The Collapse of Fiat Money, Paper Gold Flaws and the Promise of Tokenization

Gold has long been esteemed as an asset and a hedge against economic instability.  However, the advent of paper gold has generated misconceptions regarding the true value and benefits of physical gold.  This article will explore the benefits and history of the gold standard, examine the differences between paper and physical gold, and argue that tokenized assets offer a more legitimate, accurate, and advantageous means of gaining exposure to gold.

Gold

The benefits of gold are multifaceted, well-known, and widely accepted.  For thousands of years, cultures have universally recognised and valued it.  Despite the challenges physical gold presents as a monetary solution, it excels as a store of wealth.  In the modern era, gold serves as an excellent hedge against inflation, even when compared to strong currencies like the United States Dollar, which has significantly devalued since the end of the gold standard in 1971.

Gold’s reliability as a store of value has made it the world’s premier safe-haven asset.  Its scarcity prevents prices from being easily manipulated, unlike oil, commonly called black gold.  Although central banks have attempted to manipulate gold prices over the past few decades to safeguard their currencies, the true value of gold inevitably emerges, as shown over the past 12 months.

Its reliability and timeless nature characterise gold. Critics often argue that gold’s growth is modest compared to other investments, such as the S&P 500 index.  Until recently, this was widely accepted.  However, gold has outperformed all major indices over the past year and provides a far more convincing case for secure long-term investment and value preservation than individual stocks and indices.

Why Does Gold (and Other Assets) Appreciate? – The History of the Rise and Fall of the Modern-Day Gold Standard

It’s crucial to understand why the price of assets appreciate in the first place in order to understand the limitations of paper gold better.

Although it is widely believed that the United States Dollar assumed global reserve currency status after the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944, the fundamental shift in power toward the USD was inaugurated after World War I. The war devastated many European economies while the United States flourished.  The U.S. emerged as a major exporter of goods and services, and its economy was viewed as a solid investment compared to the bankrupt European sectors, leading to a surge in global demand for USD.

The first significant devaluation of the United States Dollar occurred following the Great Depression.  The depression caused massive unemployment, which led to deflation within the United States (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 2010).  Numerous banks failed due to bank runs, where people rushed to convert their dollars to physical gold.  This resulted in widespread ‘gold hoarding,’ as consumers preferred to hold gold over USD (Smith, 2009), exacerbating deflationary pressures.

It was not until 1933 that the U.S. government intervened.  On April 5, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 6102, requiring all gold coins, bullion, and certificates to be delivered to the Federal Reserve in exchange for paper currency.  Executive Order 6102 also made ownership of private investment gold illegal.  This order was part of broader efforts to stabilise the economy.

This order resulted in several consequences:

• Increased Government Control: The ban granted the federal government greater control over the monetary system, effectively removing the public’s fundamental right to sound, hard money.  This allowed for more effective implementation of economic recovery policies.
• Public Reaction: The move was controversial and faced resistance from some quarters. However, restoring confidence in the banking system and the broader economy was deemed necessary.
• Long-term Impact: The ban on gold redemption marked a significant shift in U.S. monetary policy away from the gold standard.  This change paved the way for the modern fiat currency system, where the value of money is not tied to physical commodities like gold.

This decision did not signify the official termination of the gold standard.  Yet, it initiated a significant devaluation of the USD and ended the Gold Standard Act of 1900, which fixed the value of gold at $20.67 per ounce.  Instead, the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 was enacted, setting a new rate of $35 per ounce.

Bretton Woods Agreement (1944)

The Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944 marked a pivotal moment in establishing the USD as the global reserve currency. Representatives from 44 allied nations convened in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, to formulate a new international monetary framework.  This system designated the USD as the central reserve currency, pegged to gold at $35 per ounce, with other currencies pegged to the USD. Consequently, the USD became the predominant currency for global trade and finance.

One reason the rate was adjusted to $35 an ounce was to allow the US Government to increase the money supply.  The price rate was increased by almost 70%, indicating a potential 70% increase in money supply over the coming years.

Following World War II, the introduction of the Marshall Plan exemplified the United States’ substantial economic assistance in rebuilding Europe.  This initiative further solidified the USD’s role in international transactions as countries accumulated reserves in USD.

The End of the Gold Standard – The Nixon Shock (1971)

Many argue that the gold standard collapsed due to the federal government’s inability to align its budget with available gold reserves.  After a decade marked by a significant trade deficit, extensive social spending, and the costs associated with the Vietnam War, the Federal Reserve continued to spend substantially.  Doubts arose as foreign governments questioned the Federal Reserve’s ability to maintain gold reserves at a 1:1 ratio.  Consequently, international entities started exchanging their US Dollars for physical gold, leading to a significant depletion of US Gold Reserves.

On August 15, 1971, President Richard Nixon announced several economic measures, most notably including suspending the dollar’s convertibility into gold.  This action effectively terminated the Bretton Woods system, marking the first time since 1900 that the price of gold was allowed to float freely.

Nixon’s announcement meant foreign governments could no longer exchange their dollars for gold, a move intended to stabilise the US economy and halt further depletion of gold reserves.

Under the Bretton Woods system, gold had been fixed at $35 per ounce; by 1973, it had risen to $42 per ounce.  Over the following decade, the price continued to climb, reaching $850 per ounce in January 1980.

At this time, inflation in the US was a huge issue, reaching double figures in the late 1970s and peaking at 20% in June 1981.  In a bid to control this, Paul Volcker—the Chairman of the Federal Reserve 1979-1987 – set out to regain control of rampant inflation and stabilise the US economy.

Volcker’s strategy was to fight inflation by clamping down on the circulating money supply.  This mission essentially meant the US would incur short-term economic suffering for the greater good.  Accompanying the tight money supply was significantly high interest rates.  Volcker’s peak interest rate was 21.5% in December of 1980.  Rates fluctuated from 16-20% until July 1981 and gradually decreased to around 6% over the following years when, in 1987, Volcker left his post as Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

The gold price slumped from its 1980 peak until the early 2000s for several key reasons.

• Strong U.S. Dollar: Volcker and his successor, Alan Greenspan, took steps that led to a period of great stability and growth within the U.S. economy and vastly strengthened the U.S. dollar.
• Economic Growth: The 1990s saw a period of significant economic growth following rapid technological advancements such as the internet (culminating in the dotcom crash in 2001)
• The attraction of safe interest-bearing investments: This period saw low inflation yet relatively high real interest rates, which meant the opportunity cost of holding gold was particularly high compared to interest and yield-bearing assets.
• Central Bank sales: Many central banks, particularly in Europe, sold substantial amounts of their gold reserves during this period, resulting in a huge amount of supply entering the markets and causing downward pressure on the price of gold. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) was also known to be selling large amounts of its reserves.
• Reduction in Geo-Political Tensions: Gold is revered as a safe-haven asset and tends to appreciate in times of uncertainty.  The 1990s saw the end of the Cold War and reduced the demand for gold as a safe-haven asset.  This era also saw relative world peace with less global tension than in other decades.

The large shift in the gold market came following the Central Bank Gold Agreement of 1999 – also known as the Washington Agreement – an agreement between multiple Central Banks such as the ECB, France, the UK, Germany and Switzerland.  The Central Banks agreed to limit the amount of gold they could sell in both a 1-year and 5-year period and also pledged to be more transparent about when they were planning to sell gold.  Subsequently, Central Banks also became net buyers over the next decade and essentially halted selling gold reserves. Famously, UK Prime Minister Gordan Brown sold around two-thirds of the country’s gold reserves in the three years following the Washington Agreement.

Following the dotcom crash and the 9/11 attacks, the gold price began to climb as the economy took a hit and geo-political tensions began to heighten.

The following years saw steady growth, with gold trading at $275 per Oz in October of 2000, and this growth was exacerbated by the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, which saw some of the world’s leading banks collapse and many rely on the government to be bailed out.  The aftermath of the GFC saw record low interest rates in the West; as a result, gold became even more attractive on top of the already fragile economic landscape, resulting in the gold price peaking at almost $1900 per Oz in 2011.

Today, following a rampant year, gold trades at over $3,000 per ounce.  Influenced by geo-political uncertainty, economic uncertainty, inflation, and more.  A notable rise of late was after the 2024 U.S. Election when speculators began preparing for Trump Tariffs. As a result, gold was being priced higher in New York than in London, causing significant demand for gold within London, where investors could purchase and sell in New York – netting a tidy margin.

Even after this arbitrage opportunity has subsided, demand for gold persists. It seems that new highs are being broken each week.  Speculation continues to grow as many governments begin to turn toward precious metals as an answer to the failing fiat economies of modern finance.

The Consequences

The global reserve currency became solely reliant on public trust and government authority, marking the birth of fiat currencies. These currencies, devoid of tangible backing, empowered governments to print money at will, compelling global reliance on governmental integrity.

Although the US Dollar’s credibility soared in 1974 with the Petro-dollar agreement—a pivotal 50-year deal with Saudi Arabia ensuring international oil transactions in USD—the advent of electronic money and quantitative easing (QE) has significantly eroded global currencies’ value over the past five decades, with most currencies losing between 93% and 97% of their purchasing power the USD itself losing over 85% of its value according to CPI data (Webster, 2024).  The conceptualisation of quantitative easing (QE) can be attributed to the prominent economist John Maynard Keynes, whose expertise, despite lacking formal economic qualifications, was rooted more in theory and mathematics.  Keynesian theories form the cornerstone of today’s fiat currency system, explaining why periods of QE or monetary stimulus often coincide with economic growth while concurrently eroding the purchasing power of currencies.

Beginning in 1971, the world witnessed asset inflation, a concept alien to the era of the gold standard but now a prevalent feature of today’s economic landscape.  Currently, inflation primarily results from governments’ increased money supply.  When more money is printed, the value of existing currency diminishes due to the larger supply, leading to appreciation in assets such as gold, real estate, stocks, and more.  Adding to these concerns is the escalating US debt crisis.  At the end of the Bretton Woods era, the US debt-to-GDP ratio stood at around 34%; currently, it exceeds 125%, with total debt being approximately $35 trillion (US Debt Clock, 2025). Despite these figures, the US continues to operate with a budget deficit, spending more than it generates (Fiscal Data, 2024).

As a result, assets have inflated and are likely to continue doing so in USD, making traditional physical gold increasingly attractive.  However, due to the challenges of storing and insuring physical gold, along with the aforementioned economic policies, investors have turned to paper gold as a practical alternative.

So, what is Paper Gold?

“Paper gold” refers to financial instruments that represent ownership of gold without the necessity of physical possession.  These instruments include gold certificates, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and shares in gold mining companies, providing investors with exposure to gold price movements without the complexities of storing physical gold.  While they are favoured in financial markets and offer liquidity and ease of trade, these instruments arose as a direct consequence of the move away from the gold standard, reflecting a broader reliance on financial innovations to manage and invest in gold amidst the modern fiat currency system.

Paper gold products are typically backed by some physical gold reserves or track gold prices closely, presenting an alternative to direct ownership of the metal.  They are perceived as a convenient substitute for physical gold due to the absence of custody and insurance costs, robust liquidity, regulatory protections within the financial industry, and correlation with physical gold prices.

Nevertheless, there are many issues with paper gold:

• Counterparty Risk: Paper gold exposes investors to the risk associated with financial institutions or intermediaries, who may default or encounter financial difficulties.
• Lack of Physical Ownership: Unlike physical gold, paper gold lacks the security of possessing a tangible asset.  Physical gold ownership may be perceived as more secure in severe financial instability.
• Management Fees: ETFs and other paper gold instruments typically involve management fees and expenses that can reduce overall returns over time.  These costs are absent when holding physical gold outside of third-party custody.

Conversion and Backing Concerns

While the challenges associated with paper gold are substantial, its most crucial limitations become evident when considering its limited capacity for conversion into and backing by physical gold, which presents significant risks.  While some paper gold products allow conversion to physical gold, this process is typically complex, expensive, and subject to significant limitations.  A primary concern is the disconnect and potential imbalance between the amount of paper gold in circulation and the physical gold available to support it.  This disparity raises doubts about whether paper gold is always fully backed on a 1:1 basis, exposing investors to hidden risks.  Maintaining strict 1:1 backing can require substantial expenditures on storage, insurance, and security measures, prompting issuers to often opt for less stringent backing ratios to enhance liquidity and flexibility.

Furthermore, many paper gold products use leverage, allowing investors to trade larger positions with less capital.  This promotes speculative trading without full backing, prioritising exposure to gold prices over physical ownership.  This approach explains why paper gold products are not universally backed on a 1:1 basis.  For example, mining stocks representing paper gold are inherently not 1:1 backed, and regulated ETFs are not strictly mandated to maintain strict 1:1 ratios of gold reserves; discrepancies arise due to fee management and other costs; that being said, they do maintain strong reserves (Mitchell, 2024).  Synthetic ETFs, which use derivatives like futures contracts to track gold prices, lack direct 1:1 backing with physical gold and rely on financial instruments to replicate gold price performance.  Indeed, these dynamics were apparent during the 2008 global economic crisis, illustrating a significant price disparity between paper and physical gold.  For example, in November 2008, while the 1 oz American Gold Eagle Coin was selling at $1,024.95, the gold spot price hovered around $790 per ounce (Federal Register, 2008) (Gold.co.uk, 2024).  Whilst not being quite as drastic, in the recent ‘gold rush’, physical gold premiums are soaring, with bullion brokers charging anywhere between 5 and 25% premium on physical gold.

It’s also essential to note that one of the largest avenues for gold investment contemporarily is the GLD ETF, managed by market makers such as HSBC and JP Morgan.  Both entities have faced allegations of manipulating precious metals prices, with JP Morgan being fined $1 billion in late 2020 for such practices (Delevingne et al., 2020) and HSBC and other banks facing similar legal trouble through the 2010s (Moyer, 2018).  Understanding the disparities between the volume of physical gold in existence versus the volume of paper gold being traded is crucial to assessing the potential risks involved in paper gold investments.

According to a recent report by the World Gold Council, the average daily trading volume of gold reached $162.6 billion in 2023 (World Gold Council, 2024), implying a total annual trading volume of over $40 trillion based on 252 trading days.  At the end of 2023, the World Gold Council estimated that the total above-ground gold supply amounted to 212,582 metric tonnes (World Gold Council, 2024).

Despite fluctuations, the average gold price in 2023 stood at $1,940.54 per ounce. This valuation contributed to an estimated total market capitalisation of above-ground gold, reaching approximately $13.26 trillion in the same year.  The World Gold Council further broke down the allocation of this gold as follows:

Total above-ground stock (end-2023): 212,582 tonnes (World Gold Council, 2024)

• Jewellery ~96,487t, 45%
• Bars and coins (including gold-backed ETFs) ~47,454t, 22%
• Central banks ~36,699t, 17%
• Other ~31,943t, 15%

Proven reserves ~59,000t – (Underground proven reserves of major mining companies)

The annual global gold production is at around 3,500 tonnes.  This means there are less than 20 years of new gold supply left – based on proven unmined reserves.  This fact starkly highlights the finite nature of gold.

The World Gold Council estimates that ETFs hold approximately 3,500 tonnes of gold (World Gold Council, 2024).  Considering that CFDs and Synthetic ETFs maintain an assumed 10% gold backing, and with an estimated 5,000 tonnes of gold trading in the futures market, we can infer about 500 tonnes of physical gold.  An additional 500 tonnes is allocated for the less transparent OTC derivatives and other financial instruments.  This totals an estimated 4,500 tonnes of physical gold supporting the paper gold markets, excluding mining stocks.

This amount constitutes only 2.12% of global gold reserves and is valued at approximately $280 billion based on the average 2023 price.  According to data from the World Gold Council, ETFs, Futures Markets, OTC Derivatives, and other financial instruments collectively represent about 98% of the daily gold trading volume (World Gold Council, 2024).  Assuming an average daily trading volume of $159 billion in 2023 (equivalent to $40 trillion annually), it becomes apparent that maintaining such trading levels is likely unsustainable.  With only $280 billion worth of physical gold supporting $40 trillion in annual trading volume, it suggests that physical gold changed hands or ownership approximately 142 times throughout the year.

Naturally, the subsequent question arises: What if there was a universal demand for physical gold delivery of paper gold products?  Presently, there is reliance on the markets to sustain a significantly leveraged environment. This concern has persisted for decades.  A 2011 article addressing the disparities between physical and paper gold volumes highlighted this issue, citing Kyle Bass of Hayman Capital, who facilitated the University of Texas Endowment’s acquisition of nearly $1 billion in physical gold bullion (Intelligent Partnership, 2023).

“When I talked to the head of deliveries at COMEX NYMEX, I was like, ‘What if 4% of the people want deliveries?’ He said, ‘Oh Kyle, that never happens. We rarely ever get a 1% delivery.’ And I asked, ‘Well, what if it does happen?’ And he said, ‘Price will solve everything,’ and I said, ‘THANKS, GIVE ME THE GOLD’ – (Bass, 2011).

In the event of a surge in demand for physical gold, we might witness a scenario akin to the 2008 decoupling, where physical bullion products commanded substantial premiums over financial spot prices.  Providers of paper gold, facing increased demand for delivery, could temporarily suspend this option (like the Nixon shock), potentially devaluing paper gold investments while physical markets thrive.

So How Do We Overcome This Problem? Tokenization

Tokenization involves converting physical assets into digital tokens, offering numerous advantages.

• Improved Liquidity: It enhances liquidity by allowing fractional ownership, reducing entry barriers and enabling transactions to settle instantly around the clock.
• Transparency and Reliability: It provides a transparent and secure alternative to traditional ownership and investment methods. All pertinent data can be stored on the blockchain, and any contractual agreements or terms can be enforced through smart contracts, ensuring transparency and reliability.
• Security: Blockchain technology bolsters security by preventing transactions from executing under uncertain conditions, thus ensuring robust security measures are consistently upheld.
• Cost-Effective: Transaction costs, often known as “gas fees,” are minimal on many blockchains, enabling high-speed transfers at a fraction of traditional costs.  For example, sending $1 million across borders can now be accomplished in seconds with transaction costs under $0.10.  This capability is already in practice, demonstrating the efficiency of tokenization for assets like gold, where ownership of physically allocated metal can be transferred globally almost instantaneously and at minimal cost around the clock.

Blockchain and digital assets represent a significant leap in financial innovation, offering promising solutions to current challenges within the monetary system.  The primary obstacles facing tokenization are adoption and regulation.  While the concept holds promise, its widespread acceptance needs validation.

The critical question remains: will regulators endorse its adoption?

Several jurisdictions are beginning to establish regulatory frameworks to govern and protect digital assets.  Yet, key players like the USA lag, lacking clear federal guidelines on cryptocurrency and digital asset regulation.  Despite regulatory uncertainty, the compelling benefits of blockchain technology are difficult to overlook.

Historically, the US government has employed a strategy of “regulation by enforcement”, stifling projects and innovations with outdated regulations. A notable example is the SEC’s enforcement actions under the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 against numerous cryptocurrencies and exchanges under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Velasquez, 2024).  Applying century-old legislation to regulate this emerging asset class poses considerable challenges.  Despite legal challenges, many SEC lawsuits against cryptocurrency projects have been unsuccessful, underscoring the technology’s resilience and inevitable integration into modern society.

It should be noted that the new Trump administration is seemingly keen to change current regulations.  However, action is yet to be seen, and it seems regulators are ‘turning a blind eye’ in the meantime.

GEM NFTs:

This regulatory landscape has significant implications for the tokenization of assets like gold, exemplified by the evolving sophistication of products such as Paxos Gold and Tether Gold – examples of gold-backed stablecoins.

While these innovations address certain drawbacks of traditional paper gold, such as accessibility and liquidity, they also introduce concerns such as extra fees and opacity in physical ownership verification.  This prompts a critical inquiry into whether cryptocurrencies truly offer a holistic solution to the challenges of owning gold amidst evolving regulatory frameworks and technological advancements.

However, International Precious Metals Bullion (IPMB) has innovatively redefined and endeavoured to overcome these limitations through the implementation of ‘Stable-NFTs’ with its product, GEM – Globally Exchanged Metal.

GEMs offer an innovative approach by digitally representing physically allocated gold products.

For example, IPMB may hold a 1000-gram bar of 24-carat gold and tokenize this bar as a GEM1000 rather than using a standard and fungible stablecoin.

What distinguishes GEMs is their capability to allocate individual gold products, each enriched with detailed metadata covering provenance, production specifics, and metal location through the proprietary product GoldTrace360. 

IPMB is uniquely positioned to provide this service due to its extensive involvement spanning over 25 years across the entire gold supply chain, from mining to vaulting.

The company holds significant stakes in mines, collaborates closely with smelters and refineries, and is developing its own refining facilities, smelters, and vaults.

GEMs are essentially digital promissory notes, backed 1-to-1 by 24-carat gold, offering fee-free access and redemption of – ethically sourced – investment-grade gold.

For the first three years, GEM NFT holders are exempt from all fees, including custody, insurance, and other charges.

Additionally, IPMB may reward GEM NFT holders with physical gold as a loyalty incentive.

GEMs avoid issues typically associated with paper gold, offering a fully transparent, 1-to-1 backed, and liquid market, allowing exchange into an array of digital assets or physical gold.

To explore the full advantages and potential of GEM NFTs, please visit: https://www.ipmb.com/gem-nfts/

References

Delevingne, L. et al., 2020. JPMorgan set to pay nearly $1 billion in spoofing penalty: source. [online] Reuters. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/business/jpmorgan-set-to-pay-nearly-1-billion-in-spoofing-penalty-source-idUSKCN26E348/ [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Federal Register, 2008. Federal Register. [online] US Mint. Available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2008-11-17/pdf/E8-27144.pdf [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 2010. U.S. Historical Experience with Deflation. [online] Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Available at: https://files.stlouisfed.org/files/htdocs/publications/es/10/ES1030.pdf [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Fiscal Data, 2024. Federal Spending | U.S. Treasury. [online] U.S. Treasury Fiscal Data. Available at: https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/ [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Gold.co.uk, 2024. Gold Price History. [online] Available at: https://www.gold.co.uk/gold-price/20year/ounces/USD/ [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Intelligent Partnership, 2023. Paper Gold Volumes Vs Physical Gold Volumes. [online] Intelligent Partnership. Available at: https://intelligent-partnership.com/paper-gold-volumes-vs-physical-gold-volumes/ [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Mitchell, C., 2024. Physical Gold vs. Gold Funds: Which is More Efficient? [online] Investopedia. Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/032116/what-relationship-between-gold-and-gold-etfs-gld-iau.asp [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Moyer, L., 2018. UBS, Deutsche Bank and HSBC to pay millions in spoofing settlement, CFTC says. [online] CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/29/ubs-deutsche-bank-and-hsbc-to-pay-millions-in-spoofing-settlement.html [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Smith, G.F., 2009. The Case for Hoarding. [online] Mises Institute. Available at: https://mises.org/free-market/case-hoarding [Accessed 3 July 2024].

US Debt Clock, 2024. US Debt Clock. [online] Available at: https://www.usdebtclock.org/ [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Velasquez, V., 2024. SEC Crypto Regulations: What Financial Advisors Need to Know. [online] Investopedia. Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/crypto-regulations-for-financial-advisors-8402046 [Accessed 3 July 2024].

Webster, I., 2024. $1 in 1971 → 2024. [online] Inflation Calculator. Available at: https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1971?amount=1 [Accessed 3 July 2024].

World Gold Council, 2024. Gold ETF Holdings & Inflows. [online] Available at: https://www.gold.org/goldhub/research/etf-flows [Accessed 3 July 2024].

World Gold Council, 2024. Gold Trading Volume | Gold Daily Volume. [online] Available at: https://www.gold.org/goldhub/data/gold-trading-volumes [Accessed 3 July 2024].

World Gold Council, 2024. How Much Gold Has Been Mined? [online] Available at: https://www.gold.org/goldhub/data/how-much-gold [Accessed 3 July 2024].

ABOUT IPMB

At IPMB, we’re transforming the gold ownership experience by addressing the traditional challenges—high costs and lack of transparency—while making gold a profitable, positive carry trade. Our fully integrated ecosystem offers the only end-to-end solution for modern gold ownership, featuring:

• GoldPro Tokens: A hybrid utility and payment token designed for versatility.
• GEM NFTs: Digital promissory notes that grant direct ownership of LBMA-certified gold.
• Goldtrace360: The world’s first gold traceability platform, ensuring full transparency from mine to vault.

With zero management fees and an innovative dual-token model.