Blockchain Papers

Maxime Uhoda

No abstract is available for this record.

Remerta Basson

Orientation: This article examines the normal tax treatment of cryptocurrency transactions performed by natural persons in South Africa. Research purpose: The aim of this article was to document the normal tax treatment of cryptocurrency transactions subsequent to the inclusion of cryptocurrency in the definition of ‘financial instrument’ in section 1(1) of the Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962, and to determine whether this inclusion gives rise to unanticipated issues. Motivation for the study: This investigation was necessitated by the distinguishing features of cryptocurrency that differentiate it from other financial instruments. Research approach/design and method: This article falls within the reform-orientated genre of doctrinal research. A desktop literature review was conducted to determine the normal tax treatment of cryptocurrency transactions, based on an interpretation of relevant legislation and a review of secondary commentary. Key issues identified in the normal tax treatment of cryptocurrency transactions were documented, and recommendations were made for addressing the issues identified. Main findings: A misalignment may occur between taxable incomes and economic gains of taxpayers engaged in cryptocurrency mining. Practical/managerial implications: The South African Revenue Service (SARS) should allow for a deduction equivalent to the market value of cryptocurrency acquired through cryptocurrency mining in terms of section 22(2)(a). Contribution/value-add: A risk of misalignment between taxable incomes and economic gains of taxpayers performing cryptocurrency mining has been identified and documented, which may inform legislative amendment, or the practice of the SARS.

Олег Резник

The article deals with the content of the tax on cryptocurrency, which is an innovative IT instrument of economic development. It has been established that there was no common understanding of the official status of cryptocurrency given that each state establishes it in the framework of its national legislation independently, and the introduction of taxes is one of the instruments of state influence on the cryptocurrency circulation. It has been found out that the EU member states had only one restriction on the taxation of cryptocurrency, namely cryptocurrency transactions were not liable for VAT. Foreign experience in taxing cryptocurrency transactions is considered in the article. It has been established that Ukraine offered the most optimal tax rate on income from cryptocurrency transactions for individuals and legal entities. At the same time, the significance of the economic effect of the cryptocurrency tax in the form of revenues to the state budget due to the unstable cryptocurrency exchange rate is disproved, which raises the issue of the feasibility of search for new areas of state influence on cryptocurrency.

Kellen Yent

No abstract is available for this record.

Damian Boada

No abstract is available for this record.

Jim Mignano

This article presents an example of how globalization and digitization force states to rely on international organization. Examining tax policy with respect to cryptocurrency—an innovative, global technology—the implication is that a state levying taxes on cryptocurrency must turn to international monitoring and enforcement regimes to support effective taxation. Based on Margaret Levi’s theory of predatory rule, I submit a theory of “co-predation” to explain international cooperation with respect to taxation of novel, cross-border technologies such as cryptocurrency. The Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI), an anti-tax evasion framework promulgated by the OECD, serves as an example of international cooperation. A comparison of cryptocurrency taxation in Russia and Belarus finds that, where effective tax policy is at stake, states are enjoined to commit to international cooperation through AEOI. The article concludes by considering implications for legitimacy, quasi-voluntary compliance, and strategic tax policy.

Alex Ankier

In 2014, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued Notice 2014-21 in an attempt to address issues with cryptocurrency taxation, essentially reaching the conclusion that cryptocurrency must be treated like property for purposes of taxation. In the time since the IRS pronouncement, several academics have called for an alternative treatment known as “currency treatment.” Each treatment inadequately addresses the comprehensive issues surrounding cryptocurrency because they offer wholesale treatment to nuanced issues with valid concerns from each side. To truly allow this emerging industry to flourish and gain societal acceptance, artful policymaking is required. This note provides an example of such policymaking. The tax plan proposed in this note will address a litany of issues, ranging from investment intent, price volatility, treatment of income for “miners,” the criminal element of cryptocurrency, enforcement mechanisms, and cross-regulatory agency efforts, eventually suggesting a three-tiered approach that combines elements of the property and currency treatment approaches for a more comprehensive analysis. Being proactive in addressing these issues will allow the market to embrace a new medium of commercial change that revolutionize the world.

Gabriella Erdős

Hungarian abstract: : A kriptovaluták népszerűsége világszerte növekszik. Használják őket fizetésre, befektetésre, kincsképzésre, annak ellenére, hogy nem minősülnek fizetőeszköznek, értékpapírnak, vagy vagyontárgynak, bár kétségkívül minden kategóriának a tulajdonságaiból rendelkeznek néhánnyal. Egy magyar állásfoglalás szerint a krioptovalutákat egyéb követelésnek kell tekinteni, míg a nemzetközi számviteli sztenderdek ajánlása szerint a kriptovalutákat vagy az immateriális javak, vagy a készletek között kell bemutatni. A cikk elemzi a kriptovaluták tulajdonságait, és bemutatja, hogy milyen társasági adózási következményei vannak annak, ha a vállalkozás a magyar állásfoglalás ajánlását követi, és hogyan vezet a helytelen besorolás fals adózási eredményekhez. A szerző az állásfoglalás visszavonását, és új számviteli szabályok és értelmezés megalkotását javasolja – akár egy új eszközkategória megalkotásával a kriptovaluták számára. English abstract: Cryptocurrencies are gaining in popularity worldwide. They are used as if they were currencies, securities, debt or equity instruments, or property. They are neither of those things although they certainly show characteristics of each categories. A Hungarian non-binding ruling classifies them as claims or accounts receivable, while the international accounting standards recommend to present cryptocurrencies either as intangible assets or as inventories. The article analyses the characteristics of cryptocurrencies, and the corporate income tax consequences of following the recommendations of the Hungarian non-binding ruling. It shows why the wrong classification of cryptocurrencies leads to false tax results. The author recommends the withdrawal of the tax ruling and the establishment of new accounting rules and interpretations - possibly also the introduction of a new accounting category for cryptocurrencies.

Abraham Sutherland

No abstract is available for this record.

Mattia Landoni, Abraham Sutherland

Dilution is the loss experienced by incumbent owners upon the creation of new ownership units (such as shares or tokens). Although a number of ad hoc patches to the U.S. tax code typically provide incumbents with some form of tax allowance for their loss, there appears to be no unified theory of accounting for dilution – for tax or any other purposes. When additions to one’s balance from newly created units are viewed as an income realization event, whereas dilution is not, net income is systematically overstated. The resulting over-taxation could be a serious hurdle to the adoption of proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies, which rely on token creation by incumbent owners as an integral part of network maintenance. In this short article we quantify the potential for over-taxation — defined herein as the excess of taxable income under a strict realization approach over true economic income — for a real-world taxpayer holding cryptocurrency tokens. Our example taxpayer is a Tezos staker — a token holder who acquires new Tezos cryptocurrency tokens by participating in the maintenance of the Tezos network. We present the pros and cons of different methods of accounting for dilution when the cryptocurrency’s aggregate network value, the taxpayer’s ownership balance, and the rate at which dilution happens are all time-varying. We conclude that the acquisition of those tokens should not be an income realization event, although any of the methods we propose would be preferable to an approach of strict realization that ignores dilution entirely. Tax policy aside, the methods we develop to quantify the economic value lost to dilution are independently interesting to investors and other finance and accounting practitioners.

Abraham Sutherland

This report argues that including proof-of-stake cryptocurrency block rewards in gross income when the reward tokens are first created results in inequitable taxation and would discourage U.S. taxpayers from participating in this new technology. The better approach is to tax reward tokens when they are sold or exchanged. In this two-part report, Sutherland proposes a single taxation policy for all public cryptocurrencies. Focusing on the mechanics of proof-of-stake networks and the economic incentives underlying their maintenance, Sutherland, in the first installment, begins to make the case that reward tokens should be taxed when they are sold or exchanged, not when they’re created. In the second installment, Sutherland explores options for the equitable taxation of cryptocurrency reward tokens based on existing policies and principles. He concludes that for both proof-of-work and proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies, the best approach is to tax reward tokens only when they are sold or exchanged. Although cryptocurrency would benefit from legislative and regulatory clarity and certainty, the report also argues that in the meantime no act of Congress or new Treasury regulation is required to ensure the proper taxation of block rewards.

Arvind Sabu

This Article argues that, contrary to the common belief that Bitcoin enables tax evasion, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) can increasingly police transactions in Bitcoin. First, commercial and technical intermediaries have emerged as part of Bitcoin’s ecosystem. This diverse set of intermediaries can facilitate tax enforcement, as the litigation over the IRS’s summons on Coinbase—the largest domestic digital asset exchange—and subsequent IRS efforts show. These intermediaries could report transactions to the IRS or even, one day, withhold and remit tax payments. Second, the publicly visible, trustworthy nature of Bitcoin’s blockchain—its unique role as a shared truth—allows tax authorities to observe transaction flows. This renders Bitcoin unusually regulable for tax purposes, as recent efforts by the IRS to rely on Bitcoin’s blockchain to police tax evasion demonstrate. The Article offers a proposal by which the IRS might make better use of Bitcoin’s blockchain: the IRS can tailor an existing program to reward technically savvy whistleblowers who scour Bitcoin’s blockchain and determine identities that correspond to public Bitcoin addresses at issue.

Benjamin Molloy

No abstract is available for this record.

Jasmin Kollmann

Since their creation in 2009, crypto-assets have evolved from niche products into assets held and used much more widely. These assets pose challenges for policymakers and tax administrations, because, as pointed out by the OECD, they can be transferred and held without the participation of traditional financial intermediaries and without central administrators being aware of the transactions carried out or the location of crypto-assets holdings.
 On the indirect taxation side, the VAT Committee discussed the issues relating to the VAT treatment of crypto-assets and, in particular, of cryptocurrencies, on several occasions. The discussion on the most recent of the working papers on this subject, No. 1037 on the VAT treatment of crypto-assets, resulted in the adoption of the Guidelines which aim at harmonising tax administrations’ practice regarding the VAT implications of the different transactions linked to crypto-assets.
 The article highlights the main challenges posed by cryptocurrencies in terms of VAT while focusing on the main supplies with the use of cryptocurrencies and their qualification for the VAT purposes. Those transactions range from the creation, verification, validation, and supply of cryptocurrencies through their modification, storage, transfer, to exchange. The article explains in this context the position of the VAT Committee reflected in the Guidelines.

Mattia Landoni, Gina Pieters

The tax treatment of cryptocurrency forks presents four unique challenges: parent/child designation, taxpayer access to the new token, assessment of fair market value, and assessment of comparable contemporaneous fair market values. We provide empirical evidence that each of these issues is a hurdle in determining whether income has been realized, or in apportioning the basis. We consider three existing approaches for assets acquired without a purchase. We conclude that the least problematic approach (adopted by Japan) is giving zero tax basis to the new coin and taxing the proceeds upon a sale, while treating the new coin as realized income (as recently ruled in the US) is the most problematic.

Edgar Jurado

No abstract is available for this record.

Alessandro Liotta

The aim of this paper is to highlight the main problems deriving from cryptocurrencies in the field of taxation.First, the paper will give a glimpse at the key features of cryptocurrencies and Blockchain.Secondly, the paper will deal with the definition of this phenomenon and it will focus on the difficulties faced by different Institutions and entities, at European and International level, to provide a convincing and homogeneous definition of cryptocurrencies.The paper will provide a comparative overview of some different definitions to give an idea of how difficult it is to identify what cryptocurrencies are.Finding out the correct definition is not important as such, but it represents the first step to understand how to tax revenue deriving from cryptocurrencies.In fact, various economically relevant activities are involved in the world of cryptocurrencies, such as mining or exchanging, and such activities need to be taxed.In this scenario, the current legislative framework is not up to date and obsolete and requires robust amendments.How should revenue deriving from cryptocurrencies be taxed?An answer has been given by the Italian Tax Administration, which has issued two responses, following the judgment of the ECJ which, however, do not seem to be conclusive.In fact, the Italian Tax Code does not set forth any provisions regarding cryptocurrencies and the Tax Administration had to interpret the existing provisions.In addition, the paper will explore the approach of a Notice issued by the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS Notice 2014-21, March 25, 2014) and the one adopted by the Virtual Currency Tax Reform Act, which is supposed to give a definitive solution to the problem of taxation in the US.In conclusion, the paper will pose some questions regarding the ability of the tax systems to deal with issues related to cryptocurrencies.

Bryce Ciccaglione

This paper examines the use of blockchain, or distributed ledger, technology for the potential supplantation of the antiquated process of international trade financing. Using the technology for this purpose has the potential to narrow the enormous gap in unmet demand for trade finance experienced by small-and medium-sized enterprises in the developing world. The current process of trade finance is still paper-based and relies heavily on manual labor. After the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, banks became restrictive in their lending, especially to small-and medium-sized enterprises in developing countries, leading to the aforementioned trade finance gap. Blockchain technology could narrow this gap by digitizing and automating key steps in the trade finance process, which will lead to efficiency gains along the trade finance process. By allowing users to establish a verifiable identity, blockchain also increases compliance with ‘know your customer’ and anti-money laundering requirements. Currently, permissioned blockchains are better suited for trade finance as evidenced through recent initiatives, whereas permissionless blockchains have more to offer to individuals at the “bottom of the financial pyramid” who are typically excluded from the formal financial sector. Financial inclusion refers to the delivery of basic financial services in a non-discriminatory way. Blockchain can help lift the large unbanked and financially underserved populations in the developing world out of poverty and into the global economy, contributing to sustainable economic growth.

Ihor Alieksieiev, Stepan Paranchuk, Oksana Chervinska

Under conditions of decentralization, especially taking into account the creation and establishment of united territorial communities (UTC), there is a need to transfer financial resources to a different than earlier, primary, level of financing of socio-economic programs. Changing the direction of budgetary funds flows requires studying a number of aspects of the transformation of the budgetary and tax systems. In particular, there is a need to study tax and non-tax flows in the functioning of the united territorial communities. The article justifies the introduction of the concept of tax and non-tax (financial) flows, in particular, in the context of the united territorial communities. It is determined that the use of the category “flows” for tax and non-tax payments or budget revenues at various levels is a first step necessary for further research with the use of economic and mathematical methods. The concept “flow” is more tight-laced in terms of both physical representations and mathematical methods of data processing. The paper suggests introducing the categories of “tax flow” and “non-tax flow” into financial terminology. Tax and non-tax flows (revenues) of the local budgets of Ukraine and the budgets of the united territorial communities are analyzed. The analysis of these revenues in the local budgets of regions of Ukraine showed that all items of revenues increased during the study period, the largest increases being observed for the personal income tax, single tax, corporate income tax and basic subsidy. The data on the dynamic pattern of creating united territorial communities in Lviv region are given. An analysis of the structure of actual revenues and costs of general and special-purpose funds of UTCs of Lviv region is carried out, corresponding calculations are made.

Valentina Derbeneva

An urgent task today is to strengthen the importance of property taxation, measured not only by quantitative indicators, but also by the correct perception of tax by local authorities. The scope of the research is the development of the process of fiscal decentralization in Russia. The subject of the study is the relationship of the principle of benefits in property taxation with the process of fiscal decentralization at a local and regional level. The employed research methods include logical analysis, the descriptive method and systematic presentation of the results of statistical analysis. The aim of the article is to study the importance of property taxes for the implementation of fiscal decentralization in Russia. As a result of the calculations, it was concluded that there is a tendency toward an increased financial dependence of local governments and increased centralization at the local level. It is shown that increasing transfer dependence and increasing centralization at the level of administrative centers of the regions while reducing gratuitous assistance at the regional level indicates a concentration of resources around the regional capitals and a decrease in financial support for smaller areas. The author proposes that the benefit principle in the property taxation system in Russia should be introduced and proves the possibility of doing that. The principle implies the transfer of property taxes to the targeted category, when tax revenues are directed toward specific items of municipal expenditures. The ultimate goal of introducing the principle of benefit is to increase the responsibility of local authorities regarding the efficient provision of municipal public goods, highlight the importance of property taxes and strengthen fiscal decentralization at the local level. To determine the potential ability of property taxes to fulfill the target function, a ratio of municipalities’ fiscal self-sufficiency was proposed and calculated, which allows one to determine the share of net expenditures of budgets subject to financing with property tax. The input data for the study was borrowed from statistical data on the execution of regional and local budgets, as well as tax revenue reports of tax authorities.

Margaret Ryznar

This piece summarizes the implications of applying Coffee bonding theory to bitcoin, using tax as a case study.

Eric D. Chason

In a recent article appearing in the Virginia Tax Review, I analyzed the income tax issues that arose from hard forks of cryptocurrencies That article focused on the August 1, 2017 hard fork of the Bitcoin blockchain that resulted in the creation of Bitcoin Cash, a new cryptocurrency. The hard fork resulted in a windfall to owners of Bitcoin, who came to own one unit of Bitcoin Cash for each unit of Bitcoin owned at the time. After considering the difficulties of taxing the new units as income immediately, I argued that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) should tax new units of Bitcoin Cash as “open transactions,” deferring income tax consequences until the owner sells or exchanges the units. As that article went to press, the IRS released Revenue Ruling 2019-24 (the “Ruling”), which describes the taxation of cryptocurrency hard forks. The Ruling seems to embrace an “immediate taxation” approach that my article considered but rejected. This essay evaluates the Ruling in light of my recent article. This essay will review some of the arguments against immediate taxation and in favor of open transaction. Perhaps more importantly, this essay will identify inconsistencies and oddities that appear in the Ruling. In particular, the Ruling, by its terms, does not seem to apply to Bitcoin Cash. Even if the IRS wants to apply immediate taxation, it should nevertheless release new guidance that applies more clearly to Bitcoin Cash.

Autilia Arfwidsson, Louise Fjord Kjærsgaard

The authors analyse the current classification of cryptocurrencies from the Danish and Swedish domestic income tax perspectives. Cryptocurrencies are analysed as they are typically applied in practice, where a categorization is made between coins, utility tokens, security tokens and asset tokens. In particular, it is concluded that despite the economic differences of different cryptocurrencies, they generally fall outside the scope of Danish and Swedish lex specialis regulation on taxation of capital gains and losses from the sale of certain assets, for example, shares and claims in currency. In both countries, there appears to be a presumption that most cryptocurrencies should be taxed as assets held for investment and speculative purposes. It is argued that such an approach is problematic not only in relation to the principle of neutrality, but also because it creates a barrier to realizing the economic potential of cryptocurrencies. The authors conclude that (1) the classification of cryptocurrencies poses challenges and uncertainty for tax purposes due to the lack of a regulatory framework, the absence of common definitions and the diverse technical structure of tokens and coins and (2) the classification for Danish and Swedish tax law purposes should be based on a case-by-case assessment of the specific cryptocurrency.

Stephanie Armbruster, Beat Hintermann

We analyze the strategic interaction of regional and federal governments using a model that includes fiscal externalities in the form of inter-regional capital tax competition and technical externalities in the form of inter-regional spillovers. The federal government aims to correct for these inefficiencies using a transfer system. If the regional governments are policy leaders (such that federal policy is set conditional on regional choices), they will internalize both fiscal and technical externalities but free-ride on the transfer system. Efficiency can be achieved by introducing a second transfer scheme that is independent of regional public production. If the federal government sets its policy first and can commit itself to it, the outcome is efficient only if matching grants are used that are financed outside of the transfer system.