The Legal Desirability Of Tokenized Money: A Comparative Analytical Framework

This chapter examines the legal desirability of tokenized money through a comparative analysis of regulatory approaches across major jurisdictions. Legal desirability denotes the systematic evaluation of whether novel monetary instruments should be introduced and under what regulatory conditions. The research reveals a fundamental paradox: technological convergence in tokenization capabilities intersects with persistent regulatory divergence across central bank digital currencies, tokenized deposits, and stablecoins. Analysis of wholesale-retail dynamics, financial stability trade-offs, privacy-AML/CFT balance, and adoption challenges demonstrates that jurisdictions rationally reach different conclusions based on payment system contexts, institutional capacity, and policy objectives. Empirical data confirms the emergence of a multifaceted digital monetary system: wholesale digital currencies issued by central banks for interbank settlements, tokenized deposits for programmable payments, and regulated stablecoins for crypto-asset markets. The framework reveals that tokenization subordinates monetary instruments to computational logic, creating infrastructural legal primacy that challenges constitutional monetary sovereignty. Legal desirability requires context-specific assessment rather than universal technocratic determination.