South Korea integrates CBDC into the real banking system amid strict US ban
The Bank of Korea is taking its central bank digital currency (CBDC) pilot project to a fundamentally new level. While the first phase limited testing to isolated payments via electronic wallets, the regulator is now making a decisive move to integrate the CBDC into the country's existing financial infrastructure.
Nine Banks in Action: From Tokens to Real Settlements
In this new phase, nine commercial banks are joining the project. They will need to create a full-fledged ecosystem: electronic wallets, vouchers, and blockchain infrastructure for managing CBDC deposit tokens. The key difference is that these digital assets will now be used in real banking systems for transactions and settlements, not just within a test environment.
Particularly noteworthy is the plan to replace government subsidies and targeted program funds with digital vouchers. This is a direct indication that Seoul sees the CBDC not merely as an experiment, but as a tool to enhance the efficiency of budget expenditures and reduce administrative costs.
USA: Complete Ban Until 2030
The contrast with the United States' position is stark. The Trump administration has consistently stated the inadmissibility of issuing a CBDC. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently confirmed that under the current administration, the focus will be on leadership in the digital asset space, not on a government-issued digital currency.
Furthermore, the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have agreed to advance a major housing bill, which includes a provision banning the issuance of a CBDC until December 31, 2030. Thus, the world's two largest economies are moving in directly opposite directions.
Cryptalist Analysis
We are witnessing a classic divide in approaches to digital currencies. South Korea, by betting on deposit tokens as an intermediate link between CBDCs and stablecoins, demonstrates a pragmatic, evolutionary path. The United States, on the other hand, chooses strict regulation and a ban, fearing increased government control over finances. In the long term, in my view, the Korean approach appears more viable, as it allows the market and the regulator to adapt to the new reality without radical upheavals.