2026-10-29 · 1 statements · 1 actors
BIS speech on deposit insurance in a changing financial landscape, 29 Oct 2026
A BIS speaker discussed the evolving role of deposit insurers, non-bank risks, digital vulnerabilities and the treatment of stablecoins and tokenised deposits.
Not compared yet. Events are compared once at least two actors have spoken.
The statements
Bank for International Settlements
-
Deposit insurance in a changing financial landscape
2026-10-29 · central bank · one of several topics in this statement
The speaker says deposit insurers' mandates are increasingly delivered through measures that preserve access to deposits, and that effective failure management requires funding from internal loss-absorbing capacity, industry-sourced funds such as deposit insurance funds, and public funding. The speaker argues external industry funding remains crucial, notably for small and medium-sized banks, and cites the EU CMDI reform as consistent with this direction.
-
Deposit insurance in a changing financial landscape
2026-10-29 · central bank · one of several topics in this statement
The speaker says stress at non-bank financial institutions can disrupt the system and transmit to the banking sector, citing the Archegos failure in 2021 and the September 2022 UK gilt market disruption. The speaker suggests that central bank liquidity access for certain NBFIs might be considered, but does not imply extending resolution regimes beyond their current scope.
-
Deposit insurance in a changing financial landscape
2026-10-29 · central bank · one of several topics in this statement
The speaker says digitalisation makes deposits less stable and failures faster, citing the Silicon Valley Bank failure, and says operational incidents such as cyber incidents and third-party outages are increasingly risky. The current crisis framework was not designed for such scenarios, and joined-up planning across authorities is needed.
-
Deposit insurance in a changing financial landscape
2026-10-29 · central bank · one of several topics in this statement
The speaker argues that asset-backed stablecoins lack stable value against fiat currency and are not linked to credit intermediation, so the core rationale for deposit insurance is missing, though backstops could be considered and regulatory safeguards can mitigate run risk. Tokenised deposits, tied to an issuing bank, preserve the deposit-credit link, so the speaker suggests they should be subject to the same protection, while noting operational complexities and the need for public communication.