The paper conveniently dodges a few critical items of attention. The first one is that the CBDC is a (crypto) currency to promote or maintain the dominance of

The paper conveniently dodges a few critical items of attention. The first one is that the CBDC is a (crypto) currency to promote or maintain the dominance of the dollar in the world, as they openly state in the paper itself. This in itself is not unexpected but violates the idea of most cryptocurrencies, they are internet money, detached from national currencies, national interests or national rules. Only in the exchange back to fiat money do local interests play a role. So this is more like a stablecoin, with better backing. The paper self-congratulates current central bank money as the safest money in the world, which I'd say is not entirely false, but at the very least I would expect monetary expansion (inflation) to be deeply discussed, but it isn't. It mentions the current private cryptocurrencies and their many downsides, without listing upsides. Suspicious and biased. I don't care if you're pro or anti crypto, but its assessment cannot be this simplistic or binary. Another item that comes top of mind is anti-seizure legislation. Recent events as seen in Canada (using an emergency law to seize assets) and the Russia thing where reserves are simply frozen are raising some questions about the safety of digital money. If any emotional politician can just push a button and take your assets, people will feel unsafe. The authority question goes unanswered in the paper. The paper correctly establishes that privacy is critical but then also goes on to say that everything needs to be reported. A contradiction, so we'll find a "balance". Elaborate on this balance, because there is none. Every single transaction ever will be on record. Not a word on the dangers of cryptocurrencies being programmable. Under the pressure of ever-changing politics, these could make possible restrictions on money currently barely possible. For example, they can put an expiration on your money, forcing you to spend it. Or, block the buying of particular products directly from your wallet. It's a potential huge jump in authority, but it's barely mentioned. It dances around a lot of hot and inconvenient issues.