Brussels set to disregard ECB warnings over stablecoin rules, FT reports
The European Union's executive arm is planning to issue formal guidance proposing that stablecoins issued outside the bloc are treated as interchangeable with same-branded versions allowed only on EU markets, the newspaper said, citing people briefed on its contents.
The announcement of the guidance has been scheduled for the next few days, the FT reported, citing one unnamed source.
Reuters could not immediately confirm the report.
Brussels proposed legislation on the creation of a digital euro, a so-called central bank digital currency, in June 2023, but not much has happened since.
The ECB sees a digital euro as a response to U.S. President Donald Trump's push to promote stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency typically pegged to the U.S. dollar.
ECB President Christine Lagarde on Monday renewed her plea in the European Parliament, describing the digital euro as key to Europe's financial autonomy.
She took aim at competing, privately issued stablecoins, saying they posed "risks for monetary policy and financial stability" because they could lure deposits away from banks and did not always maintain their fixed value.
A European Commission spokesperson told the FT that "a run on a well-governed and fully collateralised stablecoin is very unlikely".
Even if it were to happen, "foreign holders would redeem their tokens in (for example) the U.S., where the majority of the tokens circulate and the majority of the reserves are held", the spokesperson was quoted as saying.
The Commission did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
10 minutes ago
- BBC News
Chelsea win in CWC but Uefa sanctions pose problems
Chelsea manager Enzo Maresca will see his team earn a substantial $21m dollars after beating Palmeiras in Fifa's Club World Cub but Uefa sanctions still pose a problem. The Blues will rightly celebrate a 2-1 win over the Brazilian giants, helped by a wonderful Cole Palmer goal at Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia. However, on the same day Fifa provided a windfall and something to celebrate, there was concerning news from Uefa. Uefa's governing body announced an initial fine of 31m euros (£26.7m) and Chelsea could be fined a further 60m euros (£51.2m) over the next four years should they continue to not fulfil the financial controls enforced by European football's governing body. Further to this, the sanction stipulates Chelsea must balance the books in Europe and make sure to end the transfer window with a "positive balance" or be unable to register new players, including new signings like Liam Delap, Joao Pedro, Estevao Willian and Jamie Gittens. Not only that, they must sell players that were previously on the A list in Uefa competition, in this case the Conference League squad from the second half of last season. That means that balancing the £170m of purchases this summer needs to come from those registered from Europe's third tier, which Chelsea won, with only Marcus Bettinelli, sold for a nominal fee to Manchester City, thus far counting. Sales of forwards Nicolas Jackson, Noni Madueke and Christopher Nkunku are not ruled out. Trevoh Chalobah could also be sold from the current squad. The sales of Kepa Arrizabalga to Arsenal for £5m and defender Bashir Humphreys for £12.7m to Burnley do not count, neither would fees for Raheem Sterling, Ben Chilwell, Armando Broja, Joao Felix and Renato Veiga, who were not selected for the Club World Cup and are deemed surplus to requirements. This is a very complex case and it is not clear how many players will need to be sold but Chelsea say they are confident of future compliance and have spoken of their ongoing support for Uefa's rules.
Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Telegraph
My problem with being a restaurateur? Flaky customers
We are a small- to medium-sized neighbourhood restaurant, probably averaging 40 to 45 covers per night, serving simple but – we hope – delicious food. It's casual, but there are tablecloths and we hope to give nice service. But we sometimes have a problem: flaky customers. It's one shared by Olivier Vincent, the chef and owner of a 20-seater restaurant called L'îlot in the Loire Valley. For him, it's reached such a breaking point, he's decided to impose fines: if a group does not contain the exact reserved number of guests, they are now charged €15 (£12.92) per missing or additional person. It sounds heavy handed, but I wasn't surprised to read that Vincent had taken action – on missing customers, at least. For small, independent businesses, too many or too few customers showing up for a booking can have a big impact, in different ways. If you book a table of eight and turn up with six, we could have reconfigured and given that table to someone else. Or someone might have turned up hoping for a walk-in of two and we've turned them away, which is sad for us because it's horrible turning people away. If the big table had just called and said, 'I'm really sorry but we're going to be six now,' it's annoying, but at least you can reset the tables. A table turning up with too many people is annoying in a different way. I think we've had a table of nine that has suddenly been 14, which is 50 per cent more. Sometimes there is just genuinely not the space. Meanwhile, the people on the table are starting to get annoyed at you for not having room. What are we supposed to do? Sometimes people don't understand that as a restaurant you have a responsibility to all of your diners and not just one table. A table of eight turning up with 12 or 13 changes the dynamic of the room. A huge table will sometimes take over the restaurant in a way that isn't fair on the rest of the diners. I feel like restaurants are the final frontier of understanding that if you commit to coming you ought to pay. If you buy a theatre ticket and you can't make it last minute, you're not going to get your money back. The same with a massage or a ticket for an exhibition. For some reason that psyche doesn't apply to restaurants. Partly it's because you haven't paid for your meal upfront, although some restaurants now make you do that. People feel aggrieved about the notion of having to pay something to a restaurant if their plans change. I sometimes wonder what people think restaurants make, money-wise. When you look at a waiter, or a chef, does anyone think they are living a life of luxury? None of us are rolling in it. Mostly we do this because it's a passion. One or two people not showing up might not seem like a big deal, but actually it is a big deal financially. A table of 10 dropping to a table of six is a 12.5 per cent service charge of those four people that none of the staff are going to see. I don't think people realise that someone's pay cheque is instantly reduced if fewer people than expected turn up. The problem is definitely getting worse. A lot of customers lie about their reasons for not showing up, too. It is hard for us to negotiate that. Some restaurants make it very clear there are no exceptions. I don't know if I agree with that. Sometimes people genuinely have had an emergency. But sometimes people have a table of eight but one of their party is sick so none of them come, which is ridiculous. Part of the problem is people being reluctant to call on the phone. When we opened Cafe Deco I refused to have an online booking system, because I was so depressed by the fact people were so scared to pick up the phone and speak to a human. I hated the few experiences I'd had when I'd gone in to book a restaurant and been directed to the online database. Ultimately we had to move to a booking system because having to ring was putting off so many people coming. If you don't have to speak to someone, you don't have to take responsibility. If you're doing something that you know is going to be annoying for a restaurant, maybe if you don't have to speak to someone it's not so bad for you. The generation who started dining out before everything was digitised are better at ringing. It's the younger customers who are less considerate and less understanding of their commitment. We have a cancellation fee; if you cancel with less than 24 hours notice, you'll get charged. For tables over six, we take a £30 deposit per head up front, which incentivises people to figure it out. If you turn up with more people than your booking, it's really annoying but we're not going to lose money unless we have no space and they all walk out, so we have no plans to implement a fee for that. It's important to say that these cases are still the exception, rather than the rule. It just happens a bit too often. It doesn't give us the chance to give you the best experience, which is what our job is, and what we aim to do every time.
The Guardian
35 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘A mess of our own making': Labour mayors reflect on Starmer's first year
Keir Starmer's government appears 'disjointed' from the rest of the Labour party just a year after taking power, regional mayors have said, with one blaming No 10 for overseeing 'a mess of our own making'. Steve Rotheram, the Labour mayor of Liverpool city region, said Downing Street's repeated missteps were 'winding up' people who wanted to back the government. Speaking as the party marked 12 months in government after a stunning election win last summer, during which Starmer campaigned on an agenda of national renewal centred around a message of 'change', Rotherham said people were willing to forgive the occasional miscalculation but that the climbdowns over winter fuel payments and the welfare bill had left Starmer's operation looking like 'a mess'. He said: 'What I think has exacerbated this feeling by many, not just politicians but people around the country, who look at this and think it's a mess. Well, it's a mess of our own making,' he said. 'We could have avoided some of this by just listening to some of the people in the party who want to support Starmer, want to support Labour, but are finding it difficult because the mistakes are made and they could have been avoided.' Rotheram, a former MP who was elected as first Liverpool city region mayor in 2017, said the government appeared 'disjointed' from the rest of Labour. He added: 'I don't think it's necessarily about Keir or Keir's team necessarily – although there are definitely some siren voices around all of that – but I do think it's about the feeling that there's a lack of connectivity between different bits of the party.' Tracy Brabin, the Labour mayor of West Yorkshire, urged Starmer to place the devolution of power at the heart of his premiership. She said 'The devolution revolution has been all too quickly forgotten by some [government] departments' despite mayors 'driving incredible change for our communities bringing growth, hope and optimism'. Brabin, a former shadow culture secretary who took office in West Yorkshire in 2021, said Labour had an opportunity to win back the trust of voters who had 'lost confidence in politicians ability to improve their lives' by backing mayors with more powers. The call was repeated by Oliver Coppard, the Labour mayor of South Yorkshire, who urged government ministers to invest more in frontline policing in the region and in its cultural sector. But he said ministers appeared 'genuinely interested' in what he was trying to achieve in South Yorkshire, describing dealings with them as 'chalk and cheese' compared with the 'absolute shambles' under the Conservatives. 'The difference is I think this government listens and I hope this government learns. That certainly seems to be the case. I want things to go better, of course I do, because what's good for South Yorkshire is good for this country and vice versa.' Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Angela Rayner, the local government secretary, has promised to extend devolution to all parts of England, starting with new combined authorities in six regions – Cumbria, Cheshire, Essex, Hampshire, East Anglia and Sussex – due to elect metro mayors in May 2026, with a further scheme in Lancashire. That would mean almost 70% of England's population, about 40 million people, would be represented by 21 mayors with various levels of devolved powers. The Institute for Government said the plans could mark 'the start of a generational shift in power' away from Whitehall. Rotheram urged Starmer's government to use its existing mayors more frequently as a way of demonstrating the party's successes. 'My message is that we are here to help,' he said. 'There are things we can all do that will help the party demonstrate its economic competence. We haven't been used as much as we could and should have been, and hopefully we will in the future'.
