2019.7.27-[Libra/Medium]Facebook邀请华盛顿来管理Libra
2019.7.27-[Libra/Medium]Facebook邀请华盛顿来管理Libra
——祝你好运 By EricRavenscraft Jul 27
是银行吗?这是匿名吗?这是一种投资吗?问题没完没了
上周，Facebook就其Libra加密货币项目在参众两院面临质询。这些委员会似乎并不支持Facebook创建全球货币的计划。他们的一些担忧是由于对Facebook的普遍不信任，但也因为即使是国会议员也很难理解Libra是什么。这可能是Facebook所希望的规则制定过程中的一个障碍。
在向参议院银行、住房和城市事务委员会(Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs)发表的公开声明中，Facebook承诺，在“我们完全解决监管方面的担忧，并获得适当批准”之前，不会提供Libra加密货币。一个罕见的转折是，Facebook正在邀请监管机构在其推出产品之前而不是之后进行监管，就好像它的目标是既要放慢速度，又不要破坏东西。
不过，听证会显示了监管机构为何难以做到这一点。如果说众议院委员会的听证会有一个指导主题的话，那就是Libra到底是什么?Libra如何融入Facebook的世界?几个例子:
众议员BillHuizenga (R-MI)问Libra:“它是一种证券，还是一种交易所交易产品?这到底是什么?是鱼还是鸟?对我来说，它更像是一只鸭嘴兽。”
众议员EdPerlmutter说:“我们正在努力解决的问题是，你是谁?在把脸书的天平钱包Calibra比作圣经里的货币兑换商之前，先让我们来比较一下。
众议员乔伊斯·比蒂说:“这非常复杂。我们双方都有一些最优秀的人才，显然还有很多问题没有得到解答。”简而言之，无论是从技术角度还是金融角度来看，加密货币都是出了名的难以理解。
与Facebook首席执行官马克•扎克伯格去年在国会臭名昭著的露面不同，这种困惑并不是因为对技术一无所知——众议院委员会的多位成员就编程语言、GitHub提交和密码术提出了高度技术性的问题。相反，这个话题本身非常复杂。简而言之，无论是从技术角度还是金融角度来看，加密货币都是出了名的难以理解。这对监管机构构成了挑战。
争论的焦点是，Libra协会(LibraAssociation)管理的加密货币Libra，还是Facebook开发的数字钱包应用Calibra，是否有资格成为一家银行。Facebook的主要论点之一是，Libra将帮助全球近20亿没有银行账户的成年人。然而，该公司同时辩称，Libra并不打算与银行账户竞争。这一区别将对Facebook或Libra协会的监管产生深远影响。
通过不被归类为银行，Facebook可以避免其他银行必须遵守的一些规则。例如，在美国，所有的银行都被要求遵守“认识你的客户”(或KYC)规定，这意味着他们必须能够识别与他们做生意的任何人，以帮助打击非法活动。波士顿大学奎斯特罗姆商学院高级讲师杰伊•扎戈尔斯基表示:“目前，Facebook不必遵守这些规定。”
Facebook的代表大卫·马库斯表示，Libra的钱包仍将遵循KYC的指导原则，试图以此来缓解人们对Libra被用于非法活动的担忧。然而，正如众议员比尔•福斯特(Bill Foster)所指出的那样，这种保证并不那么直截了当。银行将能够确认任何注册账户的人的身份，但Facebook只管理自己的Calibra wallet应用程序，允许用户购买、转账和出售货币。Libra的货币本身仍然可以匿名持有，其他公司也可以创建自己版本的Libra钱包，使用这种货币，具有不同的功能和政策。
当试图确定Libra是否可以匿名交易时，福斯特得到的答案很复杂。马库斯解释说，Libra的生态系统有“上坡道和下坡道”，所有这些都使用KYC策略。福斯特问，是否有可能在“一些岛屿”上存在钱包，而非法交易可以通过这些岛屿进行。马库斯对这个问题闪烁其词，只是指出，如果你是美国居民，你就必须使用美国法律规定的钱包。
还有一些细微的差别并不总是容易解决的。例如，Facebook坚持认为，与比特币不同——比特币的价值波动很大——Libra的行为不会像投资一样。它的价值不会因为市场的一时兴起而改变。由于Libra拥有美元和其他货币的支持，相对于其他货币，Libra的价值应该保持不变。
但是扎戈尔斯基说，实际情况要复杂得多。在欧洲和日本等世界部分地区，政府银行已经开始尝试支付负利率。这意味着，例如，如果你把100美元存入一个利率为-1%的账户，到年底，你将拥有99美元。其目标是激励私人银行、公司或个人花钱或投资，而不是把钱存起来。
扎戈尔斯基解释说:“如果Libra说我们会给你1美元，而且我向你保证，从现在起，它每年会值1美元。这实际上比把钱存在你的支票账户里要好，因为你的支票账户每年会被扣掉1%。”换句话说，即使Facebook或Libra协会不打算将货币作为投资，它们仍然可以作为一个整体。
天秤:也许Libra最让人困惑的事情是谁在负责。Facebook坚持认为，它只负责数字钱包卡里布拉，但Libra货币本身将由一个独立的协会管理。然而，听证会上出现的却是Facebook，每个标题上都出现了Facebook。不管是好是坏，Facebook的名字就是这个东西的名字。
扎戈尔斯基说:“我认为，在非常令人困惑的情况下，人们会试着给自己讲一个简单的故事。“我相信，不管Libra的圈子里有多少人，他们都会告诉自己，Libra有Facebook做后盾。”当然，这一切都不是“简单”的。立法者没有先例可以借鉴，但他们现在必须做出决定，塑造全球货币体系的未来。
没有压力。
FacebookIs Inviting Washington to Regulate Libra — Good Luck With That
Is it a bank? Is itanonymous? Is it an investment? The questions are unending
By EricRavenscraft Jul 27
Last week, Facebook faced a grilling beforeboth the House and Senate over its Libra cryptocurrency project. The committeesdid not seem to be fans of Facebook’s plans to create a global currency. Someof their concerns were due to a general distrust of Facebook, but also becauseit’s hard even for members of Congress to understand what Libra is.
That might be an obstacle to crafting theregulation that Facebook is inviting.
In the company’s opening statements to theSenate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Facebook promised thatit would not offer the Libra cryptocurrency until “we have fully addressedregulatory concerns and received appropriate approvals.” In a rare twist,Facebook is inviting regulation before it launches a product, rather thanafter, as if it were aiming to both move slow and not break stuff.
The hearings, though, showed why that maybe difficult for the regulators. If there was one guiding theme for the Housecommittee hearing — aside from a general disdain of Facebook over its myriadpast privacy failures — it was confusion over what, exactly, Libra is and how itfits into Facebook’s world. A few examples:
Representative Bill Huizenga (R-MI) asked,regarding Libra, “Is it a security, is it an exchange-traded product? Whatexactly is this? Is it fish or fowl? And it seems that it’s more of a platypusto me.”
Representative Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) said,“What we’re struggling with is, what are you?” before moving on to compareFacebook’s Libra wallet, Calibra, to money changers from the Bible.
Representative Joyce Beatty (D-OH) said,“This is very complicated. We have some of the best minds here on both sides,and clearly there’s a lot of unanswered questions.”
Put simply, cryptocurrencies arenotoriously difficult to understand, both from a technical perspective and afinancial one.
Unlike what happened during Facebook CEOMark Zuckerberg’s notorious appearance before Congress last year, the confusionwasn’t due to tech illiteracy — multiple members of the House committee askedhighly technical questions regarding programming languages, GitHub commits, andcryptography. Rather, the topic itself was incredibly complex. Put simply,cryptocurrencies are notoriously difficult to understand, both from a technicalperspective and a financial one. That presents a challenge for regulators.
A key point of contention was whether Libra,the cryptocurrency managed by the Libra Association, or Calibra, the digitalwallet app Facebook would build on top of it, qualify as a bank. One ofFacebook’s main arguments is that Libra will help the nearly 2 billion adultsaround the world who lack bank accounts. However, the company simultaneouslyargues that Libra is not designed to compete with bank accounts. Thatdistinction would have a profound impact on which regulations Facebook or theLibra Association that would run it would fall under.
By not being classified as a bank, Facebookis able to avoid some of the rules that other banks have to follow. Forexample, in the United States, all banks are required to follow Know YourCustomer (or KYC) regulations, which means they have to be able to identifyanyone they do business with, in order to help crack down on illegal activity.According to Jay Zagorsky, senior lecturer at Boston University’s QuestromSchool of Business, “Right now, Facebook does not have to follow thoseregulations.”
Facebook representative David Marcusattempted to assuage worries that Libra would be used for illegal activity bysaying that Libra wallets would still follow KYC guidelines. However, asRepresentative Bill Foster (D-IL) pointed out, that kind of assurance isn’t sostraightforward. A bank would be able to confirm the identity of anyone whosigns up for an account, but Facebook only manages its own Calibra wallet app,which lets users buy, transfer, and sell the currency. The Libra currencyitself can still be held anonymously, and other companies can create their ownversions of Libra wallets that use the currency, with different features andpolicies.
When trying to determine whether Libracould be traded anonymously, the answer Foster got was complicated. Marcusexplained that there are “on-ramps and off-ramps” for the Libra ecosystem, allof which use KYC polices. Foster asked if it would be possible for a wallet toexist in “some set of islands” that illicit transactions could run through.Marcus gave a slight dodge of the question, simply pointing out that if you’rea U.S. resident, you’d be required to use wallets that are properly regulatedby U.S. law.
There are other nuances that aren’t alwayseasy to work out. For example, Facebook insists that, unlike Bitcoin — whichhas fluctuated wildly in value — Libra won’t behave as an investment. Its valuewon’t change based on the whims of the market. Since it is backed by the U.S.dollar and other currencies, Libra’s value should stay the same, relative tothose other currencies.
But Zagorsky says it’s more complicatedthan that. In some parts of the world like Europe and Japan, government bankshave experimented with paying negative interest. This means that if, forexample, you leave $100 in an account with -1% interest, at the end of theyear, you’ll have $99. The goal is to incentivize private banks, companies, orindividuals to spend or invest money, rather than leave it stored.
“If Libra comes out and says we’ll give you $1 and I guarantee youit’s going to be worth $1 a year from now, that is actually a better investmentthan leaving it in your checking account, which is being docked 1% a year,”explains Zagorsky. In other words, even if Facebook or the Libra Associationdon’t intend for the currency to be investments, they can still function asone.
Perhaps the most confusing thing aboutLibra, though, is who’s in charge. Facebook maintains that it’s only going tobe responsible for the digital wallet Calibra, but the Libra currency itselfwill be managed by an independent association. Yet it’s Facebook that’s presentat the hearings and it’s Facebook that’s in every headline. For good or ill,Facebook’s name is the one attached to this thing.
“I think in very confusing situations, people try and tell themselvesa simple story,” says Zagorsky. “The story I believe people are going to tellthemselves, no matter how many people are part of the Libra Association, isthat Libra is backed by Facebook.”
Of course, there’s nothing “simple” aboutany of this. There’s no precedent for lawmakers to draw on, yet they must makedecisions now that will shape the future of the global monetary system.
No pressure.
评论(6)