Connect with us

Banks must establish infrastructure for digital assets before it’s too late

Banks must establish infrastructure for digital assets before it’s too late

Published

on

Crypto adoption in traditional legacy systems is moving fast, but a lack of technological infrastructure limits compliance and safe storage.

The adoption of digital assets in traditional legacy systems is moving fast. In the middle of the year, the digital asset custody industry saw welcome developments when the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency officially announced that all nationally chartered banks in the United States can provide custody services for cryptocurrencies.

The move, while positive for the ecosystem, is yet to be accompanied by a rigorous assessment of its technological infrastructure, like asking questions such as: Where are these newly acquired digital assets stored?

One thing is clear: We have entered a new paradigm of finance that requires a different approach to securing assets.

Digital assets offer great wealth potential, but asset custody providers have a responsibility to prevent their clients from becoming another figure of global crypto attacks, which reached a value of $1.4 billion in June this year.

According to the Financial Action Task Force’s yearly report, the industry’s lack of infrastructure is limiting compliance and safe storage of assets. As traditional financial markets begin to embrace the space, they must develop robust, tailored technology solutions with the strength of a legacy system.

Banks custodying crypto is a positive step in the maturation of digital assets

When the senior deputy commissioner stated in a letter that banks can hold cryptographic keys, it was clear banks were paying attention. It is a key sign of the industry maturing and that assets are being better understood and utilized. The OCC’s move will accelerate the confidence and development of regulators in the industry.

Banks have a unique opportunity with this move to dramatically increase wealth opportunities for millions of people across the globe through custodying digital assets. They could boost financial inclusion or prevent national economic collapse.

But they must do it correctly; they must understand how to effectively manage risks, how to comply with local and international laws, and how to be responsible for their customers’ assets.

Traditional banks are the pony express — and they must invest in telegraph wires

The story of traditional banks and new fintech digital asset providers can be compared to the old story of the Western Union and the pony express. In the Wild West of the U.S., messages were sent via the pony express, from one horse station to another. Riders carried letters on horseback for thousands of miles, passing messages from coast to coast. When Western Union came along and installed telegraph poles, suddenly, the pony express became obsolete.

The traditional financial system and the new financial system will run in parallel but with two different systems opening at one time. We’ll still call payments payments, and investments will still be investments. But the overarching infrastructure it runs on will be vastly different, like horse carriages and cars.

Technology has the power to be disruptive in a fast and transformative way — and banks need the right wires. This is a critical time for fintech actors to step up and usher banks in the right direction on their digital asset journey.

The future of finance is moving fast, and if banks do not incorporate the correct protective and regulative mechanisms, assets are at great risk.

In a new paradigm of finance, banks must understand new requirements

The first challenge for banks is understanding how the new industry works; they need to understand the implementation of atomic swaps and the development of smart contracts. This technology doesn’t play well with the traditional space.

We foresee a parallel system running in which players will use infrastructure that works significantly differently from traditional payment networks or settlement flows. There are many existing counterparties in the middle of those systems, and this is a status quo that won’t change. So, the only option for banks is to adopt these new technologies.

If banks move too quickly to capitalize on the booming space and do not incorporate the correct protective mechanisms, they may fail. The reputation of digital asset potential will be damaged, and the livelihoods of millions converting fiat may be lost.

The biggest loss to assets in the new world of digital finance is the theft of cryptographic access to keys. Custodians must learn how to better safeguard these from cyberattacks, which have been on the rise — up by 75% during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Many banks have yet to find ways to cost-effectively service and protect themselves from such attacks. They must also understand that digitized securities differ from traditional securities because they are essentially representations of value or contractual rights or real-world assets.

Digital assets are fraught with risks if not settled correctly, and qualified custodians will eliminate the risk of counterparties failing to fulfill a transaction.

To build or to buy? Banks offering custody will need to decide urgently

While the move of the OCC is positive, it’s important to recognize that the majority of banks simply do not possess the correct infrastructure to provide safe and compliant custody solutions.

Banks can facilitate exchange transactions, settlements, trade executions, record keeping, valuation and tax services, but the question lies in how they will be able to deliver these services while managing the risks. You cannot scale crypto asset markets or have traditional institutional adoption without the elimination of trading counterparty and settlement risk.

Banks entering crypto custody will need tried-and-true crypto asset technology developed specifically for the industry and will inevitably face the build-versus-buy decision. So, unless they’re planning to build from scratch, banks will need access to the right technology that can safely secure digital assets.

The implementation process is not easy, nor is it cheap. They cannot cut corners. Banks will need to develop a team to research and make recommendations, seek approvals, build a team, test prototype technology and conduct regular cybersecurity assessments.

This, in and of itself, can take years. Rushing the process will be detrimental to customers’ assets. Banks have an option to integrate with the existing infrastructure that niches specifically in the protection, regulation and security of digital assets with whom digital asset protection is a number one priority, not their second.

The cost to develop crypto-tailored infrastructure is expensive — but the cost to not include it will be worse.

Moving forward without risks for customers

Banks and financial institutions are notoriously slow at innovating, but customers should not have to suffer.

The fintech and crypto space moves at the speed of light, with even the most intelligent and forward-thinking leaders in the space stating they can’t keep up. Banks must find the capacity to consider the development of the necessary secure and compliant infrastructure.

The solutions need to come fast. As global markets begin to recognize that the existing financial infrastructure is on the brink of failure, banks must follow the digital asset industry to protect the future of the financial industry.

New on-boarders embracing the digital asset space must understand how to effectively manage risks, comply with local and international laws, and be responsible for their customers’ assets.

This article was co-authored by Gunnar Jaerv and Glenn Woo.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the authors’ alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Gunnar Jaerv is the chief operating officer of First Digital Trust — Hong Kong’s technology-driven financial institution powering the digital asset industry and servicing financial technology innovators. Prior to joining First Digital Trust, Gunnar founded several tech startups, including Hong Kong-based Peak Digital and Elements Global Enterprises in Singapore.
Glenn Woo is the managing director of APAC (Asia Pacific) at Ledger — an industry leader in developing security and infrastructure solutions for cryptocurrencies and blockchain applications. He has an extensive career in the financial services and technology industry, working for S&P Global Market Intelligence as the head of Hong Kong, Taiwan and Korea, and Shinhan AITAS as a consultant in financial asset custody.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis…

Published

on

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People who recovered from COVID-19 and received a COVID-19 shot were more likely to suffer adverse reactions, researchers in Europe are reporting.

A medical worker administers a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to a patient at a vaccination center in Ancenis-Saint-Gereon, France, on Nov. 17, 2021. (Stephane Mahe//Reuters)

Participants in the study were more likely to experience an adverse reaction after vaccination regardless of the type of shot, with one exception, the researchers found.

Across all vaccine brands, people with prior COVID-19 were 2.6 times as likely after dose one to suffer an adverse reaction, according to the new study. Such people are commonly known as having a type of protection known as natural immunity after recovery.

People with previous COVID-19 were also 1.25 times as likely after dose 2 to experience an adverse reaction.

The findings held true across all vaccine types following dose one.

Of the female participants who received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, for instance, 82 percent who had COVID-19 previously experienced an adverse reaction after their first dose, compared to 59 percent of females who did not have prior COVID-19.

The only exception to the trend was among males who received a second AstraZeneca dose. The percentage of males who suffered an adverse reaction was higher, 33 percent to 24 percent, among those without a COVID-19 history.

Participants who had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (confirmed with a positive test) experienced at least one adverse reaction more often after the 1st dose compared to participants who did not have prior COVID-19. This pattern was observed in both men and women and across vaccine brands,” Florence van Hunsel, an epidemiologist with the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb, and her co-authors wrote.

There were only slightly higher odds of the naturally immune suffering an adverse reaction following receipt of a Pfizer or Moderna booster, the researchers also found.

The researchers performed what’s known as a cohort event monitoring study, following 29,387 participants as they received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The participants live in a European country such as Belgium, France, or Slovakia.

Overall, three-quarters of the participants reported at least one adverse reaction, although some were minor such as injection site pain.

Adverse reactions described as serious were reported by 0.24 percent of people who received a first or second dose and 0.26 percent for people who received a booster. Different examples of serious reactions were not listed in the study.

Participants were only specifically asked to record a range of minor adverse reactions (ADRs). They could provide details of other reactions in free text form.

“The unsolicited events were manually assessed and coded, and the seriousness was classified based on international criteria,” researchers said.

The free text answers were not provided by researchers in the paper.

The authors note, ‘In this manuscript, the focus was not on serious ADRs and adverse events of special interest.’” Yet, in their highlights section they state, “The percentage of serious ADRs in the study is low for 1st and 2nd vaccination and booster.”

Dr. Joel Wallskog, co-chair of the group React19, which advocates for people who were injured by vaccines, told The Epoch Times: “It is intellectually dishonest to set out to study minor adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination then make conclusions about the frequency of serious adverse events. They also fail to provide the free text data.” He added that the paper showed “yet another study that is in my opinion, deficient by design.”

Ms. Hunsel did not respond to a request for comment.

She and other researchers listed limitations in the paper, including how they did not provide data broken down by country.

The paper was published by the journal Vaccine on March 6.

The study was funded by the European Medicines Agency and the Dutch government.

No authors declared conflicts of interest.

Some previous papers have also found that people with prior COVID-19 infection had more adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including a 2021 paper from French researchers. A U.S. study identified prior COVID-19 as a predictor of the severity of side effects.

Some other studies have determined COVID-19 vaccines confer little or no benefit to people with a history of infection, including those who had received a primary series.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still recommends people who recovered from COVID-19 receive a COVID-19 vaccine, although a number of other health authorities have stopped recommending the shot for people who have prior COVID-19.

Another New Study

In another new paper, South Korean researchers outlined how they found people were more likely to report certain adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccination than after receipt of another vaccine.

The reporting of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, or pericarditis, a related condition, was nearly 20 times as high among children as the reporting odds following receipt of all other vaccines, the researchers found.

The reporting odds were also much higher for multisystem inflammatory syndrome or Kawasaki disease among adolescent COVID-19 recipients.

Researchers analyzed reports made to VigiBase, which is run by the World Health Organization.

Based on our results, close monitoring for these rare but serious inflammatory reactions after COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents until definitive causal relationship can be established,” the researchers wrote.

The study was published by the Journal of Korean Medical Science in its March edition.

Limitations include VigiBase receiving reports of problems, with some reports going unconfirmed.

Funding came from the South Korean government. One author reported receiving grants from pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/15/2024 - 05:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Key shipping company files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy

The Illinois-based general freight trucking company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to reorganize.

Published

on

The U.S. trucking industry has had a difficult beginning of the year for 2024 with several logistics companies filing for bankruptcy to seek either a Chapter 7 liquidation or Chapter 11 reorganization.

The Covid-19 pandemic caused a lot of supply chain issues for logistics companies and also created a shortage of truck drivers as many left the business for other occupations. Shipping companies, in the meantime, have had extreme difficulty recruiting new drivers for thousands of unfilled jobs.

Related: Tesla rival’s filing reveals Chapter 11 bankruptcy is possible

Freight forwarder company Boateng Logistics joined a growing list of shipping companies that permanently shuttered their businesses as the firm on Feb. 22 filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy with plans to liquidate.

The Carlsbad, Calif., logistics company filed its petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California listing assets up to $50,000 and and $1 million to $10 million in liabilities. Court papers said it owed millions of dollars in liabilities to trucking, logistics and factoring companies. The company filed bankruptcy before any creditors could take legal action.

Lawsuits force companies to liquidate in bankruptcy

Lawsuits, however, can force companies to file bankruptcy, which was the case for J.J. & Sons Logistics of Clint, Texas, which on Jan. 22 filed for Chapter 7 liquidation in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas. The company filed bankruptcy four days before the scheduled start of a trial for a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a former company truck driver who had died from drowning in 2016.

California-based logistics company Wise Choice Trans Corp. shut down operations and filed for Chapter 7 liquidation on Jan. 4 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California, listing $1 million to $10 million in assets and liabilities.

The Hayward, Calif., third-party logistics company, founded in 2009, provided final mile, less-than-truckload and full truckload services, as well as warehouse and fulfillment services in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The Chapter 7 filing also implemented an automatic stay against all legal proceedings, as the company listed its involvement in four legal actions that were ongoing or concluded. Court papers reportedly did not list amounts for damages.

In some cases, debtors don't have to take a drastic action, such as a liquidation, and can instead file a Chapter 11 reorganization.

Truck shipping products.

Shutterstock

Nationwide Cargo seeks to reorganize its business

Nationwide Cargo Inc., a general freight trucking company that also hauls fresh produce and meat, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois with plans to reorganize its business.

The East Dundee, Ill., shipping company listed $1 million to $10 million in assets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities in its petition and said funds will not be available to pay unsecured creditors. The company operates with 183 trucks and 171 drivers, FreightWaves reported.

Nationwide Cargo's three largest secured creditors in the petition were Equify Financial LLC (owed about $3.5 million,) Commercial Credit Group (owed about $1.8 million) and Continental Bank NA (owed about $676,000.)

The shipping company reported gross revenue of about $34 million in 2022 and about $40 million in 2023.  From Jan. 1 until its petition date, the company generated $9.3 million in gross revenue.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Key shipping company files Chapter 11 bankruptcy

The Illinois-based general freight trucking company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to reorganize.

Published

on

The U.S. trucking industry has had a difficult beginning of the year for 2024 with several logistics companies filing for bankruptcy to seek either a Chapter 7 liquidation or Chapter 11 reorganization.

The Covid-19 pandemic caused a lot of supply chain issues for logistics companies and also created a shortage of truck drivers as many left the business for other occupations. Shipping companies, in the meantime, have had extreme difficulty recruiting new drivers for thousands of unfilled jobs.

Related: Tesla rival’s filing reveals Chapter 11 bankruptcy is possible

Freight forwarder company Boateng Logistics joined a growing list of shipping companies that permanently shuttered their businesses as the firm on Feb. 22 filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy with plans to liquidate.

The Carlsbad, Calif., logistics company filed its petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California listing assets up to $50,000 and and $1 million to $10 million in liabilities. Court papers said it owed millions of dollars in liabilities to trucking, logistics and factoring companies. The company filed bankruptcy before any creditors could take legal action.

Lawsuits force companies to liquidate in bankruptcy

Lawsuits, however, can force companies to file bankruptcy, which was the case for J.J. & Sons Logistics of Clint, Texas, which on Jan. 22 filed for Chapter 7 liquidation in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas. The company filed bankruptcy four days before the scheduled start of a trial for a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a former company truck driver who had died from drowning in 2016.

California-based logistics company Wise Choice Trans Corp. shut down operations and filed for Chapter 7 liquidation on Jan. 4 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California, listing $1 million to $10 million in assets and liabilities.

The Hayward, Calif., third-party logistics company, founded in 2009, provided final mile, less-than-truckload and full truckload services, as well as warehouse and fulfillment services in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The Chapter 7 filing also implemented an automatic stay against all legal proceedings, as the company listed its involvement in four legal actions that were ongoing or concluded. Court papers reportedly did not list amounts for damages.

In some cases, debtors don't have to take a drastic action, such as a liquidation, and can instead file a Chapter 11 reorganization.

Truck shipping products.

Shutterstock

Nationwide Cargo seeks to reorganize its business

Nationwide Cargo Inc., a general freight trucking company that also hauls fresh produce and meat, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois with plans to reorganize its business.

The East Dundee, Ill., shipping company listed $1 million to $10 million in assets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities in its petition and said funds will not be available to pay unsecured creditors. The company operates with 183 trucks and 171 drivers, FreightWaves reported.

Nationwide Cargo's three largest secured creditors in the petition were Equify Financial LLC (owed about $3.5 million,) Commercial Credit Group (owed about $1.8 million) and Continental Bank NA (owed about $676,000.)

The shipping company reported gross revenue of about $34 million in 2022 and about $40 million in 2023.  From Jan. 1 until its petition date, the company generated $9.3 million in gross revenue.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending