Powered By:


The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision is staking out a conservative position on many bank-held cryptoassets. If adopted in the U.S., banks would be required to hold dollar-for-dollar capital against cryptocurrencies.

What is bank capital? At a high level, a bank’s capital is its equity: the difference between its assets and its liabilities. Banks are required to maintain specified ratios of their regulatory capital—defined instruments such as common stock—to their total “risk-weighted assets.” Risky assets receive a higher “weight” under bank capital rules, and the more assets with higher risk weights a bank has, the more regulatory capital it needs to hold to maintain its required capital ratios.

The Basel Committee, a cross-border panel comprising national-level regulators, recently issued for comment a proposal that would divide cryptoassets into two types for purposes of bank capital rules and recommend the “risk weights” that should be applied to each type of cryptoasset.

Under the Basel Committee’s proposal, Group 1 cryptoassets would include both “tokenized” digital versions of other assets and stablecoins. The Basel Committee recommends that these Group 1 cryptoassets receive the same risk weight as the underlying asset they “tokenize” or to which their value is pegged. The proposal sets forth qualifications that a cryptoasset would have to meet to be classified in Group 1.

Group 2 cryptoassets would comprise all other cryptoassets, including cryptocurrencies like bitcoin and ether. For Group 2, the proposal recommends a risk weight of 1,250%. Effectively, for a bank required to maintain an 8% capital ratio, a risk weight of 1,250% means that the bank has to have the same amount of regulatory capital, dollar for dollar, as the value of the Group 2 cryptoassets it holds. This capital “cushion” would be designed to absorb a potential loss of 100% of the value of a bank’s Group 2 cryptoassets.


The Basel Committee’s proposal is a “consultative document,” and has only been issued for comment, with a comment period ending on September 10, 2021. Even if the Basel Committee eventually publishes the proposal as-is, it would not bind national regulators. Any changes to the U.S. capital rules will require the U.S. federal banking agencies to conduct an ordinary course notice-and-comment rulemaking. U.S. regulators have not commented on the Basel Committee’s proposal, and the U.S. banking agencies have a history of both adopting and ignoring Basel recommendations.

The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm or its clients, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.


Fill out the following form to receive our cryptocurrency news and analysis.

Author's Assets


Nathan Brownback | Associate

Nathan is a member of Seward & Kissel’s Financial Services Regulatory Group, where he focuses on the regulation of domestic and foreign banks, with particular emphasis on regulation under the Dodd-Frank Act, including the Volcker Rule. He also advises on matters related to fintech, commercial lending, bank holding company regulation, bank affiliate transactions, and merchant banking rules. Prior to receiving his law degree, Nathan was an economic research analyst, first in the private sector and subsequently for a regional Federal Reserve Bank.