This paper examines Bitcoin from a legal and regulatory perspective, answering several important questions. \n \nWe begin by explaining what Bitcoin is, and why it matters. We describe problems with Bitcoin as a method of implementing a cryptocurrency. This introduction to cryptocurrencies allows us eventually to ask the inevitable question: is it legal? What are the regulatory responses to the currency? Can it be regulated? \n \nWe make clear why virtual currencies are of interest, how self-regulation has failed, and what useful lessons can be learned. Finally, we produce useful and semi-permanent findings into the usefulness of virtual currencies in general, blockchains as a means of mining currency, and the profundity of Bitcoin as compared with the development of block chain technologies. We conclude that though Bitcoin may be the equivalent of Second Life a decade later, so blockchains may be the equivalent of Web 2.0 social networks, a truly transformative social technology.
Kriptovalute su digitalni novac utemeljen na kriptografiji i decentraliziranom sustavu. Postoje samo u elektroničkom obliku kao jedinstveni digitalni novčići ("tokeni"). Iza njih ne stoji autoritet države niti ih je moguće svojevoljno proizvesti. Rad se fokusira na značajkama, postavkama, razvoju i svim međuodnosima važnih ekonomskih faktora koji utječu na kriptovalute. U prvom poglavlju navedena su obilježja kriptovaluta. Drugo poglavlje daje primjere i govori o primjeni kriptovaluta u svakodnevnom životu. U trećem poglavlju je raspravljano o trenutnim i budućim regulacijama najmoćnijih zemalja svijeta (G20) , kao i njihovoj zajedničkoj suradnji u želji za jedinstvenim i standardiziranim pravilima, a sve u svrhu što kvalitetnijeg nadzora nad kriptovalutama kako bi se spriječile malverzacije i zaštitili potrošači. Četvrto poglavlje govori o inicijalnoj ponudi kovanica, a peto poglavlje je namijenjeno sigurnosti kriptovaluta. Cilj istraživanja je utvrditi koliko je studentska populacija upoznata i usmjerena prema novim oblicima digitalnog novca, koje značajke kriptovaluta smatraju pozitivnima, a koje negativnima i u kojoj su mjeri investirali ili su spremni investirati dio svojih ulaganja u kriptovalute i sl. Metode istraživanja korištene u radu su kompilacija na temelju proučavanja postojeće literature o temi rada, prikupljanje i analiza podataka vezanih uz kriptovalute, ponajprije podataka vezanih uz cijene i tržišnu kapitalizaciju, anketiranje studenata Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci i metoda dedukcije putem koje su pokazane sve važne karakteristike i obilježja kriptovaluta. Na temelju provedene ankete u kojoj je sudjelovalo 90 studenata Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci zaključak toga dijela istraživanja je da je mlada populacija dobro upoznata s kriptovalutama i njenim glavnim značajkama, ali i određenim nedostatkom informiranosti o tehnologiji (trećina studenata nije čula za pojam "blockchain") i nedovoljnoj odlučnosti oko investiranja i trgovanja u kriptovalute. Povrh toga, dokazan je i negativan utjecaj hakerskih napada i određenih kriminalnih radnji, kao i nestabilnost tržišne cijene na povjerenje studenata, ali i ukupne populacije vezane uz globalni financijski sustav u kriptovalute. Ishod istraživanja omogućio je da zaključimo kako su kriptovalute trenutno u ranoj fazi razvoja i nisu se dovoljno implementirale za široku primjenu u trgovini roba i usluga ili općenito kao sredstvo razmjene. Faktor koji je uključen u istraživanje kako bi opisao veličinu, odnosno obujam neke kriptovalute je tržišna kapitalizacija u dolarima. Temeljna ideja ovog rada je informirati čitatelja o pozitivnim i negativnim značajkama koje se se vežu uz kriptovalute. Na taj način čitatelji će biti bolje informirani i educirani o potencijalnom riziku ulaganja u kriptovalute, kao i većoj razini zaštite prilikom posjedovanja neke digitalne valute.
There are over 275 virtual currencies in existence today. One of these currencies is Bitcoin, the largest andmost recognised virtual currency in the world. With its exponential growth over recent years, Bitcoin isbringing a degree of permanence for, and dependability on virtual currencies that can no longer be ignored byregulators. While an increase in international regulatory activity over the past 12 months suggests that somegovernments understand this, Australian regulators appear reluctant to act. In addition to examining Bitcoin’soperational system in detail, this article examines the affect that Bitcoin is having on two key features of thefinancial system: (1) the money laundering and illicit finance supply system; and (2) the payment system. Bycomparing the effectiveness of the response measures enacted by Australian and international regulators inCanada, Singapore, the United States, and the United Kingdom, this article demonstrates that even thoughAustralia’s current payment system policy is capable of addressing the threats posed by virtual currencies, thecurrent money laundering and terrorist financing regulations fail to satisfy Australia’s international obligations,and stifle the legitimate use and development of virtual currencies in Australia.
Bitcoin’s popularity increased as its value increased and people became excited about the prospect of a trustless, decentralized currency that could be used on the Internet. Within the last two years, however, people and organizations began exploiting the potential of the block chain that powers the bitcoin network. These people realized that the block chain — a transparent public ledger that cannot be altered — can be used for more than digital currency. One such organization calls itself Ethereum and its developers plan to use block chains to allow decentralized autonomous applications to operate free of government censorship or corruption. While such a network would have a profound effect on society — allowing trustless voting, uncensored social networking and the like — its impact on copyrights could be devastating. This paper argues that the emerging, decentralized Internet (also known as Web 3.0) will be the straw that breaks the copyright owner’s back. This paper argues that, with block chain technology and decentralized applications, those buying and selling unauthorized copies of copyrighted material cannot be subject to court injunctions; making enforcement of copyrights nearly impossible on a decentralized Internet. This paper then proposes that copyright holders get out in front of the problem by embracing a decentralized Internet. This can only be done by drastically reducing the price of copyright licenses. In other words, by offering cheap licenses at the dawn of Web 3.0, copyright holders can instill a sense that it’s better to be safe than sorry when it comes to the ongoing struggle between technology and copyrights.
Peggy Valcke, Niels Vandezande, Nathan Van de Velde
The research looked at which third party payment providers (TPP’s) are covered by the PSD2 and AMLD4 directives, the consequences thereof, as well as to what extent such coverage goes; and sought to analyse the potential for the regulation of cryptocurrency in terms of combatting money laundering and terrorist financing. TPP’s gain possession of a significant amount of sensitive information, for instance by providing a gateway from which consumers log in to their bank accounts using their unique identifiers and credentials. As a result, these entities are drawing increasingly more attention from legislators and regulators.Under the framework of the PSD2, TPP’s will be subject to stringent regulatory standards similar to those placed on traditional payment service providers under the PSD. In the US, regulation of TPP’s must be assessed on a state-by-state basis. In Florida, for instance, they can be considered as money transmitters, thus putting them under that regulation, as well as the federal Bank Secrecy Act. In Asia, the number of TPP’s has grown significantly over the past years. In China, these actors are regulated by the People’s Bank of China, and are subjected to a number of requirements similar to those found in the EU, such as minimum capital requirements and anti-money laundering rules.Another notable development is that of alternative payment methods – a prime example here are cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin. The bitcoin ecosystem is decentralized, meaning that no single entity controls the system. Currently, there exists no convincing arguments to consider virtual currencies as regulated under the EU’s Payment Services Directive or the Second E-money Directive. While the PSD2 does introduce new terminology and significantly amended scope exemptions compared to the original Payment Services Directive, there is no wider inclusion of virtual currencies under its scope. A similar argument can be made for the recently adopted AMLD4, where virtual currencies have been omitted from its scope despite earlier signs that this development may be included. The researchers conclude their paper with several public and private sector recommendations.
This article is aimed at augmenting current awareness of virtual currencies ("VCs") in the South African legal community. To this end, it introduces the reader to VCs in general and decentralised convertible VCs ("DCVCs") in particular. Due to their design and interaction with the real economy and currency, DCVCs are on the radar of many financial regulators worldwide. As Bitcoin is considered the leading type of DCVC in terms of value and volume, its early beginnings in South Africa are probed. Although regulation should follow innovation, awareness of the VC ecosystem will not only warrant appropriate regulatory intervention when the time comes, but will also enable the growth and development opportunities associated with VCs. South Africa has not promulgated any legislation pertaining to VCs. The potential applicability of all current legislation and regulations relevant to VCs calls for in-depth research. This article aspires to serve as an appetiser to do so.
Virtual currencies have been well-cited and well-discussed in the near past. Due to the loss of trust in the banking sector and the fear of loss of capital, low interest rates and uncertainty of existing currencies, the ground for a virtual currency was given. Virtual currencies and the money flows are controlled only online by the anonymous group of volunteers (also called peer); every single transaction is documented. Approximately 10,000 businesses worldwide accept payments with virtual currencies already, and the number is increasing steadily. This article analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of virtual currencies in comparison to real money and gives an outlook to a new banking system with high transparency and the chance to lead to a paradigm shift in the world of transactions and banking.
In het Delta Lloyd magazine april 2015, p. 32, wordt aandacht besteed aan Martijn Wismeijer (43 jaar). Hij liet onlangs twee chips onder zijn huid implanteren, een voor bitcoins en een voor de honderden wachtwoorden die hij voor digitale toepassingen gebruikt. 1 Het is een feit dat we in het huidige ICT-tijdperk te maken krijgen met heel veel wachtwoorden die liefst zo weinig mogelijk identiek mogen zijn en het is duidelijk dat wie toegang krijgt tot die wachtwoorden ons leven behoorlijk kan ontwrichten. Maar is een chip voor bitcoins niet overbodig? Wat zijn bitcoins eigenlijk, wat is hun juridische status en zijn ze betaalmiddel?
Current cryptocurrencies, starting with Bitcoin, build a decentralized blockchain-based transaction ledger, maintained through proofs-of-work that also serve to generate a monetary supply. Such decentralization has benefits, such as independence from national political control, but also significant limitations in terms of computational costs and scalability. We introduce RSCoin, a cryptocurrency framework in which central banks maintain complete control over the monetary supply, but rely on a distributed set of authorities, or mintettes, to prevent double-spending. While monetary policy is centralized, RSCoin still provides strong transparency and auditability guarantees. We demonstrate, both theoretically and experimentally, the benefits of a modest degree of centralization, such as the elimination of wasteful hashing and a scalable system for avoiding doublespending attacks.
Bitcoin is an innovative virtual currency, which has gained much commercial traction, yet is widely overlooked by the accounting profession. Due to its parallels with actual currencies and its growing use, accountants should be aware of what bitcoin is, including its risks and benefits, in order to properly leverage its business uses. Of the existing financial instruments, derivatives stand out in their potential to stabilize the bitcoin market. Bitcoin regulation is sparse, but evolving, especially in the face of the emerging bitcoin securities and derivatives markets. The accounting profession is poised to play a major role in facilitating the future of proper regulation and oversight of Bitcoin.
Ashley S. Harrison, M. Scott Niederjohn, J. R. Clark
Economists define money as anything that is generally accepted in payment for goods and services or in the repayment of debts.1 Paper money and coins clearly fit this definition, but deposits in checking accounts are so widely accepted that they are also considered in the narrowest definition of money used by the Federal Reserve, called “M1.” M1 is the sum of all currency, checkable deposits, and travelers checks. How about savings accounts? These amounts are so quickly convertible into M1 that many economists consider them money too, part of a larger total called M2 that includes all of M1 plus all small denomination time deposits (bank CDs), savings accounts, and money market account balances. M2 then represents a form of money that is less “liquid” (less easily converted and spent) than M1. In addition to this definition, money is expected to satisfy three functions: serve as a medium of exchange, a store of value, and a unit of account. In this article, we will explore what Bitcoin is and why it has been so prevalent in the news of late. Further, we will apply the three functions of money to Bitcoin and discuss whether it should be considered a form of money. Some of the benefits and problems associated with Bitcoin will be discussed along with its future potential.
Bitcoin is the first and most successful digital currency in the world. It polarizes the news almost daily, with either glowing reviews of the many benefits of an alternative and international currency, or doomsday predictions of anarchy, deflation, and another tulip bubble.\nThis article focuses on the truly innovative aspect of Bitcoin - and that which has gone mostly unnoticed since its inception - the technological platform used to transfer Bitcoin from one party to another. This technology is called the Blockchain. The Blockchain eschews a bank or other intermediary and allows parties to transfer funds directly to one another, using a peer-to-peer system. This disruptive technology has done for money transfers what email did for sending mail - by removing the need for a trusted third party just as email removed the need for using the post office to send mail.\nIf this technology can be used for peer-to-peer money transfers, why not extend the technology to accomplish other forms of transfers? Imagine selling a house or buying a car peer-to-peer. What about using the Blockchain technology to buy and sell stocks? Stocks exchanged completely peer-to-peer could resolve many of the issues facing the stock market today, including high frequency trading and short sales. This article develops a peer-to-peer stock market system, the legal implications of such a system, and how this system will fit in with current legislation and regulation.
[NOTE: This paper was written in late 2014 and early 2015. It is relevant given the continued movement of Bitcoin toward the mainstream, exemplified by El Salvador's adoption of Bitcoin as legal tender in June 2021.] After a slow beginning in 2009, the digital currency Bitcoin has edged closer to the mainstream, and regulators are scrambling to determine what to do with it. So far, they have focused on harms that its use creates, such as easy money laundering and sales of illicit goods. But Bitcoin’s ability to grease the wheels of crime is not the only risk we should worry about. Rather, due to its status as decentralized, open-source software, Bitcoin poses a risk that money has not historically been subject to – the risk that the money will just stop working one day due to a technology or basic governance problem. Illuminating the importance of reliable money to our society, this paper unpacks the operational risks generated by Bitcoin’s very structure, such as the inherent vulnerabilities of software to bugs and attacks, the governance problems spawned by its decentralized structure and open-source nature, and the lack of monetary expertise of the coders who run the currency. Explicitly considering how each operational risk impacts Bitcoin’s status as money, I conclude that the aggregation of Bitcoin’s operational risks means that it is simply not durable enough to serve as money – even if it becomes widely accepted and achieves a stable value. With hundreds of millions of dollars in investments now pouring into Bitcoin and the larger virtual currency ecosystem, and with more and more prominent individuals jumping daily on the Bitcoin bandwagon, this paper urges regulators and policy-makers to specifically address Bitcoin’s critical operational risks as they design the soon-to-come regulations for virtual currencies.
This paper explores the legal character of the Bitcoin and other emerging "virtual currencies," and the legal and policy implications of Bitcoin trading. It observes that these "cryptocurrencies" exhibit different legal characteristics depending on the context in which they are examinedwhether transactional law, tax law, or criminal law, for example. The paper argues that the appropriate legal analogue for classifying Bitcoins should be investment and commercial notes, since this characterisation would lead to the application of an appropriate and effective body of transactional and regulatory law to Bitcoins.
It is argued that a Bitcoin-style money-like informational commodity may constitute an effective instrument for the further development of Islamic Finance. The argument involves the following elements: (i) an application of circulation theory to Bitcoin with the objective to establish the implausibility of interest payment in connection with Bitcoin, (ii) viewing a Bitcoin-like system as a money-like exclusively informational commodity with the implication that such a system need not support debt, (iii) the idea that Islamic Finance imposes different requirements compared to conventional financial policies on a money concerning its use as a tool for achieving social and economic objectives, and (iv) identification of two aspects of mining, gambling and lack of trust, that may both be considered problematic from the perspective of compliance with the rules of Islamic Finance and a corresponding proposal to modify the architecture of mining in order to improve compliance with these rules.
Bitcoin is a virtual currency transaction protocol.It also is a type of virtual currency.One of Bitcoin's unique features is that it is decentralized; it is not created or issued by a single person or entity.Rather, it is "mined" by miners that are issued bitcoins in exchange for solving complex math problems with special software.Bitcoins may be converted to governmentissued legal tender (commonly referred to as fiat currency) or other types of virtual currency through an exchange, or they may be used to purchase goods and services from any of the tens of thousands of merchants who accept bitcoins for payment.The Bitcoin protocol enables the transfer of bitcoins and also can be used for other purposes, such as providing the infrastructure for smart contracts, escrow systems, smart property/title systems, and much more.Many other virtual currencies exist.Some are centralized virtual currencies that are created and issued by a single entity.Some of these virtual currencies may be converted to fiat currency, but others may not.Many are "closed loop" virtual currencies that may only be used to obtain goods and services of the issuer.
Divya Rana, Syed Md Faisal Ali Khan, Arvind Arahant, Jitender Kumar Chaudhary
This study investigates the concept of green cryptocurrencies as a potential solution to mitigate the ecological footprint associated with traditional cryptocurrencies. It explores their viability as a sustainable alternative to traditional currencies. The rising popularity of cryptocurrencies has brought about concerns regarding their environmental impact, particularly due to the energy-intensive nature of mining and transactions.In conclusion, the importance of exploring sustainable alternatives to traditional cryptocurrencies emphasizes the potential of green cryptocurrencies to address environmental concerns.It discusses the growing awareness within the cryptocurrency community and the general public regarding the urgent need to address these issues. Green cryptocurrencies employ alternative consensus mechanisms, such as Proof-of-Stake (PoS) or energy-efficient algorithms, and utilize renewable energy sources for mining and transactions.
This paper proposes a self-governing cryptocurrency, dubbed Autonocoin. Cryptocurrency owners play formal tacit coordination games by making investments recorded on the blockchain. Such investments represent bets about the focal point resolution of normative issues, such as whether a proposed change to Autonocoin should occur. The game produces a result that resolves the issue. With a typical cryptocurrency, the client software establishes conventions that ultimately lead to the identification of the authoritative blockchain. Autonocoin completes a circle by making transactions on the blockchain that in turn define those conventions and the expected software behavior. The distributed consensus mechanism embodied by formal tacit coordination games, meanwhile, can make other types of decisions, including which of competing blockchains is authoritative and whether new Autonocoins should be rewarded to benefit those who have taken actions to benefit Autonocoin. This establishes a unique funding model for a cryptocurrency, and it addresses objections to cryptocurrencies issued predominantly to the initial founders, as well as to those that encourage wasteful mining activities.