These goals and principles should include common requirements vis-à-vis GSC operators before they start their operations, such as clear and proper risk management policies and means, regarding their stabilisation mechanisms, legal certainty of users’ redemption rights and potential claims on underlying reserve assets, and regarding linkages and exposure between their core components and the other entities of the financial system. In addition, there is a need to agree on adequate cross-border oversight principles and schemes between authorities in charge of jurisdictions impacted by the potential circulation of stablecoins. To that end, we could take inspiration and review existing standards and principles for cross-border cooperation in the field of market infrastructures or AML-CFT. - Thirdly, making concrete efforts – including live experimentations – to address weaknesses of the current payment and settlement landscape Adjusting the regulatory and oversight frameworks might not be enough as we have to make sure stablecoins do not become a bad solution to a real problem. Our current financial system  order rests on multiple issuers of settlement assets linked to the anchor settlement asset provided by central banks. In order to preserve the incentives and benefits for innovation, efficiency and stability, central banks as issuers of the reference settlement asset need to revisit and possibly adapt the conditions under which they make that settlement asset available. In that perspective, central banks could, for instance, issue their money in digital form, the so-called concept of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC).

Moreover, it means that the costs of entry are high for new participants, particularly for foreign competitors, not least because of marketing. The effect of distinctive national features on the market has also been apparent to Swedish participants that have set up businesses abroad and then operated under other regulatory frameworks and according to other practices. Another limiting factor is the fact that as long as Sweden remains outside the euro area, foreign companies that wish to enter the Swedish mortgage market will have to provide loans in Swedish kronor, as Swedish borrowers do not generally want to expose themselves to exchange rate risk. However, should Sweden join the euro, the interest rates offered by lenders in the different countries of the euro area will become directly comparable. With a single currency, it would be easier for borrowers to judge which institution in the euro area offers the best terms. Swedish borrowers would be able to take loans in euro without exposing themselves to currency risk, and the availability of potential lenders would increase. Differences in regulations and taxation systems, however, would continue to constitute a limitation on increased competition. Challenges for Swedish housing finance ahead of the future Looking toward the years ahead, developments in the housing finance market will be driven by a number of powerful forces: continued balance sheet adjustments, the effects of the continued internationalisation process in Europe and new rules for financial institutions. I shall concentrate on these three challenges.