronger or weaker dollar, she did not specify.

"We believe in free-floating currency. The president has always believed in that," Sanders said."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My added comments: It appears that the US policy on the US dollar is that we either like a weaker dollar for trade, or we have not abandoned our "strong dollar" policy or that we don't actually pay attention to the US dollar or that we favor a free floating US dollar (which is of course what we have whether we favor it or not). Apparently, although the US dollar is not something we pay much attention to day to day, various US officials did spend most of this day talking about it and clarifying our position on it as it was falling sharply  :-)

In a more serious vein, the chart below does show the US dollar index fell below the key 90 level. As we noted a few days ago, if the dollar does not bounce and hold here soon, there is not much support on the chart until it hits the 80 level. Gold responded by moving sharply higher. 

                                         Click here to view the chart on Stockcharts.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Added note 1-25-18: It appears that we should ignore whatever we thought we may have heard from US officials yesterday regarding the US dollar which we don't really pay much attention to anyway :-)

CNBC - Trump says dollar to get "stronger and stronger" - Mnuchin was misunderstood

Also, while some US officials may say the US does not pay much attention to the US dollar day to day, as Graham Summers points out in this article, a lot of other people do.

North Korea - Latest News

Obviously this is an ongoing situation that is unpredictable and could go in many directions. We have reported here for some time that Jim Rickards analysis on North Korea is that he sees a 70% chance that a war will happen at some point during 2018. He bases that analysis on the view that North Korea will not give up its nuclear program and the US is serious about not accepting a nuclear armed North Korea.

The two new articles linked just below seem to confirm that nothing is happening so far to change Jim's take on this. Below are links to the articles a a brief excerpt from each article.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HR McMaster: Threat from North Korea increases every day

H.R. McMaster, President Trump’s national security adviser, said Saturday that the possibility of war with North Korea increases every day the problem over its nuclear program isn’t solved.

“I think it’s increasing every day,” McMaster told Fox News’ Bret Baier at the Reagan National Security Forum in California. “It means we’re in a race. We’re in a race to be able to solve this problem.”

. . . . .     click here to read the full article

CIA Boss Hints Trump can consider a preemptive strike on North Korea

“We’re working to prepare a series of options to make sure that we can deliver a range of things so the president will have the full suite of possibilities. The president is intent on delivering this solution through diplomatic means,” Pompeo told AEI’s Marc Thiessen.

“We are equally at the same time ensuring that if we conclude that is not possible, that we present the president a range of options to achieve what is his stated intention,” Pompeo continued, which he later described as to “denuclearize permanently” North Korea, “that we’re gonna foreclose this risk.”

. . . . .      click here to read the full article

Nomi Prins Offers Her Outlook for 2018

Nomi Prins has issued her outlook for 2018. She sees some potential triggers for systemic instability out there to keep an eye on. For the most part, her analysis is in line with what we have been reporting here on a variety of the issues she talks about. Below are a few excerpts.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In last year’s roadmap, I forecast that 2017 would end with gold prices up and the dollar index down, both of which happened.  I underestimated the number of Fed hikes by one hike, but globally, average short term rates have remained around zero. That will be a core pattern throughout 2018.

Central banks may tweak a few rates here and there, announce some tapering due to “economic growth”, or deflect attention to fiscal policy, but the entire financial and capital markets system rests on the strategies, co-dependencies and cheap money policies of central banks.  The bond markets will feel the heat of any tightening shift or fears of one, while the stock market will continue to rush ahead on the reality of cheap money supply until debt problems tug at the equity markets and take them down."   ..... read more here

. . . . .

Here are her thoughts on cryptocurrencies and central banks

8)  Cryptomania Grips More Tightly

As for Bitcoin, despite its predisposition to being a Ponzi scheme, it should rise (and sustain its high degree of volatility) through 2018 for a few reasons. First, many funds have been green lighted to get involved in the second half of 2018 and ETF’s are on the horizon, albeit with a plethora of surrounding problems and regulatory hesitations. Second, futures exchange activity will broaden the market. Third, establishment banks like Goldman Sachs have announced plans to set up crypto-trading desks and promoted the possibility of bitcoin becoming a legitimate global currency.

There will be growth of the number and diversity of exchanges beyond Coinbase in the manner of PayPal which is already a player in that space, as well as for Coinbase itself. Expect the start of many payment exchanges that can process both regular currencies and cryptocurrency transactions ala the dot com bubble, rendering the idea of crypto-independence more and more fuzzy.

Conversations amongst the financial elite at G7 gatherings and other similar forums will encapsulate more crypto focus. Central banks will ultimately create or utilize some elements of crypto currencies for themselves, and adopt ways to regulate the market, as will regulatory agencies that will focus more on crypto than regular banking activities (both need that monitoring to protect people.)  Meanwhile, there will be more buying of cheaper crypto currencies (or assets as I consider them) like Litecoin and Ripple. The fight between those that believe in crypto’s decentralized nature will hit a wall of resistance from banks and central banks, but that fight might take years.   . . . .  read full article here

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Added notes: Wall Street on Parade reviews her new book (Collusion) in this article. In this new interview with Greg Hunter, she says investors should look at silver in 2018. Interestingly, Jim Rickards also touted silver recently in this article.

Swiss Voters to Decide on Fractional Reserve Banking in 2018

A thank you to Dr. Warren Coats for passing along the link to this article in CFA Institute. The article points out that sometime in 2018 voters in Switzerland will decide on a referendum which would end fractional reserve banking in that country. Below are a couple of excerpts. The article also includes links to some additional articles debating the pros and cons of such a move.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Over 100,000 Swiss citizens signed a petition to hold a constitutional referendum to end fractional reserve banking. Yes, really! That petition was certified on 24 December 2015 and a vote will be held sometime in 2018.

Switzerland, that scion of banking, may vote to end the bedrock philosophy underlying modern finance. The date of the referendum is not official as of this writing, but ballots will be cast on either 4 March, 10 June, 23 September, or 25 November."

The movement is known as Vollgeld and is inspired by . . . . .

Please click here to read the full article on Vollgeld

Readers  may want to look at this speech by the Chairman of the Swiss National Bank

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Added note: Dr. Coats also did this interview he notes on his Twitter feed with Rory Hall of The Daily Coin. They discuss a gold standard, Dr. Coats proposal for monetary system reform using Currency Board rules, and the role of central banks. The interview is just over 35 minutes long and well worth the time for anyone interested in these issues.

Foreign Affairs - Does Beijing Really Want to Challenge the Dollar?

This article in Foreign Affairs examines what China really wants from the international monetary system. It suggests that contrary to what many are saying, long standing Chinese policy has not really been focused on challenging the US dollar. It also suggests that Chinese support for the SDR is more about national prestige for China than a serious attempt to dethrone the US dollar. Below are a couple of excerpts from the article.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In March 2009, a few months after the outbreak of the global financial crisis, the governor of China’s central bank, Zhou Xiaochuan, published an essay on the bank’s website. Zhou criticized the international monetary system for “the inherent deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies” and praised the Special Drawing Right (SDR), the synthetic currency created by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The SDR “serves as the light in the tunnel for the reform of the international monetary system,” Zhou wrote.

Zhou’s call for a greater role for the SDR attracted attention around the world. Many observers viewed his comments as a sign of China’s readiness to challenge the U.S.-dominated international monetary order. Indeed, several years later, in 2015, China got its own currency, the renminbi (RMB), admitted to the SDR basket, which the year before had included only the dollar, the pound sterling, the yen, and the euro. Some Western analysts saw that measure, too, as a sign of China’s interest in challenging the international monetary system.

In fact, Zhou’s 2009 statement was not as revolutionary as it seemed.  . . . . . . . 

Click here to find the article in Foreign Affairs (may have to register to read full article)

It's US Dollar Index Watching Time Again

Over the past couple of years the US dollar index (USD) has threatened to break down below a long time support area in the 90-92 range. Looking at the chart below, we can see that we are once again hanging on to that level by a thread. So, it's US dollar index watching time once again. 

This has been the the deepest plunge yet and the chart indicates a possible long term head and shoulders formation. If that turns out to be the case, and the USD index does not hold 90 this time, there is not much support on the chart until it reaches the 80 level or so. There is a bit of minor support around 88 and 85-86, but not much. Will be something to keep an eye on here at this level in the coming weeks.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Click here to view chart on Stockcharts.com

Jim Rickards Calls New Bull Market in Gold - Predicts "Gold Backed Digital Currency"

In recent articles Jim Rickards is now ready to call a new leg of a bull market for gold. He says the multi year bear market ended in December 2015 and has now been confirmed by two consecutive years of higher gold prices. Below are links to his two part article and an excerpt from each.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Next Great Bull Market in Gold has Begun - Part I

"This new trend will take gold past $1,400 per ounce by the end of 2018, past $4,000 per ounce by 2020 (if not sooner) and ultimately to $10,000 per ounce or higher by the mid-2020s.

This bull market actually began on Dec. 17, 2015, when the dollar price of gold sank to $1,051 per ounce. This new bull market was two years old last weekend."

. . . . .


The Next Great Bull Market in Gold has Begun - Part II

"The most important piece of evidence that the next great bull market in gold has begun is the technical behavior of the prior bear market itself.

Over many decades, commodities rallies have exhibited 50% retracements (bear markets) before resuming their long-term upward trends based on the slow, steady devaluation of the fiat currency in which the commodities are priced."

 . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It appears that Jim is also joining the ranks of those who believe that a gold backed blockchained based currency is coming from Russia and China. He talks about that prospect in this recent article. If this were to happen it could be a significant event in terms of how it may impact the US dollar. Here is a quote from this article:

"According to Russian government officials attending a recent monetary conference in Moscow, Russia, China and their BRICS allies are moving toward their own gold trading system (bypassing London and New York)."  . . . read more here

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Added comments: Readers here know we always keep an eye out for any event that might trigger the kind if crisis Jim Rickards has long predicted. In this new article Jim lists three potential triggers to watch for in 2018. Here is a quote:

"What are some of the emerging-market snowflakes I’m watching now? The three of most concern are China, Venezuela and Turkey." . . .  read more here

I would add another potential trigger to follow in 2018. That would be some kind of major crash in the US stock market related to events surrounding the Trump Administration. We are a full year into the Trump Presidency so he is now tied in the public mind to whatever happens with the economy and stock market. President Trump has cemented that tie by constantly pointing to the huge rise in the stock market as being due to his efforts. We can expect that if the stock market were to take a sharp dive for any reason (whether related to anything the President does or not), his political opponents will point the finger of blame his way. If the markets stay strong and the economy responds well to the tax cuts recently passed, I would expect President Trump to benefit politically. If the opposite were to happen, we might see the start of a process that ended his Presidency if the public blamed him for the market crash (if the Dems win Congress and start an impeachment process). So, it is something to keep an eye on and one reason why I am giving it until mid 2018 to see if this becomes a potential trigger for systemic instability. By then it should be clearer which way these various issues (and potential crisis triggers) are going.

BIS - Household Debt and Financial Stability

I get a monthly email update from the Bank for International Settlements (pasted in below). This month it included a short video on the topic - Household debt and financial stability. It's mostly just some common sense analysis, but I did note that BIS felt the issue was important enough to do this brief video on it. See just below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BIS Video - Houshold Debt and Financial Stability

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Below I have pasted in the full email update for this month from the BIS

View this email in your browser

January 2018 Finalising Basel III The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has finalised post-crisis regulatory reforms to make banks more resilient and restore confidence in banking systems. Basel III package finalised  Watch highlights of the announcement of the Basel III reforms. A paradoxical tightening? The latest BIS Quarterly Review discusses the easing in global financial conditions despite tightening by some major central banks. Household debt: recent developments and challenges Economist Anna Zabai explains how high household debt could affect economic and financial stability. Bank business models: popularity and performance Bank business models under the spotlight: commercial banks show lower cost-to-income ratios and more stable return-on-equity than trading banks. More BIS publications  Publication: Stress testing principles  The Basel Committee proposes new, streamlined principles for bank stress testing. Working Paper: Why so low for so long? A long-term view of real interest rates The usual explanations for the decline in real interest rates appear to be more coincidence than cause. Working Paper: Triffin: dilemma or myth? Setting the record straight about the dilemma posed by Robert Triffin and its application to current policy debates. Upcoming 10 Jan 2018: Claudio Borio speaks at the BIS-IMF-OECD conference on productivity in Paris, France By 23 Jan 2018: BIS publishes international banking statistics 25 Jan 2018: BIS publishes global liquidity indicators

Bitcoin? BlockChain? Hyperledger? Hashgraph?

I have noted here previously that trying to cover all the moving parts in terms of things that might impact the global monetary system has become much more complicated than I ever imagined when I started this blog. This post is going to be part tongue in cheek (for some comic relief) and part serious in trying to be educational. 

By now a majority of people you know have probably at least heard of Bitcoin because the the enormous move up in its price per coin in 2017. That has vaulted Bitcoin (and to a lesser extent blockchain ledger technology) into more mainstream media reports so that now both mainstream and alternative media cover it a lot.

But most people don't have much depth of understanding because the technologies behind all this are somewhat complex and require a lot of determined effort to learn in very much detail. One economist I hear from now and then whose views I value greatly sent me this video which I will use for the humorous part of this discussion. I suspect a lot of people can relate to it.

But seriously, all these terms can get confusing very quickly. First we have Bitcoin which is separate from the blockchain technology it runs on. But wait, all blockchain is not alike either. So, we have to figure how the different kinds of blockchain work. But wait, now we are being told in the very latest "next big thing" conversation that blockchain (all versions of it) are already obsolete because we have now have Hashgraph that will take care of everything that Bitcoin and blockchain cannot.

Let's take a breath. Is there some place where we can learn about Bitcoin, Blockchain, and Hashgraph basics that is at least possible to understand? Perhaps. Mike Maloney recently released this video on YouTube that tries to do that. It does have some good animations that can be helpful to try and understand these complex technologies.

In this video, Mike walks you through his 3 year long quest to try and understand all this. How he first thought Bitcoin/Blockchain would change the world, but then later learned of some problems they faced. Now he believes that Hashgraph might be what changes the world and explains why in the last half of this video presentation. He points out in this video that things are changing so quickly the Hashgraph technology emerged while he was in the process of making the video.

So where is all this going? I don't know and I believe we are at a point in time where no one knows where all this is going. I would encourage readers to learn as much as possible because I don't think anyone knows for sure where all this is going. 

When you dig into all this in any bit of detail and follow a variety of media sources that cover this, it becomes clear that the world is in a state of flux at this time. This new Fintech has disrupted existing paradigms and started the world on a discussion of new ideas. But there is no indication I can find that any kind of global consensus that would lead to any one new currency or technology emerging as dominant over the system we have now. I base that conclusion on the hundreds of news articles and discussions like the one in this video I try to follow and from input from people I trust as experts on these issues from around the world. One leading expert in global payment systems recently told me, "I don't think the monetary system is going to change a lot."

My conclusion at this time is that no one knows for sure how all this will turn out

First, we have to see if we get some kind of major new crisis that destabilizes the current monetary system. Without that, I believe any changes we get will be slow and incremental. If we do get a crisis, who knows who most people will believe or trust if the current system they have relied on doesn't work any more and they suffer significant personal financial loss in the process? It is clear that millions of people are already looking into a variety of alternatives (precious metals, Bitcoin, other cryptos, blockchain, hashgraph, etc).

Who they trust will be more important than what technology may or may not emerge or what kind of currency is proposed. That is the one thing I feel I have learned working on all this. The most critical thing a currency and monetary system must have is the trust of the end users. I have no idea who people are going to trust in the future, especially if a huge crisis does unfold. I suspect that whoever gets blamed for that crisis will not have much trust with the public and I don't know who they might blame for such a thing. 

Honestly, I just hope we don't have to find out. Right now, I don't think anything is really ready to step in quickly to replace our current monetary system on a global scale. Chaos seems more probable as different alternatives compete for public trust. Then again, perhaps the reality is that "the monetary system isn't going to change a lot".

Express UK - BOE Could Introduce Bitcoin Style Digital Currency? Apparently Not

The Express (UK) runs this article which at first glance sounds like the Bank of England might be on the verge of issuing a central bank digital currency. This something we have covered here extensively so the article is of interest. 

However, when you look into the details in this article, it becomes clear that the BOE is not going to do anything like this any time soon. Below are a couple of quotes from the article and then a few added comments. (see added note below for latest update on this - BOE will not move forward with a central bank digital currency)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Bank of England is investigating the possibility of introducing a bitcoin-style digital currency linked to sterling, according to reports. 

A new crypto-currency could be set up as early as 2018 and would transform the banking industry in Britain – possibly ending the need for high street banks.

A research unit at the Bank of England was set up in February 2015 to look into the possibility of a sterling-linked crypto-currency and a spokesman told the Telegraph it could report back within the next 12 months."

. . . .

"Despite looking into the possibility of launching a central-bank issued cryptocurrency, Dr Carney (BOE Governor) warned there could be financial stability risks if such an approach were rolled out across the whole economy through a cryptocurrency intended for the general public."

. . . .

“You (could) create a situation where you can have an instantaneous (bank) run. So as soon as there were any concern, people can switch in their account at the Bank of England,” Carney said.

Please click here to read the full article in Express (UK)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My added comments: I will just list a few key points to consider on this topic below:

- please note that the article says it will 12 months before a research unit of the BOE "reports back" on this issue. That is not something about to actually be implemented. They say it will take another 12 months just to report back.

- BOE Governor Mark Carney repeats the concerns he and other central banks have about even doing this at all. Fed Governor Quarles recently said somewhat the same thing and indicated the Fed is in no hurry to do anything with a central bank digital currency. He talked about changes like this taking decades to unfold.

- please note the comment by Governor Carney that if central banks setup digital currencies that the public can own directly with an account at the central bank, it could setup the potential for "an instantaneous bank run" in a crisis where everyone tries to move their money to that account that would be directly backed by the central bank.

My own view on this is that all we seeing is a lot of articles trying to capitalize on the Bitcoin craze and trying to imply that major central banks are ready to counter this rise in Bitcoin interest by suddenly offering up their own versions of a digital currency. The direct input I get from people who work on this every day in the real world suggests otherwise. For one thing, this not something you can "suddenly" do in the real world.

I want to repeat what I have stated here many times. I have zero evidence that anything like this is about to happen any time soon based on direct input from experts I view as extremely credible. While this idea continues to be studied at central banks and the IMF, none of these entities have any kind of actual real world tested system they could actually implement at this time as far as I know. The only payments system in the world that has been able to implement a blockchain based ledger that could actually function inside the existing banking and central banking system (connect into it) that I am aware of is the one IBM announced earlier this year in partneship with KlickEx and Stellar. 

A central bank would have to have access to a functioning system like that one to actually implement this. I am not aware of any major central bank (or the IMF) announcing they have such a real world tested functioning system at this time. The best information I have at this time is that we might see a central bank such as Singapore test a central bank digital currency sometime in 2018 perhaps followed by some other smaller central banks. I don't believe any major central bank would move forward with this idea until they have a chance to observe it tested in the real world somewhere first. I will say that IBM and KlickEx can point to real world testing by KlickEx in the South Pacific for their system.

So, I doubt the BOE will implement a central bank digital currency in 2018. 2019 is the earliest I can imagine that really happening if they even to decide to implement one at all. There are many concerns such as the one Governor Carney mentions above that have to be resolved. If Bitcoin takes a huge dive in price in 2018 it would not surprise me to see this whole topic disappear as quickly as it has arisen in the media. Central banks could easily just put it all on the back shelf as well.

I would not hold my breath on the BOE issuing a central bank digital currency any time soon. China may be more likely to show up with one in 2018 than the BOE.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Added note: After I wrote the above post, this article appeared stating that the BOE has decided not to go forward with implementation of a central bank "cryptocurrency" as the article puts it:

"The Bank of England has decided it will not launch its own cryptocurrency due to its possible impact on the financial system, according to FT Advisor. The bank began researching cryptocurrencies in 2015 and was considering launching its own cryptocurrency."

I decided not to delete this post as originally written but to leave it up as it very well illustrates what we have been trying to report here recently. That being that we should take all these articles about central bank digital currencies and blockchains with a grain of salt (Bank of Canada lukewarm on a CBDC). I do have information that suggests that we could see a central bank digital currency show up soon in Singapore. However, these major central banks like the BOE and the US Fed seem to have cooled off on the idea at this time as this new article reports. Original article on this is here on FT Adviser.