The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has validated tokenization as a pathway to improve wholesale cross-border payments, marking the first explicit endorsement from the central bank of central banks. For institutions building payment rails, this signals immediate infrastructure requirements around custody, settlement finality, and regulatory alignment.
BIS Positions Tokenization as Settlement Layer Solution
The BIS analysis identifies tokenization as addressing three structural inefficiencies in current correspondent banking networks: settlement lag, capital inefficiency, and operational opacity. The report specifically highlights how tokenized deposits and securities can compress T+2 settlement to near-instantaneous finality while maintaining regulatory oversight.
Central to the BIS framework is the concept of "unified ledgers" where tokenized central bank money, commercial bank deposits, and securities coexist on shared infrastructure. This architecture demands custody solutions that can handle multi-asset, multi-chain operations while maintaining strict segregation of client assets.
The report distinguishes between retail CBDC experiments and wholesale tokenization initiatives, positioning the latter as immediately actionable for financial institutions. Project mBridge, connecting central banks in China, Hong Kong, Thailand, and the UAE, processed $22 million in real transactions during its pilot phase. Project Agorá, launched in May 2024, brings together seven central banks including the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, focusing specifically on tokenized wholesale deposits.
Infrastructure Requirements for Bank Compliance Teams
Banks entering tokenized settlement face three compliance checkpoints that existing custody infrastructure often fails to address. First, regulatory capital treatment under Basel III requires demonstrable control without balance sheet expansion. Non-custodial architectures using multi-party computation (MPC) enable banks to maintain sovereign control while keeping assets off-balance-sheet.
Second, cross-border settlement introduces multi-jurisdictional compliance complexity. Banks must navigate MiCA in Europe, MAS guidelines in Singapore, and evolving SEC interpretations in the United States simultaneously. Custody infrastructure must provide jurisdiction-specific audit trails and reporting capabilities without fragmenting operational workflows.
Third, the BIS framework emphasizes "same risk, same regulation" principles. Banks tokenizing traditional assets must maintain equivalent controls to traditional custody, including segregation, reconciliation, and recovery procedures. This requires cryptographic proof of reserves, real-time audit capabilities, and deterministic recovery paths—capabilities absent from traditional custody models.
Threshold signature schemes (TSS) with distributed key generation eliminate single points of failure while maintaining institutional-grade access controls. A 3-of-3 threshold configuration, where the institution holds one key share and the infrastructure provider holds two, ensures no single party can unilaterally move assets while maintaining operational continuity even if one share becomes unavailable.
Operational Architecture for Tokenized Settlement
The BIS unified ledger concept demands custody infrastructure capable of atomic swaps across heterogeneous blockchain networks. Banks must execute delivery-versus-payment (DvP) transactions where tokenized securities and tokenized deposits settle simultaneously across different chains.
Current experiments demonstrate the technical requirements. The Swiss National Bank's wholesale CBDC pilot with SIX Digital Exchange processes tokenized bond settlements on Ethereum while maintaining central bank money on a permissioned ledger. The custody layer must bridge these environments without introducing counterparty risk or settlement finality uncertainty.
Institutional MPC architectures address this through distributed signing ceremonies that span multiple blockchain protocols. Rather than moving assets between chains via wrapped tokens or bridges—both introducing counterparty risk—MPC enables native multi-chain execution from a single operational interface.
SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 certifications become table stakes for institutions handling tokenized central bank money. These frameworks mandate continuous monitoring, incident response capabilities, and cryptographic key lifecycle management that traditional custody providers have not needed to implement.
Timeline and Implementation Milestones
The BIS roadmap suggests three phases of institutional adoption. Phase one, currently underway, involves closed pilot programs between central banks and tier-one commercial banks. Project Agorá expects initial results by Q2 2025, with participating banks including JPMorgan, HSBC, and UBS already selecting custody infrastructure.
Phase two, anticipated for 2025-2026, expands access to regional banks and non-bank financial institutions. This phase introduces competitive dynamics as institutions without direct central bank relationships must access tokenized wholesale deposits through intermediaries, creating new custody and sub-custody relationships.
Phase three, projected for 2027 onwards, introduces interoperability between regional tokenization initiatives. Banks must prepare for scenarios where tokenized euros from the ECB's digital euro wholesale project must settle against tokenized dollars from Federal Reserve initiatives.
Regulatory checkpoints accelerate this timeline. The European Union's DLT Pilot Regime expires in March 2026, requiring permanent frameworks for tokenized securities. Singapore's Project Guardian moves to production in 2025. Banks delaying infrastructure decisions face compressed implementation windows as these deadlines approach.
Institutions evaluating MPC-based custody for BIS-aligned tokenization initiatives can review Vaultody's technical architecture documentation and compliance certifications at Vaultody.
Copy link