MSTA Resolutions V.1.0 (rev.3)

Editors: Marc Gauvin, Sergio Dominguez, Mark Heffernan, Jordan Soreff,  Jorge Meira, Rúben Arranz.  January 2020 rev. April 11 2020 /June 30 2021/July 2021


More than ever, “money” is being questioned. While there exists a familiar common notion of money inherited for millennia, “money” has never actually been formally defined nor specified. Indeed, although intuitively compelling, our currently assumed notion of money is flawed (see: “Money’s Core Misrepresentation” below).  In light of that flaw and given the many adverse effects of using this erred notion has on society as a whole, it is imperative that money be formally defined and specified, without disrupting our current day-to-day ability to operate nor sacrificing our core rights and freedoms.

Consequently, these Resolutions call for two concurrent actions:

  1. That money be formally defined and specified by all interested parties and stake holders through the appropriate open multidisciplinary international forum;
  2. As an immediate interim measure, that current money practices be rendered “passive” in the formal scientific sense of the term. Passivity of our money system will ensure money’s function as a valid record of value, without in the process producing ANY adverse effects.

Just as the scoreboard of a sports event “passively” and accurately reflects what transpires on the field, without determining how the players play to achieve their “goals”. So too, having our money system fulfil the formal requirements of “passivity”, will allow us all to obtain valuable information, without interfering with what we choose to do or how we choose to do it.

Key Concepts

Money’s Lack of Definition:

Absent any formal definition of money and respective symbols (e.g. “$”) used in a wide array of contexts (e.g. dollar bills, checks and account entries) on similarly varied set of physical supports (e.g. paper, computer memory) and as an object of different contracts (e.g. mortgages, loans, derivatives, etc.), it is impossible to identify any determinable relation between money denoted by such symbols and the value inherent in goods and services money represents.  As a consequence, obligations, agreements or contracts in terms of such “$“ units are commensurately indeterminate such that a logical, fully reasoned and hence just rule of law is impeded. 

Just as any mathematical expression is rendered indeterminable if its variables are not fully and unequivocally defined in terms of the reality in which they are to be applied, so too mathematical expressions in terms of units of money are rendered indeterminate in terms of the real economy, unless those units are unequivocally defined in terms of that common reality to which they are expected to be applied.

Money’s Core Misrepresentation:

Common practice has adopted a notion of money where it is implicitly and explicitly assumed to be both a record/measure of value AND a commodity/tradable good without noticing how these two notions (measure/commodity) are, by logic, mutually exclusive. Such a logical core misrepresentation, once identified and by the most fundamental principles of law and justice, must render any contracts in terms of such a notion invalid. 

To continue business as usual in spite of this revelation is to arbitrarily subject one or other parties directly or indirectly to unknown, incalculable and/or undeclared adverse systemic effects and imperatives, the most notable of these being the systemic distortion of the common perception of value by systemic compounding,

As a consequence of the mere knowledge of this common misrepresentation and the subsequent adverse effects and consequences, again by principles of law, it becomes incumbent on all parties to all contracts involving “money” to seek remedy by proactively assisting in providing a logical and independently evaluable (valid) definition of money for contracts.


System passivity ensures that a system cannot directly affect its environment, which by no means implies that the system necessarily ceases to be useful or functional.  In fact, depending on a system’s function and purpose, passivity can be mission critical.  In the case of money and if it is to be used as a valid record and therefore measure of value,  then system passivity is an indispensable core requirement.   Thus, by merely rendering a money system passive,  any direct (systemic) adverse effects can be avoided while improving money’s utility at no cost or penalty to anyone.


Resolution 1 (Correction of Money’s Misrepresentation by Legal Imperative)

We thus seek,  as set out by the Money Systems Transparency Alliance (MSTA), to immediately set out to pursue and assist all technical and legal avenues to resolve the aforementioned logical anomaly,  and to do so in relation with the highest monetary authorities i.e. Central Banks, leading banking and investment houses and related stake holders, by way of the necessary open ratification and publication of a valid formal logical definition/specification of money, its function, scope of use and corresponding logical requirements. This formal logical definition/specification of money shall be done in terms of independently determinable criteria. For example, money’s definition cannot be circular (i.e. in terms of itself, also known as “false confirmation”) but rather must be in terms of the reality in which it, money, is to be operated on and applied.

Resolution 2 (Immediate (Interim) Imposition of Formal Passivity):

Pursuant to the above and with the aim of eliminating all and any direct or associated adverse effects and consequences arising from implementing money under its commonly assumed current misrepresentation,  we move to IMMEDIATELY adopt an interim logical “Passive” specification of money’s current use in the formal scientific sense of the term as follows:

  1. That money’s logical function shall be strictly limited to that of a record/annotation of the “value” attributed to goods and services transferred between parties in transactions and denominated using the common unit symbol “$”.
  2. Thus money shall be created on account to represent value given in the form of “goods and services” pending future reciprocation of “goods and services” of commensurate value and money shall be cancelled on account upon value being reciprocated.
  3. Related Balances of such “moneys” shall be kept by all stakeholders (e.g. Central Bank, associated banking or credit institutions, public administrators and interested parties etc.)  along with periodic issuance of statements as required.
  4. In order to maintain a system of any number of such transactions “passive” according to the formal requirements of passivity the following shall be observed:
    1. Money is defined as an annotation of value expressed in currency units (e.g. $) and only comes about as a result of transactions after the fact.
    2. There is no prior circulation, supply or demand of units required.
    3. Each transaction generates its own independent units that are later resolved against existing balances (see creation and cancellation of money above).
    4. The sum of money in a system of any number of such transactions at any given point of time, represents all non reciprocated value (risk measured in currency units) and at all times is equal or less than the sum of input “cost”/”prices”, thus conforming to Passive BIBO criteria for sampled LTI Systems.
    5. Value transacted may never be unilaterally determined.
    6. To avoid systemic distortion of the common perception of value by systemic compounding, the cost/price of all associated money (banking) services (e.g. maintaining of accounts, risk consultancy, etc.) must be attributed solely in terms of their own value and never as a percentage commission of the sums of value attributed to other transactions.

To support this proposal please download the following  Urgent communique and (editable) Communiqué Cover_Letter to forward to your contacts,  political and fiscal representatives and request they take action.