According to Financial Times News, the European Central Bank’s digital euro project is facing serious pushback after nearly five years of debate. The core issue is that officials still haven’t articulated what problem a retail digital euro actually solves for citizens. The official justification relies on abstract concepts like “strategic autonomy” and “monetary anchor” rather than concrete consumer benefits. Meanwhile, banks and lawmakers are resisting the proposal over concerns about competition and financial stability. The project appears stuck in a design dilemma where mimicking existing payment solutions adds little value, while making it too attractive could disrupt the banking sector.
What’s in it for regular people?
Here’s the thing: when you’ve already got cards, instant transfers, and mobile payment apps that work perfectly fine, why would you bother switching to a government-run digital currency? The ECB’s talking points sound like something from a central banking textbook rather than addressing real consumer needs. I mean, “monetary anchor”? Does anyone in Lisbon or Leipzig actually lie awake at night worrying about that?
The resistance makes complete sense when you think about it. Banks are worried they’ll get squeezed on fees while still having to provide customer service. Lawmakers are concerned about destabilizing the financial system. And consumers? They’re probably wondering why they should care at all.
The three tests the digital euro keeps failing
The letter writer makes a brilliant point about the three basic tests any digital currency needs to pass. First, the user test – what can you actually do with it that you can’t do better with existing options? Second, the business model test – how do banks make money while providing the infrastructure? Third, the system test – can it work without breaking the normal financial system?
Right now, the digital euro seems to be failing all three. It’s trying to be everything to everyone instead of focusing on specific problems it could actually solve. Like offline payments when networks go down, or truly seamless cross-border transfers without middlemen taking cuts.
Time for some honesty
What we really need is a more honest conversation. Start with actual user problems rather than technological possibilities. Identify a handful of specific issues where a public digital currency could genuinely help, design around those, and drop the rest of the baggage.
Until that happens, the skepticism from parliament and industry isn’t just understandable – it’s absolutely necessary. Sometimes the healthiest response to a solution in search of a problem is to ask “why?” repeatedly. And after five years, that question is getting louder.
