Published on: Jul 15, 2026
Last modified on: Jul 15, 2026
Tokenized assets are reshaping how businesses handle payments, financing, and settlement. Here's what the shift actually means for B2B operations in 2026.
Tokenized assets are often presented as investment products, but their importance for businesses extends beyond investment. Tokenization can also serve as infrastructure for commercial transactions by giving financial claims and economic rights a machine-readable form that can be managed across connected digital systems.
The Bank for International Settlements describes tokenization as part of an emerging architecture in which money and assets operate on programmable platforms. The IMF similarly frames tokenized finance as a potential change to financial infrastructure rather than merely a new issuance format.
For businesses, the relevant question is whether tokenization can remove a specific source of friction, delay, cost, or exposure from an existing transaction.
A tokenized asset is a digital representation of an asset or enforceable economic right. Depending on its structure, a token may confer:
ownership
a redemption right
entitlement to income
participation in an investment vehicle
the right to receive a future payment
The blockchain record does not create these rights by itself. Their legal effect depends on the contracts, institutions, and regulatory framework supporting the arrangement.
Most real-world structures are therefore hybrid. The blockchain records transactions and applies programmed rules, while conventional institutions remain responsible for:
safeguarding assets
maintaining documentation
conducting verification
enforcing rights
A credible tokenized claim must therefore have a dependable legal and operational connection to the asset or right it represents.
The most relevant B2B applications of tokenization involve assets that already support commercial activity, funding, or settlement.
Invoices and receivables can be represented as transferable payment claims. A supplier may retain the claim until maturity, use it as collateral, or sell it to obtain earlier access to cash.
Other credit instruments can also be issued in tokenized form, with programmed terms supporting administration throughout their lifecycle.
The underlying activities remain familiar. Businesses still borrow, extend credit, and finance receivables. Tokenization changes how the instrument is:
recorded
transferred
monitored
settled
Tokens may represent interests in physical commodities and other productive assets. These structures can support procurement, collateralization, and capital raising.
Their credibility depends on reliable information about the underlying asset, including its:
location
condition
quantity
insurance coverage
availability for redemption
Property tokenization may be used to finance real estate or distribute income among several investors. The legal structure determines the rights held by each participant.
Environmental instruments such as carbon credits can also be issued and transferred through tokenized systems. Tokenization may improve how credits are tracked and retired, but the quality of the credit still depends on the standards and verification process behind it.
Recurring income from intellectual property and similar contractual rights can be represented digitally.
This may simplify the distribution of proceeds among several rights holders or allow a business to raise funding against expected future income. These structures are particularly relevant when payments must be allocated repeatedly according to agreed contractual shares.
Digital forms of money, whether privately or publicly issued, provide the payment leg for transactions involving tokenized instruments.
A tokenized asset cannot settle entirely within a programmable environment unless an acceptable form of money is available within, or connected to, that environment.
A receivable provides a useful example because it connects a commercial obligation with liquidity and collection.
A supplier performs under a contract, creating an obligation for the customer to pay under the agreed terms. Before the receivable is tokenized, the supporting evidence must be validated. Depending on the transaction, verification may involve reviewing the:
underlying agreement
invoice
purchase order
proof of delivery
debtor details
payment terms
restrictions on assignment
Verification is critical. Digitizing an invalid or fraudulent invoice would make the problem transferable rather than solve it.
Once the claim has been validated, it can be represented by a token. The associated record may identify the:
amount and currency
current holder
claim status
permitted actions
Supporting documents can be linked or referenced without being reproduced in full on-chain. Sensitive commercial information does not need to be publicly visible and access can be limited to authorized participants.
The token can also indicate whether the claim:
remains outstanding
has been pledged
has been partially financed
is under dispute
is subject to transfer restrictions
The supplier may retain the token until payment, sell it to a financing provider, or pledge it as collateral. The purchaser could acquire the claim at a discount and provide the supplier with immediate liquidity. Alternatively, the supplier could borrow against the claim without transferring full ownership.
Economically, the arrangement remains similar to conventional invoice financing. The difference is that ownership, restrictions, encumbrance status, and payment events can be managed within the same digital framework.
At maturity, the customer pays the party entitled to receive the funds. Payment can trigger an update to the token’s status, marking the obligation as discharged. The token may then be retired according to the platform’s rules. Research into tokenized supply-chain finance has examined how digital invoices could be combined with compatible forms of central bank money to support this process.
In more advanced structures, the transfer of the asset and the transfer of money can be made conditional on each other. Many financial transactions involve two separate commitments. One party transfers an asset or performs an obligation, while the other provides payment. When the two sides move through separate systems, one may become final before the other, creating settlement exposure. Programmable systems can reduce this risk through atomic settlement. Under an atomic structure, the asset and payment transfer together. If either movement fails, neither is completed. In securities markets, this is commonly described as delivery versus payment. When two currencies are exchanged, the equivalent model is payment versus payment.
In addition to increased speed, the primary benefit lies in the reduction of risk during the interval between the two transfers. Project Agorá, coordinated by the BIS Innovation Hub with public- and private-sector participants, has shown how regulated tokenized money could support wholesale cross-border transactions.
Creating a token is technically straightforward compared with building a structure that commercial and institutional users can trust. The OECD has identified several factors that impact adoption in financial markets.
Every tokenized system needs a trusted process for confirming what enters it and how its status changes over time. Physical assets may require:
inspection
secure storage
insurance
inventory records
The platform should define who validates each stage of the token’s lifecycle, what evidence is required, and how disputes or data errors are handled. Blockchain can preserve the history of submitted information, but it cannot determine whether that information was accurate when first entered.
Businesses must determine how tokens and transaction permissions will be controlled. The design should use an access and approval model suited to the value and legal significance of the represented asset. Relevant controls include:
key management
role-based access
approval thresholds
transaction limits
recovery procedures
protection against unauthorized transfers
Losing control of a tokenized corporate claim may have consequences far beyond losing access to an ordinary software account.
A tokenized platform must exchange information with the systems through which the business already operates, including:
accounting systems
treasury systems
procurement tools
compliance systems
enterprise resource planning platforms
Staff should not have to reconstruct token activity manually before it can be reflected in financial statements, treasury reports, or internal controls.
Privacy must also be built into the architecture. Commercial agreements, customer identities, pricing terms, and payment data should not automatically be exposed to every network participant. A technically functional token will have limited value if the relevant counterparties and internal systems cannot use it.
Digital transferability does not guarantee economic liquidity. Before adopting a tokenized instrument, a business should confirm that the holder can recover value through a:
workable market
potential purchaser
redemption mechanism
other reliable routes
The same applies to the payment instrument. A company receiving stablecoins or tokenized deposits must determine whether they can be converted, redeemed, or used for ordinary treasury obligations.
The relevant measure is the total end-to-end operating cost rather than merely the nominal cost of moving a token on-chain. This includes:
financing
conversion
custody
compliance
integration
reconciliation
Classification depends on the rights represented and the activities performed around them. A tokenized structure may engage:
securities law
payment regulation
anti-money-laundering obligations
sanctions controls
custody requirements
taxation
data protection
cross-border reporting rules
The analysis must cover both the token and the entities involved in:
issuing
holding
transferring
financing
redeeming
settling
Finance teams must also determine the appropriate accounting treatment throughout the instrument’s lifecycle. Transaction records must satisfy the company’s control, audit, and reporting requirements.
Tokenization is most compelling when a transaction involves:
multiple parties
fragmented records
complex rights
delayed settlement
assets that are difficult to finance or transfer
In these situations, a shared digital structure can help participants:
maintain a consistent record of ownership and transaction status
enforce permitted actions
connect assets with sources of capital
coordinate settlement
Other potential applications include debt administration and automated revenue distribution. The commercial case should be assessed against measurable outcomes, including:
improved access to liquidity
shorter processing times
lower end-to-end operating costs
fewer reconciliation errors
stronger settlement certainty
better counterparty coordination
For businesses in 2026, the value of tokenization lies in whether it improves the economics, control, or execution of a real transaction.
At a broader market level, the OECD indicates that wider adoption of tokenized infrastructure may also support:
fractional ownership of assets and economic interests
near-continuous issuance, trading, clearing, and settlement outside conventional business hours
shorter transaction chains and reduced reliance on administrative intermediaries
potentially lower settlement-related liquidity requirements, although some models may require pre-funding
more efficient exchange of compliance information and settlement instructions across jurisdictions
ledger-based monitoring of proceeds, eligible projects, reporting obligations, and performance for instruments such as green bonds
the substitution, release, and mobilization of collateral across transactions and collateral pools
more efficient repurchase agreements, securities lending, and other secured-financing transactions
regulated liquidity pools, automated market makers, and other programmable market structures
The realization of these market-level benefits would depend on broad adoption, settlement finality, effective governance, and sufficient market liquidity.