{"id":68927,"date":"2026-09-25T10:06:02","date_gmt":"2026-09-25T10:06:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.vtmarkets.com\/en-ca\/uncategorized\/ibm-swift-and-the-rise-of-tokenised-bank-deposits\/"},"modified":"2026-09-25T10:06:02","modified_gmt":"2026-09-25T10:06:02","slug":"ibm-swift-and-the-rise-of-tokenised-bank-deposits","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.vtmarkets.com\/en-ca\/featured\/ibm-swift-and-the-rise-of-tokenised-bank-deposits\/","title":{"rendered":"IBM, Swift and the Rise of Tokenised Bank Deposits"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n

In July, the fight over digital money was playing out in Washington. Banks and crypto firms were lobbying over who gets to own the deposit<\/a>, with stablecoin rewards at the centre and Congress stuck in the middle. Crypto was pushing into banking, and banks were mostly playing defence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This week, the banks answered with infrastructure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Thursday, IBM connected its Digital Asset Haven platform to Swift’s blockchain-based shared ledger<\/a>, letting banks instruct tokenised deposit transfers in ISO 20022, the message standard they already use for cross-border payments. The same day, seven UK banks completed the first live customer payments using tokenised sterling<\/a>. Neither waited for Congress. The IBM feature is still in beta, and no banks have been named yet, but the direction is clear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The upgrade banks already paid for<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The significance of IBM’s move is less about replacing traditional payments and more about connecting blockchain capabilities to existing infrastructure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Banks have already spent years migrating to ISO 20022<\/a>, creating a common language for richer payment information. IBM’s adapter allows banks to use that same messaging layer to instruct tokenised deposit transfers rather than building entirely separate blockchain workflows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That lowers one of the biggest barriers to adoption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For most banks, the challenge was never whether blockchain technology existed. The challenge was integrating it into operations, compliance processes and risk frameworks that were built around traditional financial systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tokenised deposits offer a compromise: banks can explore faster, programmable settlement while keeping deposits as regulated bank liabilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tokenisation moves from experiment to infrastructure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The banking approach also fits into a wider regulatory shift.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two days before IBM’s announcement, CFTC Chair Michael Selig told a New York Fed conference<\/a> that US markets need to prepare for \u201cmass tokenization\u201d and \u201cthe world of onchain finance and 24\/7 markets.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

His comments did not establish new rules or a timetable. But they reflect a broader change in the discussion: policymakers and financial institutions are increasingly focused on how tokenised assets should operate within existing markets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The regulatory question remains open. Tokenisation could take several forms \u2014 including bank-issued digital deposits, stablecoins and other blockchain-based assets \u2014 and each model creates different questions around oversight, settlement, liquidity and access.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The infrastructure race behind digital money<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The bank-led approach is part of a wider competition over what digital money infrastructure will look like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Model<\/strong><\/td>Who issues the money<\/strong><\/td>Main advantage<\/strong><\/td>Main challenge<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Tokenised bank deposits<\/td>Regulated banks<\/td>Keeps money within existing banking systems<\/td>Interoperability between banks<\/td><\/tr>
Stablecoins (USDT, USDC)<\/td>Private issuers<\/td>Global blockchain liquidity<\/td>Regulation and reserve oversight<\/td><\/tr>
Public blockchains<\/td>Decentralised networks<\/td>Open access and global settlement<\/td>Institutional adoption and compliance<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The important point is that these models are not developing in isolation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Banks are borrowing ideas pioneered by crypto networks: programmable assets, blockchain settlement and always-on transfers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, crypto infrastructure is moving closer to traditional finance. Stablecoin issuers are expanding across multiple blockchain networks, while financial institutions are exploring how digital assets could become part of institutional settlement flows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The question is increasingly less about whether blockchain enters finance and more about who controls the rails: banks, private digital money issuers, or open networks.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why banks have a natural advantage<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The strongest argument for tokenised deposits is that they build on what banks already control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A tokenised deposit remains a claim on a regulated financial institution. The bank keeps the customer relationship, compliance obligations and balance-sheet connection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That matters because many corporate payments are not simply about speed. They require:<\/p>\n\n\n\n