Just for the record, I’ve sharpened my description of the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) e-CNY pivot from a central bank digital currency (CBDC) to a tokenized commercial bank deposit platform:
e-CNY 2.0 Pivot from Central Bank Digital Currency to Tokenized Deposits (PBOC)
On December 29, 2025, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) announced the digital yuan (e-CNY) transition from central bank digital currency to a tokenized commercial bank interest-paying deposit platform. The PBOC also introduced a “global single ledger” (GSL) that operates like a centralized real-time gross settlement system. The GSL binds payment instructions and settlement together to eliminate correspondent clearing delays. The PBOC embeds regulatory nodes into the network to have real-time, comprehensive visibility of all interbank flows for risk management and financial integrity purposes. And to reduce settlement latency, settlement on the GSL is separated from the execution of smart contracts (metadata enabling automated transaction execution based on predefined rules). Smart contract execution is offloaded to parallel, permissioned blockchain networks where programmability acts as a temporary conditional lock. Once conditions are met, the programming is stripped away, and the funds settle across the GSL to the receiving bank as unrestricted money. Only earmarked funds held in sub-wallets retain post-transfer restrictions set by “parent” wallets. [PBOC]
How Pontes (DLT) Reinvented the Time-Out and Got it Wrong (LinkedIn)
Patrick McConnell, in a September 22 LinkedIn post, argued that the European Central Bank Pontes tokenized asset settlement system pilot utilizes a flawed hash-link protocol (HLP). Pontes employs a dual settlement model, one of which settles cash legs directly in the Eurosystem’s T2 real-time gross settlement system via application programming interface triggers to achieve central bank money settlement finality. Patrick claims the HLP implements time-outs without unique transaction sequence numbers or duplicate identification flags. Consequently, delayed but successful transactions could be erroneously marked unsettled, creating double-payment risks upon resubmission. This vulnerability renders the Eurosystem Single Market Infrastructure Gateway a single point of failure with unpredictable outcomes, violating the Digital Operational Resilience Act. Comments posit that T2’s underlying reconciliation layer reduces the double-payment risk to a “tie-out problem” rather than lost funds, and that the architecture is fundamentally flawed for locking payments before verifying asset availability. [LinkedIn]

BTW if you want to see a complete database of my DFC-related posts going back years, including many that didn’t make the Daily Digest cut, click here.
FYI I produce a monthly digest of digital fiat currency (DFC) developments exclusively for the official sector (e.g., central banks, ministries of finance and international financial institution (e.g., the BIS, IMF, OECD, World Bank)) plus academics and firms that are active in the DFC space (commercial banks, technology providers, consultants, etc.). (DFCs include central bank digital currency (CBDC), stablecoins and tokenized deposits.) It goes out via email on the first business day of every month, and if you’re interested in being on the mailing list, please email me at john@kiffmeister.com.










