the public would no longer need to obtain fiat money (except, perhaps, for illegal transactions and vending machines)". In the European case, it is not that taxes "could be paid using bank money" but that taxes are paid using bank money because it is the money injected into the economic system to monetize public spending." Warren Mosler's response to my question about evidences is the following: "it's a point of logic 100% supported by evidence" and "read 'the 7 deadly innocent frauds of economic policy.'" There is no evidence I can find relating to my question in "The Seven Deadly Innocent Frauds." I would be interested to know what is the evidence referenced by Warren Mosler. "taxes are paid using bank money because it is the money injected into the economic system to monetize public spending" The author here seems to be refering to the source of initial balances to settle govt securtites issuance as the "owner" of the "money"...ie becasue a dealer bank of course is involved in settlement of govt securities issues then the author views this as "bank money"...that is not how one would define a currency sovereign imo. Im not sure who you are quoting (quotes are not closed in your post), but I think Wray may be refering to actual privately issued bank notes vs in the US Federal Reserve notes in his hypothetical. A situtation of competing or co-existing currencies within the same country. The quote reads like the author thinks the banking entity