The digital dollar is coming. Here’s what payments companies worry about.

Jodie Kelley heads the Electronic Transactions Association. The trade group's members, who process $7 trillion a year in payments, want a say in the digital currency.

Jodie Kelley is CEO of the Electronic Transactions Association

Jodie Kelley is CEO of the Electronic Transactions Association.

Photo: Electronic Transactions Association

The Electronic Transactions Association launched in 1990 just as new technologies, led by the World Wide Web, began upending the world of commerce and finance.

The disruption hasn't stopped.

Now in its fourth decade, the ETA, which represents more than 500 corporations, including giants like Wells Fargo, Visa, Mastercard, Capital One and Google, is grappling with the most dramatic technological shift in payments: the rise of cryptocurrencies and other digital means of exchange.

The ETA is gearing up for deeper discussions over the creation of a central bank digital currency, or CBDC. There's been growing excitement and concern around an American CBDC — the digital dollar — ever since Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell designated it as a "high-priority project."

How should a digital dollar be issued? How should transactions work? How would it affect the business world? These are key questions for the ETA, said CEO Jodie Kelley. "We are engaged in the conversation, which is picking up significantly, but are still in pretty early stages," she said.

In an interview with Protocol, Kelley, who assumed the post in 2019, talked about how the association — whose members collectively process more than $7 trillion in purchases in North America — see the rise of crypto and how they are gearing up for what could be a major shift in their industry.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.

What has been the attitude toward crypto among your members?

There is a broad recognition that crypto writ large is here to stay. People are interested. They're engaged with it, and our member companies are as well. There's clearly a range of different views about how certain forms of crypto will ultimately shake out. To date, for example with bitcoin, we've seen consumers engaging with it more as a new asset class, something that they buy and hold and hope it continues to go up.

You see our member companies facilitating that purchase, the holding, the ability to sell it. And you see our member companies who continue to take the public position that cryptocurrencies like bitcoin could serve as a payment mechanism. To date, it hasn't proven out, mostly because of the incredible volatility. But we definitely have member companies who are exploring it.

There's a debate on whether to view crypto coins as currencies or securities.

Yeah, there is that debate about currency versus security. As you look at how bitcoin and those types of cryptocurrencies have evolved, consumers are engaging with them more as a security than as a payment mechanism.

What do you think of the U.S. looking to launch a digital currency as a response to the rise of bitcoin and other currencies?

You're putting your finger on what is the most important question with respect to central bank digital currencies: What is the problem that we're trying to solve for, and is the CBDC the best way to do it?

Early on, there were people who said if coins like Libra take off, that could be a threat, and so CBDC is a response. Now you hear CBDC talk much more as a hedge against what China and others are doing with their digital currencies, as a way to reach low- and moderate-income Americans, as a way to solve cross-border challenges. There's a whole host of problems.

The payments industry is a technology industry. This is premised on a new technology that I think a lot of folks, including our members, find really exciting. I think the excitement is somewhat tempered though by the fact that the introduction of a CBDC is pretty complicated.

There are some risks, as Chairman Powell and others have called out publicly, depending on how you do it. There's a sense of caution, of being excited to support it, but wanting to make sure that whatever is done is done correctly and in a way that does no harm.

What are some of the risks that have been raised by ETA members?

One risk that has been pretty widely discussed is the risk to the lending system in the United States.

If there's a flight of deposits out of banks and into some CBDC wallet, for example, then banks, which rely on those deposits to then lend and create commercial money, that ability would shrink. So the ability of individuals and small businesses in our system to get loans would be diminished.

That would be an unintended consequence. There's not a desire going into this to make it harder for people to access capital when they need it. Different central banks have talked about all different ways they may try to mitigate that risk, but it's clearly a risk that is acknowledged pretty broadly.

There are a lot of questions in terms of design choice. We have an existing system now that is highly secure. If you're building a new system, what security gets built in? What interoperability gets built in? What is the balance between privacy and a regulatory regime like anti-money laundering? There are many, many questions like that that arise.

Can you elaborate on the privacy and anti-money laundering concerns?

When you think about the rise of crypto, there was a real desire to lean into the privacy component, to have a means of transacting where privacy was at a premium. Obviously, when you choose that as a first principle, if it truly is a private system that's not trackable and traceable, then you're giving up the ability to track it, when there are concerns about legality. Anti-money laundering, know your customer, the full regulatory regime that's designed to ensure that people are who they say they are, that we can trace money when we think it's being used for illegal purposes — it is made much, much more difficult in an environment where the digital currency is essentially anonymous and it's not trackable.

If I hand a dollar to you, there's no record of that $1. It's one thing when you're talking about dollar bills because you can only carry around so many sacks of currency. But when you're talking about a digital dollar, that concern becomes amplified.

There are concerns when the swing to privacy goes the other way. People raise concerns about China's digital yuan, for example, whether at its core is a mechanism to track how its citizens are moving money.

Are there things that China or maybe other countries have done with CBDCs that your members find troubling, that made them say, "We should avoid this?"

I would say it's so early, notwithstanding China being out there testing the water. You know, there are so many central banks that are looking at this. Most of them, including our own, are just looking at it. Most of the discussion now is happening in the abstract. There's very little to react to thus far.

What's the biggest worry of your members?

The concern at this early stage is just ensuring that there's a recognition of the complexity here. There's this recent paper published that referenced the Hippocratic oath in this context: "First do no harm." It's hard to get concrete about the harm until you understand what the proposal is.

There have been recent major developments in the crypto space. Clearly, the industry is growing faster, highlighted by the Coinbase IPO. But there are also concerns about volatility and the use of crypto in criminal activity. How have your members reacted to these?

There's a lot going on. There's a recognition that cryptocurrencies are here to stay. The volume is significant. This is real. You're seeing the industry engaging with it in different countries in a way that maintains the integrity of the system. As you mentioned, you can't open your computer without seeing something about crypto.

This is the flip side of my earlier question. Are there CBDC features or policies that your members find exciting and promising?

What I'm hearing more right now is interest in some broader cooperation internationally on CBDCs. One of the use cases that people have talked about are cross-border transactions, which is challenging for settlements and remittances.

There's a recognition that CBDCs would have to solve a bunch of other things, including interoperability. You must have a mechanism to settle in whichever CBDC you're going to settle in. There has to be interoperability. You've got to be able to go into a drugstore and use the CBDC to buy something. There has to be a mechanism for them to go through some network to settle.

And the complicating factor is you have more than one government, more than one CBDC, so they have to be able to interoperate for them to take advantage of the technology.


Apple's new payments tech won't kill Square

It could be used in place of the Square dongle, but it's far short of a full-fledged payments service.

The Apple system would reportedly only handle contactless payments.

Photo: Nathan Dumlao/Unsplash

Apple is preparing a product to enable merchants to accept contactless payments via iPhones without additional hardware, according to Bloomberg.

While this may seem like a move to compete with Block and its Square merchant unit in point-of-sale payments, that’s unlikely. The Apple service is using technology from its acquisition of Mobeewave in 2020 that enables contactless payments using NFC technology.

Keep Reading Show less
Tomio Geron

Tomio Geron ( @tomiogeron) is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. He was previously a reporter and editor at The Wall Street Journal, covering venture capital and startups. Before that, he worked as a staff writer at Forbes, covering social media and venture capital, and also edited the Midas List of top tech investors. He has also worked at newspapers covering crime, courts, health and other topics. He can be reached at or

Sponsored Content

A CCO’s viewpoint on top enterprise priorities in 2022

The 2022 non-predictions guide to what your enterprise is working on starting this week

As Honeywell’s global chief commercial officer, I am privileged to have the vantage point of seeing the demands, challenges and dynamics that customers across the many sectors we cater to are experiencing and sharing.

This past year has brought upon all businesses and enterprises an unparalleled change and challenge. This was the case at Honeywell, for example, a company with a legacy in innovation and technology for over a century. When I joined the company just months before the pandemic hit we were already in the midst of an intense transformation under the leadership of CEO Darius Adamczyk. This transformation spanned our portfolio and business units. We were already actively working on products and solutions in advanced phases of rollouts that the world has shown a need and demand for pre-pandemic. Those included solutions in edge intelligence, remote operations, quantum computing, warehouse automation, building technologies, safety and health monitoring and of course ESG and climate tech which was based on our exceptional success over the previous decade.

Keep Reading Show less
Jeff Kimbell
Jeff Kimbell is Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer at Honeywell. In this role, he has broad responsibilities to drive organic growth by enhancing global sales and marketing capabilities. Jeff has nearly three decades of leadership experience. Prior to joining Honeywell in 2019, Jeff served as a Partner in the Transformation Practice at McKinsey & Company, where he worked with companies facing operational and financial challenges and undergoing “good to great” transformations. Before that, he was an Operating Partner at Silver Lake Partners, a global leader in technology and held a similar position at Cerberus Capital LP. Jeff started his career as a Manufacturing Team Manager and Engineering Project Manager at Procter & Gamble before becoming a strategy consultant at Bain & Company and holding executive roles at Dell EMC and Transamerica Corporation. Jeff earned a B.S. in electrical engineering at Kansas State University and an M.B.A. at Dartmouth College.

Why does China's '996' overtime culture persist?

A Tencent worker’s open criticism shows why this work schedule is hard to change in Chinese tech.

Excessive overtime is one of the plights Chinese workers are grappling with across sectors.

Photo: VCG/VCG via Getty Images

Workers were skeptical when Chinese Big Tech called off its notorious and prevalent overtime policy: “996,” a 12-hour, six-day work schedule. They were right to be: A recent incident at gaming and social media giant Tencent proves that a deep-rooted overtime culture is hard to change, new policy or not.

Defiant Tencent worker Zhang Yifei, who openly challenged the company’s overtime culture, reignited wide discussion of the touchy topic this week. What triggered Zhang's criticism, according to his own account, was his team’s positive attitude toward overtime. His team, which falls under WeCom — a business communication and office collaboration tool similar to Slack — announced its in-house Breakthrough Awards. The judges’ comments to one winner highly praised them for logging “over 20 hours of intense work nonstop,” to help meet the deadline for launching a marketing page.

Keep Reading Show less
Shen Lu

Shen Lu covers China's tech industry.

Boost 2

Can Matt Mullenweg save the internet?

He's turning Automattic into a different kind of tech giant. But can he take on the trillion-dollar walled gardens and give the internet back to the people?

Matt Mullenweg, CEO of Automattic and founder of WordPress, poses for Protocol at his home in Houston, Texas.
Photo: Arturo Olmos for Protocol

In the early days of the pandemic, Matt Mullenweg didn't move to a compound in Hawaii, bug out to a bunker in New Zealand or head to Miami and start shilling for crypto. No, in the early days of the pandemic, Mullenweg bought an RV. He drove it all over the country, bouncing between Houston and San Francisco and Jackson Hole with plenty of stops in national parks. In between, he started doing some tinkering.

The tinkering is a part-time gig: Most of Mullenweg’s time is spent as CEO of Automattic, one of the web’s largest platforms. It’s best known as the company that runs, the hosted version of the blogging platform that powers about 43% of the websites on the internet. Since WordPress is open-source software, no company technically owns it, but Automattic provides tools and services and oversees most of the WordPress-powered internet. It’s also the owner of the booming ecommerce platform WooCommerce, Day One, the analytics tool and the podcast app Pocket Casts. Oh, and Tumblr. And Simplenote. And many others. That makes Mullenweg one of the most powerful CEOs in tech, and one of the most important voices in the debate over the future of the internet.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.


Spoiler alert: We’re already in the beta-metaverse

300 million people use metaverse-like platforms — Fortnite, Roblox and Minecraft — every month. That equals the total user base of the internet in 1999.

A lot of us are using platforms that can be considered metaverse prototypes.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

What does it take to build the metaverse? What building blocks do we need, how can companies ensure that the metaverse is going to be inclusive, and how do we know that we have arrived in the 'verse?

This week, we convened a panel of experts for Protocol Entertainment’s first virtual live event, including Epic Games Unreal Engine VP and GM Marc Petit, Oasis Consortium co-founder and President Tiffany Xingyu Wang and Emerge co-founder and CEO Sly Lee.

Keep Reading Show less
Janko Roettgers

Janko Roettgers (@jank0) is a senior reporter at Protocol, reporting on the shifting power dynamics between tech, media, and entertainment, including the impact of new technologies. Previously, Janko was Variety's first-ever technology writer in San Francisco, where he covered big tech and emerging technologies. He has reported for Gigaom, Frankfurter Rundschau, Berliner Zeitung, and ORF, among others. He has written three books on consumer cord-cutting and online music and co-edited an anthology on internet subcultures. He lives with his family in Oakland.


Lyin’ AI: OpenAI launches new language model despite toxic tendencies

Research company OpenAI says this year’s language model is less toxic than GPT-3. But the new default, InstructGPT, still has tendencies to make discriminatory comments and generate false information.

The new default, called InstructGPT, still has tendencies to make discriminatory comments and generate false information.

Illustration: Pixabay; Protocol

OpenAI knows its text generators have had their fair share of problems. Now the research company has shifted to a new deep-learning model it says works better to produce “fewer toxic outputs” than GPT-3, its flawed but widely-used system.

Starting Thursday, a new model called InstructGPT will be the default technology served up through OpenAI’s API, which delivers foundational AI into all sorts of chatbots, automatic writing tools and other text-based applications. Consider the new system, which has been in beta testing for the past year, to be a work in progress toward an automatic text generator that OpenAI hopes is closer to what humans actually want.

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Kaye

Kate Kaye is an award-winning multimedia reporter digging deep and telling print, digital and audio stories. She covers AI and data for Protocol. Her reporting on AI and tech ethics issues has been published in OneZero, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review, CityLab, Ad Age and Digiday and heard on NPR. Kate is the creator of and is the author of "Campaign '08: A Turning Point for Digital Media," a book about how the 2008 presidential campaigns used digital media and data.

Latest Stories