Perhaps history can be a guide on whether central banks should issue digital currencies.

Even exploring a CBDC without ultimately issuing one can provide significant benefits.

Policymakers are weighing the possible benefits and risks of adopting a U.S. central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Vanity McDaniel and Zhu Wang review the Federal Reserve's important role in the payments system, from cash and check processing to supporting innovations in electronic payments. McDaniel is a senior payments business analyst in the Payments Outreach group and Wang is vice president for research in financial and payments systems in the Research Department at the Richmond Fed.

In the last year, more than 10 percent of Americans have reportedly traded or bought cryptocurrencies, in part fueled by increased institutional adoption and public attention in the media. This increased engagement has captured the attention of both the general public and central bankers alike.

Facebook and Amazon are examining creating digital currencies, like Alibaba has. What drives platforms to develop these currencies, and should central banks be worried?

The U.S. might benefit from replacing physical cash with central bank digital currency, but first the Fed must resolve several policy and implementation issues.

This paper studies a platform's business model choice between accepting cash and issuing tokens, as well as the implications for welfare, resiliency, and interoperability.

In this discussion paper, I provide a cautionary tale. I show also in a version of Green and Lin (2003) that the information content in the blockchain prevents agents from attaining all the gains from risk sharing — highlighting the downsides of too much public information.

The technology behind cryptocurrencies shows promise for raising capital but has also drawn scrutiny from regulators.

Can payments be made to work faster, safer, and more efficiently?

Duke University economist on the future of bitcoin, the overconfidence of CEOs, and index funds