Australia to commence multiple trials of tokenised asset settlement and CBDC
1
24 innovative use cases from a diverse range of organisations, ranging from local fintechs to major banks, have been conditionally selected for this next stage of the project. This will include 19 pilot use cases, which will involve real money and real asset transactions, and five proof-of-concept use cases involving simulated transactions.
The use cases involve a range of asset classes, including fixed income, private markets, trade receivables and carbon credits.
Proposed settlement assets for the use cases include stablecoins, bank deposit tokens, and pilot wholesale central bank digital currency (CBDC), as well as new ways of using banks' existing exchange settlement accounts at the RBA.
Issuance of pilot wholesale CBDC for testing use cases will occur on a range of private and public-permissioned DLT platforms, including Hedera, Redbelly Network, R3 Corda, Canvas Connect and other EVM-compatible networks.
Testing of use cases will occur over the next six months, with a report on the findings from the project expected to be published in the first quarter of 2026.
Brad Jones, assistant governor at the RBA says: 'Ensuring that Australia's payments and monetary arrangements are fit-for-purpose in the digital age is a strategic priority for the RBA and the Payments System Board. Project Acacia represents an opportunity for further collaborative exploration on tokenised asset markets and the future of money by the public and private sectors in Australia.
'The use cases selected in this project will help us to better understand how innovations in central bank and private digital money, alongside payments infrastructure, might help to uplift the functioning of wholesale financial markets in Australia.
The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (Asic) is providing regulatory relief to participants to support and streamline the pilot.
Asic commissioner Kate O'Rourke says: "Asic sees useful applications for the technologies underlying digital assets in wholesale markets. The relief from regulatory requirements that we have announced today will allow these technologies to be sensibly tested—to explore opportunities and identify and tackle risks.
'Importantly, Project Acacia will allow industry and regulators to work together to learn more about how these use cases may reshape the financial services industry, potentially boosting efficiency and foster economic growth.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
Economists doubt Trump outlook that US will sell 'so much' beef to Australia
WASHINGTON/CANBERRA/CHICAGO, July 24 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said that the United States would sell "so much" beef to Australia after Canberra relaxed import restrictions on Thursday, but economists and traders said that high prices and tight supplies make major American exports unlikely. Australia said it would loosen biosecurity rules for U.S. beef. The move will not significantly increase U.S. shipments, though, because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower, analysts said. U.S. companies export small quantities of beef to Australian buyers. They import much more in the form of lean beef used to make hamburgers, particularly as U.S. production has declined due to tight cattle supplies. U.S. beef prices set records this year and the number of beef cattle fell to the lowest level since 1961 after ranchers slashed their herds due to drought that burned up pasturelands used for grazing. A ban on cattle imports from Mexico because of New World screwworm, a devastating livestock pest, and steep tariffs on Brazilian beef that are set to take effect on Aug. 1 could further tighten supplies, and require additional imports of Australian beef. "We can't get enough beef in the U.S. right now, so we're bringing it in from Australia and Brazil," said Dan Norcini, an independent U.S. livestock trader. "We're not going to be selling anything significant to anyone." Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tons of beef worth $2.9 billion to the United States, with just 269 tons of U.S. product moving the other way. "They have more cattle than people," said David Anderson, an agricultural economist at Texas A&M University. "That's why they export so much." U.S. and Australian beef also taste different. Many Australians like the grass-fed beef raised there, not marbled beef from U.S.-raised cattle that are generally fed with grain, said Jerry Klassen, chief analyst for Resilient Capital in Winnipeg. He predicted the United States will not export substantial amounts of beef to Australia in the next five years. "We just aren't in a position to export much beef to anyone, and the reality is Australia doesn't really have much need for U.S. beef," said Karl Setzer, partner at Consus Ag. The barriers that remain to exporting significant volumes of U.S. beef to Australia appeared to be lost on Trump this week. "We are going to sell so much to Australia because this is undeniable and irrefutable Proof that U.S. Beef is the Safest and Best in the entire World," Trump said in a post on Truth Social. "The other Countries that refuse our magnificent Beef are ON NOTICE." Trump has attempted to renegotiate trade deals with numerous countries he says have taken advantage of the United States – a characterisation many economists dispute. "For decades, Australia imposed unjustified barriers on U.S. beef," U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, calling Australia's decision a "major milestone in lowering trade barriers and securing market access for U.S. farmers and ranchers." Australian officials say the relaxation of restrictions was not part of any trade negotiations but the result of a years-long assessment of U.S. biosecurity practices. Canberra has restricted U.S. beef imports since 2003 due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease. Since 2019, it has allowed in meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S. but few suppliers were able to prove that their cattle had not been in Canada and Mexico. The U.S. sources some of its feeder cattle from the two neighboring countries. On Wednesday, Australia's agriculture ministry said U.S. cattle traceability and control systems had improved enough that Australia could accept beef from cattle born in Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States. The decision has caused some concern in Australia, where biosecurity is seen as essential to prevent diseases and pests from ravaging the farm sector. "We need to know if (the government) is sacrificing our high biosecurity standards just so Prime Minister Anthony Albanese can obtain a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump," shadow agriculture minister David Littleproud said in a statement. Australia faces a 10% across-the-board U.S. tariff, as well 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium. Trump has also threatened to impose a 200% tariff on pharmaceuticals. Asked whether the change would help achieve a trade deal, Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said: "I'm not too sure." "We haven't done this in order to entice the Americans into a trade agreement," he said. "We think that they should do that anyway."
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
NSW real estate agents threaten renters with fees if they are not home for tradespeople – but legally they don't have to be
New South Wales real estate agents are threatening renters with fees as high as $330 if they are not at home to let maintenance workers in, despite there being no legal requirement for renters to personally allow entry. On 8 July, Lauren Gillin's agency told her she needed to be home during a two-and-a-half-hour window seven days from that date to allow access for a smoke alarm inspector or pay a $90 fee. 'Please make yourself available, this inspection is compulsory, and access must be provided,' Gillin's property manager at Rich & Oliva said in a letter seen by Guardian Australia. 'Should access not be made available, a fee of $90 will be incurred for re-inspection.' In a statement, a NSW Fair Trading spokesperson said real estate agents must provide two days' notice for 'non-urgent repairs or inspection of a smoke alarm'. However, 'there is no requirement for the tenant to be in the property for the inspection,' the spokesperson confirmed. Further, 'the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) limits fees and charges a landlord or agent can ask a tenant to pay, with only certain payments such as rent, rental bond and other prescribed fees allowed to be charged'. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Gillin, a media manager at a community legal centre who lives in Haberfield in Sydney's inner west, said she was disappointed by the letter. 'It's an unreasonable request to be home for 2.5 hours on a weekday.' Tenants of an apartment block in the city's eastern suburbs received a similar notice from a different real estate agency, which Guardian Australia has chosen not to identify because renters said they were worried about the potential consequences. That agency wrote to the tenants in June, in an email seen by Guardian Australia, telling them they needed to be home on a day late that month between 9.30am and 10.30am for a mandatory fire safety inspection. The email warned that any failure to give access to the home would result in a re-inspection fee of $330 and advised the tenants to organise someone on their behalf to allow access if they could not do so. The Tenants' Union of NSW chief executive officer, Leo Patterson Ross, said the $90 charge Gillin faced did not 'strictly have any basis' because the agent or landlord could still give access to the smoke alarm inspector by organising entry. 'As long as the tenant hasn't actively prevented them from entering the property, then there's no basis for that charge,' he said. Patterson Ross said the $330 fee faced by residents of the eastern suburbs apartment block was 'pretty much the exact same situation' – there was no legal basis for the charge. 'The agent, probably, in a building like that where there's a lot of people, they don't want to spend their whole day walking around all the apartments,' he said. 'But there's nothing stopping them from doing that.' Patterson Ross said more than 2,100 people contacted the tenants' union in 2024 for advice about access issues. He said he regularly spoke to renters who had been threatened with fees for supposedly not allowing access to their homes, who assumed the charges were legitimate. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'No one's told the agent they can't do it and it becomes normal and then they train other people and it becomes process without anyone really checking whether it's compliant with the law,' Patterson Ross said. 'Generally, a lot of the pressure of enforcing the legislation is falling on the tenant at the moment.' Gillin said she tried to raise her concerns with one of the Rich & Olivia staff members, but did not feel the issue was resolved. The company did not respond to Guardian Australia's request for comment. On 8 July, Gillin lodged a complaint with the agency. In the email, seen by Guardian Australia, Gillin said her experience with the agency had otherwise 'been really positive' which made the letter she got from them 'all the more surprising'. She followed up on 9 July, citing legal advice she had received from the tenants' union and the NSW rental commissioner, Trina Jones, that she did not need to be at home during a smoke alarm inspection. Jones told Guardian Australia that a fee for not being present during a smoke alarm inspection could not legally be passed on to tenants. She said the state's rental taskforce – which was created earlier this year – contacted Gillin's agent to advise them of their responsibilities under the law and make clear the charge was not permitted. 'Illegal fees and charges remain an issue in the sector,' Jones said. 'Since January, the Rental Taskforce has overseen refunds of $165,303 to renters who were charged unlawful fees.' On Wednesday, Gillin said the smoke alarm technician let her know they had got a key from the agency to let themselves into the property. But she said the agency still had not responded to her complaint.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Lobbyist breaches go unsanctioned as critics call for Australia's rules to be strengthened
Not a single lobbyist has been sanctioned under the federal government's code of conduct and transparency rules for almost three years despite more than a dozen breaches, with critics arguing the scheme is 'as weak as a cup of cold milky tea'. And in Victoria, no lobbyist has been sanctioned since the establishment of the current regulator more than a decade ago, with the state government acknowledging there is a need for reform after warnings from the anti-corruption commission. Professional third-party lobbyists must comply with a federal code of conduct and disclose details to a transparency register, which is designed to strengthen public confidence in how politicians and their staff interact with vested interest groups. Lobbyists who work without being listed on a register or who fail to act honestly and fairly can be investigated for breaches of conduct. This includes lobbyists who do not disclose links to foreign companies and governments. But Guardian Australia can reveal no one involved in the 14 breaches substantiated by the federal attorney general's department since January 2023 has been formally sanctioned. Sign up: AU Breaking News email A departmental spokesperson said each breach was administrative in nature and 'resolved through engagement between the department and relevant lobbyists'. 'In most cases where breaches are substantiated, they are administrative in nature and remediated through communication with the responsible officers within lobbying organisations,' the spokesperson said. 'There were no reported breaches referred to the secretary for consideration during the relevant period.' Transparency International Australia's chief executive, Clancy Moore, said federal lobbyists breaking the rules 'do so with impunity'. 'Put simply, the federal lobbying code of conduct is as weak as a cup of cold milky tea,' Moore said. 'The commonwealth needs a big stick to sanction lobbyists who break the rules.' Crossbench MPs and the Greens have flagged pushing Labor to toughen the rules in the new term of parliament. One element of the rules persistently identified as a shortcoming is that the code of conduct only covers paid third-party lobbyists and their clients. Lobbyists employed internally by corporations and interest groups are not required to sign up. Currently about 360 lobbying organisations and more than 700 individual lobbyists are included on the transparency register. They represent a combined 2,400 clients. More than 40% of registered lobbyists are identified former government representatives, including former staffers, former government ministers and other ex-office holders. In Victoria, no lobbyist has been sanctioned by the state authority since the latest code of conduct was introduced by the Napthine government in 2013. Under current rules, the only sanction available in Victoria is the removal of a lobbyist from the register. The state's public sector commissioner, Brigid Monagle, said six potential breaches of the lobbying code had been investigated in the past five years. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'None of these potential breaches met the full requirements for removal under the terms of the code,' Monagle said. 'There may of course be other breaches that the commission has not been made aware of, and we encourage anyone with knowledge of a breach to make a report.' The Centre for Public Integrity's executive director, Catherine Williams, said Victorian regulation was not fit for purpose and regulators should have a broad range of sanctions to ensure smaller but significant breaches of the code do not go unpunished. 'Clearly, a uniform law would be optimal as it would simplify compliance for lobbying firms and individuals operating across multiple jurisdictions,' Williams said. 'Unfortunately, however, with the current regulatory patchwork across the country – and federally, a government yet to acknowledge that lobbying reform must be on the agenda – a uniform law is a very long way off.' In October 2022, the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (Ibac) raised concerns about potential corruption risks posed by lobbying. The Victorian government has accepted Ibac's recommendations, in principle, and is now consulting on possible changes. In New South Wales, six lobbyists were suspended from operating last month after failing to provide a regular update on which government officials they had met and on whose behalf. The NSW Electoral Commission, which regulates the lobbying industry, required this information to be updated every three months. Lobbyists must update the list even if they have been inactive during this period. There is no such requirement for lobbyists meeting with federal government officials.
