Basel Committee, SCO60

Anonymity-enhancing assets or unattributed transfers are barred outright, or barred for regulated firms.

What Basel Committee, SCO60 actually says

The single most privacy-restrictive sentence in global financial regulation is probably here. To qualify for the favourable capital treatment, a network must be well-defined such that all transactions and participants are traceable. A chain that obscures the transaction graph cannot satisfy it. Worth being precise about what this does and does not mean: it binds banks, not protocols, and sets a capital cost rather than a legality question. But the effect is that permissionless-chain assets fall into Group 2, capped at 2% of Tier 1 capital, which is why bank balance sheets stay away. The standard itself concedes the Committee will keep reflecting on whether those risks can be mitigated enough for Group 1. A targeted review is under way; nobody has said whether it touches the traceability condition.

What this means for confidential transactions

Bubble is built for exactly this shape of obligation: amounts and balances live on chain as ciphertexts, computation happens without decryption, and the only disclosure path is an on-chain access list through which an authorized party - an auditor, a supervisor, a counterparty - can request scoped decryption. That is confidentiality from the public, not from the regulator.