Crypto Euro Is A Must Now

European policymakers are facing renewed pressure to press ahead with plans for a digital euro, amid warnings that failure to act would leave the bloc increasingly exposed to foreign payment systems and geopolitical risk.

More than 60 economists have urged members of the European parliament to back the European Central Bank’s proposal for a digital version of cash, arguing that without it the Eurozone risks losing control over its own monetary infrastructure. In an open letter circulated ahead of a parliamentary hearing next week, the signatories describe a publicly issued digital euro as a matter of economic sovereignty rather than technological ambition.

“A strong public digital euro is not a nice-to-have,” the economists write. “It is an essential safeguard of European sovereignty, stability and resilience.” Among those backing the appeal are prominent academics including Thomas Piketty, Eric Monnet, Jan Pieter Krahnen and Daniela Gabor.

The intervention comes as the European Council has thrown its support behind the ECB’s plan to introduce an electronic equivalent of cash by 2029. Even so, the proposal still faces a politically sensitive vote in the European parliament later this year, where its fate remains uncertain.

At the heart of the economists’ argument is Europe’s reliance on foreign-owned digital payments systems. They warn that the dominance of US-based providers in everyday transactions leaves the Eurozone vulnerable to commercial and political pressure beyond its control. Thirteen euro area countries, they note, lack any domestic digital payment option and depend almost entirely on international card schemes and online payment platforms.

While the letter avoids direct political references, it points to “recent developments” that have made these risks more immediate than theoretical. The implication is clear: in a more fragmented and confrontational global environment, control over payment rails is no longer a purely technical issue.

“Europe will lose control over the most fundamental element in our economy: our money,” the economists argue. “A robust public digital euro is our only defence.”

The push from academics stands in contrast to growing resistance from parts of Europe’s banking industry. Several of the continent’s largest lenders have been lobbying for a more limited version of the project, warning that a digital euro could undermine private sector efforts to build European alternatives to US payment networks.

In November, a group of major banks including Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas and ING cautioned that the ECB’s plans risked crowding out private innovation. Banking lobby groups have also raised concerns about cost and complexity, arguing that the benefits for consumers remain unclear.

Those fears are not purely theoretical. Under current proposals, individuals would be able to hold up to €3,000 in a digital euro wallet. While intended as a safeguard against large-scale deposit flight, that money would sit outside the traditional banking system and would not be available to banks as a source of funding.

Critics within the sector argue that even modest shifts in retail deposits could have knock-on effects for lending and financial stability. Fernando Navarrete, a conservative Spanish MEP tasked with assessing the project, has already called for a significantly scaled-back approach.

Supporters of the digital euro say those objections reflect narrow commercial interests rather than the wider public good. The economists behind the letter urge lawmakers to resist what they describe as “shortsighted financial lobbying” and to focus instead on the long-term resilience of Europe’s monetary system.

The letter was initiated by the Sustainable Finance Lab, an academic think-tank based in Utrecht, alongside Triodos Bank, a Dutch lender with a strong focus on sustainability. Triodos has been an outspoken supporter of the ECB’s plans, arguing that public digital infrastructure is a necessary complement to private financial services.

Hans Stegeman, Triodos’s chief economist and a signatory to the letter, said opposition from banks was largely driven by concerns over funding. Retail deposits, he noted, remain a cheap and predictable source of finance for lenders, and any alternative that weakens that position is bound to meet resistance.

For Stegeman, the debate cuts to a broader question about the purpose of the financial system. A public digital payments option, he argues, would help ensure that finance serves society rather than the other way around. In that context, the digital euro is less about replacing banks and more about preserving public control over a core piece of economic infrastructure.

As the parliamentary vote approaches, the battle lines are becoming clearer. On one side are banks and some lawmakers wary of unintended consequences. On the other are economists and policymakers who see the digital euro as a strategic necessity in an increasingly contested global payments landscape. Whether Europe chooses caution or conviction may determine who controls its money in the decades ahead.