 |
| Tobias Adrian |
The technology of tokenization - converting real assets (real estate, stocks, bonds) into digital tokens on the blockchain - is considered one of the main trends in today’s financial market. However, the leadership of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) urges caution against euphoria. IMF financial counselor Tobias Adrian, in his report, highlighted four key threats posed by the mass adoption of tokenization.
1. Liquidity Fragmentation and Platform Rivalry
The first and most obvious danger lies in technological incompatibility. Today, many banks and startups are developing their own blockchain platforms for issuing tokens, which often do not interact with each other.
According to Adrian, this leads to liquidity fragmentation. If assets are locked inside isolated ecosystems (“walled gardens”), capital cannot freely flow to where it is most needed. Instead of a unified global market, we risk ending up with a set of local pools, which sharply reduces the efficiency of the financial system and increases spreads between supply and demand.
2. A Race Without Brakes - Threat to Financial Stability
Traditional financial markets have built-in pauses: time for settlement, clearing, and regulatory response. Tokenization with real-time atomic settlement eliminates these pauses.
The high speed of automated transactions creates the risk of cascading effects. If an algorithmic stablecoin or a tokenized derivative suddenly drops in price, automatic liquidations and margin calls may occur faster than any regulator can press the “stop” button. The IMF warns: in decentralized systems, an “off switch” may simply not exist at a critical moment.
3. Jurisdictional Chaos
The third problem concerns international law. A physical asset or traditional stock is tied to the place of registration of the issuer and clear legislation. But a token, especially one traded on global decentralized exchanges, can simultaneously “exist” in dozens of jurisdictions.
What happens in the event of a technical failure, hack, or issuer bankruptcy? Bankruptcy laws in New York, London, Singapore, or El Salvador may contradict each other. The IMF notes that the current legal framework is not prepared for a scenario where a collateralized asset is tokenized in one country, the creditor is located in another, and the network validators are scattered across the world.
4. The “Digital Dollar” Versus Sovereignty
The most serious threat for emerging markets, according to Tobias Adrian, is the expansion of dollar-backed stablecoins (such as USDT or USDC). If, in a poor country with hyperinflation or a weak banking system, the population massively switches to payments in stablecoins pegged to the US dollar, this will lead to the displacement of the local currency.
This process has been called “crypto-dollarization.” Unlike physical dollars, which must be stored and transferred, digital stablecoins are instant and accessible to anyone with a smartphone. The IMF sounds the alarm: such a scenario deprives developing countries of monetary sovereignty. Central banks will no longer be able to control the money supply, conduct independent monetary policy, or act as lenders of last resort.
Conclusion from INDOSSANT
Tokenization of finance is not just a technological trend; it is a clear phase shift. However, the IMF’s conclusions boil down to a warning: without international coordination, technical standards of interoperability, and strict rules for stablecoins, the advantages of tokenization may be outweighed by risks, chaos, and the loss of financial sovereignty. Regulators must catch up with technology before it breaks the established world order.