The introduction of programmable money as part of a heavily regulated system –Like possibly the digital euro– Provides the possibility to control and curb cash flows in a targeted manner. There is a risk that too rigid regulations and automated control mechanisms will result in a significant interference with citizens’ privacy and economic freedom. The lack of flexibility of such systems could also inhibit innovation and impair competition in the financial sector.
Time limits for programmable money
These time limits can lead to a strong regulation and control of the handling of money, which limits the financial freedom of the citizens. In particular, there is a risk that the automatic depreciation will put pressure on users to spend the money within a certain period of time instead of saving it or deliberately investing it. This couldsignificantly affect people’s behavior and possibly lead to hasty or unthinking financial decisions.
Local restrictions and their impact on payment transactions
Local restrictions with programmable money can significantly limit the freedom of movement and the choices of users. If payments are only permitted in certain places or for fixed purposes, a form of control is created that undermines the previous principle of universal acceptance of money. For citizens, this means a restriction in theireconomic self-determination, as they could be forced to adjust their expenses to specified conditions. In addition, there is a risk of fragmentation of payment transactions, which can be problematic, especially for people in rural or structurally weak regions, since not all permitted payment locations are always available there.
Restrictions on buying certain products through programmable money
Restrictions on buying certain products through programmable money can significantly limit individual freedom of choice and lead to patronizing citizens. If users can only determine to a limited extent about which goods or services they are allowed to purchase, personal preferences and living conditions are ignored. This can then in particularbe problematic if such restrictions are based on moral, political or economic specifications that are not shared equally by all social groups. There is also a risk that such restrictions will favor the black market or alternative, potentially unsafe means of payment, as users are looking for ways to avoidto enable specifications.
Gold and Cryptocurrency Transactions Ban
In some states, the ban on gold and cryptocurrency transactions for citizens could be a significant limitation of financial sovereignty. Such prohibitions often serve to retain control of capital flows and prevent the population’s ability to secure assets outside of state influences and surveillance. For those affected, this meansNot only the loss of alternative forms of investment and hedging, but also a stronger dependence on the state-regulated financial system, which may facilitate politically motivated interventions. In addition, the criminalization of these transactions can lead to the exclusion of people who are dependent on these funds, for example to maintain their economicfreedom or protection against inflation and currency instability.
Integration of social points into digital payment systems
The integration of social points into digital payment systems involves considerable risks for the individual freedom and privacy of citizens. Linking financial transactions with social evaluations could result in a comprehensive control system that evaluates not only economic behavior but also personal lifestyles and political opinions andsanctioned. This leads to potential discrimination and exclusion of certain population groups, as positive or negative assessments could have a direct impact on access to services, goods or even social participation. In addition, there is the risk of constant monitoring and data collection, the possibilities of abuse by state orprivate actors opened.
Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Programmable Money
The role of artificial intelligence in the administration of programmable money also raises considerable concerns about the control and autonomy of citizens. The use of AI systems to monitor, analyze and control financial transactions can lead to a comprehensive automation of decision-making processes that previously required human judgment. thiscarries the risk that complex social and individual contexts will not be sufficiently considered and decisions based on algorithmic evaluations that are non-transparent and difficult to verify instead of comprehensible criteria. There is also a risk that AI-controlled systems can make mistakes or be manipulated, which causes considerable financial damage orunjustified sanctions for users. Such technology to enhance monitoring and control mechanisms could be misused, particularly in authoritarian contexts, by identifying behavioral patterns and preventing potentially undesirable activities in advance.
