BITCOIN AS A COMPONENT OF THE MONETARY SYSTEM: SOCIAL INTEGRATION, TECHNOLOGICAL DIFFUSION AND SOCIO-POLITICAL TRANSFORMATIONSThe aim of this article is a multifaceted analysis of Bitcoin as a component of the contemporary monetary system, identifying the processes of its socialization, technological diffusion, and the consequences of changes in the socio-political space. The author successively presents indicators of Bitcoin’s social and economic integration and the development of blockchain as a tool transforming trust, legitimization, and the structure of value circulation. Particular emphasis is placed on analyzing the process of blockchain technology diffusion and the social mechanisms of legitimizing new forms of value. The article concludes with the thesis that Bitcoin, transcending its financial function, has become a component of a broader civilizational shift – a harbinger of the transformation of the model of money, ownership, and sovereignty in the era of Web 3.0.
In this study, we propose a structured valuation framework for non-fungible tokens (NFTs), a distinct class of digital assets whose pricing mechanisms remain insufficiently understood. Based on previous empirical studies and illustrative case analyses of three major NFT collections, we synthesize insights from non-cash-flow asset theory, market microstructure, and behavioral finance to construct a four-layer valuation framework consisting of the Asset, Market, Technology, and Ecosystem layers. We identify three NFT-specific mechanisms—verified digital scarcity, pseudonymous signaling, and on-chain herding—that modify or extend traditional valuation paradigms. Empirical evidence from the literature suggests that rarity-driven asset features and social-influence dynamics are dominant price determinants, while wash trading, fragmented liquidity, and platform incentive structures generate persistent distortions in price discovery. Case analyses of CryptoPunks, Bored Ape Yacht Club, and Pudgy Penguins demonstrate how differing risk exposures across the four layers translate into distinct valuation trajectories. With this framework, we obtain a basis for improved risk assessment, regulatory oversight, and business model design in NFT markets.
The article examines the nature and multidimensional classification of digital financial assets (DFAs) as an emerging element of the modern financial system. It demonstrates that the rapid expansion of tokenisation has created a new class of instruments that combine the legal features of conventional financial rights with the technological advantages of distributed ledgers. Internationally, DFAs represent tokenised claims on cash flows, equity, debt, or other assets recorded in distributed or hybrid registers. In Russia, DFAs operate within permissioned information systems (OIS) and are mainly used for short-term debt issuance serving corporate and banking funding needs. The purpose of the research is to provide a holistic understanding of DFAs and to propose a multi-axis classification based on their economic function, underlying asset, holder’s rights, and circulation regime. The study employs analytical and comparative-legal methods, referencing international standards (MiCA, FATF) and industry datasets (DeFiLlama, RWA.xyz) together with official statistics of the Bank of Russia (ORFR). The findings refine the economic and legal definition of DFAs and highlight global and national market trends. It is concluded that the proposed classification enhances data comparability and provides a methodological framework for risk and performance analysis of DFAs. The results may serve as a foundation for the development of regulatory calibration and for aligning Russian market practices with international approaches.
The paper systematizes current regulatory and legal approaches across various jurisdictions, as well as theoretical and methodological recommendations proposed by scholars regarding the identification of different types of digital assets. It substantiates the hierarchical relationship among the concepts of "digital assets", "virtual assets" and "crypto-assets", which describe forms of digital value. The procedure for recognizing digital assets on the balance sheet is clarified. A three-tier classification of digital assets is proposed based on the following criteria: the mode of existence and circulation of digital value, the use of distributed ledger technology, and the mechanism for ensuring value stability. The study develops a sequence for accounting recognition of a digital asset as an intangible asset, a commodity, or a financial instrument, in compliance with accounting standards. It also justifies the classification of certain types of digital assets functionally similar to digital securities, which are recognized as financial instruments.
Since the launch of Bitcoin in 2008, social scientists have sought to clarify the relationship between cryptocurrency and money. A dominant conclusion – particularly among approaches employing a commodity theory of money – has been that cryptocurrency is not money but an instrument of speculation whose activities are confined to circulation. This paper deepens the analysis of cryptocurrency and money by drawing on shifts in Marxist theory from the 1970s in the work of Diane Elson and Suzanne de Brunhoff. These developments enable a conceptualisation of money in capitalism not simply as the sum of its functions, but as taking on a particular social form. Building upon this, I develop a novel conceptualisation of cryptocurrency as ‘fictitious money’, a social form anchored in the general equivalent that facilitates the circulation and valorisation of new digital assets in the total circuit of money capital. Situating cryptocurrency in a value-form approach attendant to the unities of the functions of money and of production and circulation reveals productive entanglements and trajectories for it that must be taken seriously within IPE.
In today’s world the way people handle money and carry transactions is changing. For centuries, people were dependent on physical coins and paper notes issued by governments. Now, we are moving towards digital banking, using apps and various platforms. But a new innovation called cryptocurrency is now gaining importance. It is promising a massive change in the global financial system.In simple words, cryptocurrency is a form of digital money. It does not exist as physical coins or bills but it relies entirely on the internet. it uses "cryptography" (a way of using complex math to keep information secret and secure) and "blockchain" (a digital record-book that everyone can see but no one can easily change). The money in your bank account is controlled by a central authority like a bank or a government, many cryptocurrencies are "decentralized." This means they are run by a global network of computers instead of one single boss.Because more people are shopping online and sending money to other countries, everyone is looking for a faster, cheaper, and safer way to pay.
The Finance Ministry introduced a flat 30% tax on any income generated from cryptocurrencies in 2022. However, there are multiple legal challenges which have been created due to the imposition of such a tax including lack of differentiation on the basis of the person holding the cryptocurrency, lack of differentiation on the basis of the time for which a cryptocurrency was held, legal ambiguity regarding taxation of mining of cryptocurrencies and lack of provisions for offsetting losses or carry forwarding losses to subsequent assessment year. There is further a regulatory lacuna in enforcement of such taxes imposed on cryptocurrency transactions. This paper delves into highlighting the legal challenges related to imposition of taxes on cryptocurrencies and further provides suggestions to tackle these challenges. It further attempts to suggest a feasible model to ensure effective enforcement of taxation of cryptocurrencies.
The article discusses the controversial issues of the legal nature of self-executing transactions. It is proved that a smart contract is an algorithm that automates the execution of legally signifi cant and actual actions, subject to constant monitoring in accordance with the agreement of the parties and the regulatory requirements embedded in the program code. The use of digital tools for recording expressions of will, including software algorithms that create convincing evidence of the validity of an agreement, is being investigated. The authors conclude that a smart contract cannot be considered an independent form of contract, as a special algorithm, it helps automate the fulfillment of obligations under constant control and in strict accordance with the terms of the agreement embedded in the program code.
The growth of digital assets such as cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), stablecoins, and decentralized finance (DeFi) has changed the global financial system. These assets operate on blockchain technology and allow users to transfer value without traditional intermediaries such as banks. While this innovation has created new economic opportunities, it has also created challenges for existing tax laws. Traditional tax systems were designed for physical assets and transactions that occur within clear geographical boundaries. However, digital assets are decentralized, borderless, and often pseudonymous, which makes it difficult for governments to classify, track, and tax them effectively. This paper studies how different countries tax digital assets through a comparative legal analysis of six jurisdictions: the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, India, Japan, and Singapore. It examines how each jurisdiction classifies digital assets and how taxes such as income tax, capital gains tax, and indirect taxes are applied to digital asset transactions. The analysis shows that countries follow different approaches. Some countries treat cryptocurrencies as property and apply capital gains tax, while others focus on the economic use of the asset. India has introduced a strict tax regime with a flat tax rate and transaction-level withholding requirements. The study identifies key issues in the current global system, including inconsistent classification of digital assets, difficulties in valuation and record-keeping, regulatory arbitrage, and enforcement challenges. To address these issues, the paper suggests the need for international cooperation, clearer legal definitions, and technology-neutral tax policies. A coordinated global framework can improve compliance while supporting innovation in the digital economy. Keywords: 1. Digital Assets 2. Crypto-Currency Taxation 3. Blockchain Regulation 4.Comparative-Tax Law 5. Global Tax Policy
The rapid digitalization of wealth in the form of cryptocurrency and virtual assets has dramatically transformed the results of the matrimonial conflicts and alimony payments. With the gr owing adoption of decentralized and pseudonymous digital assets as constituents of individual financial portfolios, family courts face new issues in their classification, disclosure, valuation, and enforcement. The legal issues discussed in this paper include the legal complications of cryptocurrency as marital property, the risk of concealing assets through blockchain anonymity, and challenges of valuation, associated with the excessive price volatility, tax exposure, enforcement challenges linked to the control of private keys, and jurisdictional challenges across borders. It also examines new legal and forensic systems and contractual protection mechanisms that are intended to manage these issues. The paper claims that although the classical tenets of equitable allocation and full disclosure are still underpinning, the concept of clarity in the law and judicial flexibility is needed to provide equal justice, openness, and enforceability of the divorce process concerning cryptocurrency and virtual possessions.
The concept of alternative finance is explored from a narrow and broad perspective. The latter defines it as segments of "gray" financial markets, outside the scope of regulation and traditional finance. "Dark" liquidity pools—trading transactions of major players in securities and currencies, operating anonymously, opaquely, and hidden from the public in the over-the-counter space through automated digital trading platforms—are presented as one element of the alternative finance system. The advantages and disadvantages of "dark" pools for financial market participants and exchange infrastructure are discussed. The problem of liquidity fragmentation caused by "dark" pools is highlighted, a problem inherent in decentralized finance, where liquidity is not concentrated on a single platform or trading system, but distributed among many. Emphasis is placed on the insufficient or complete lack of oversight and regulation of this alternative financial market segment. Examples of legislative and regulatory acts in a number of countries are provided.
The digitalisation is one of the most important aspect in the twenty-first century, and thus huge amount of personal data is being accumulated about each person day-by-day. It is still a debate in many countries who we could view these datasets after the passing of the person and whether the heirs should have the right to access and maintain the dignity, memory of the deceased. One of the element of the so-called ’digital inheritance’ would be cryptocurrency which contains an enormous economic potential. This study explores and highlights the reality, the possibility of the inheritance of cryptocurrency, also the wallets, especially the online platform accounts, which these assets are stored in, in a European context through the already existing cases in the world.
This paper examines the most common smart contracts security issues included in the OWASP Smart Contract Top 10. The purpose of the study is to synthesize a set of recommendations that can help eliminate these key weaknesses or mitigate associated risks. The relevance of this research stems from the rapid development of Web3 technologies, particularly the expanding use of smart contracts. According to various estimates, this market is expected to grow at a CAGR of approximately 25% in the medium term. Furthermore, another factor contributing to the relevance of this topic in Russia is the lack of comprehensive regulation for this class of instruments, especially concerning security requirements and compliance verification. This paper proposes a smart contracts lifecycle model best suited to the research context, describing each stage with particular attention to its impact on security. Existing security weaknesses classifiers specific to smart contracts are identified, with a detailed review of the ten most common vulnerability classes. Based on this review, recommendations are provided to prevent these vulnerabilities or mitigate their associated risks. The findings can be applied by both smart contract developers and security auditors. Additionally, the presented materials contribute to the development of a methodological framework for addressing regulatory issues in the industry.
Abstract The 21st century digital transformation and rapid development of blockchain technology create fundamentally new challenges for legal regulation. The increasing popularity and economic significance of cryptocurrency as a digital asset makes its legal qualification and, consequently, regulation within the framework of inheritance law relevant. The global cryptocurrency market capitalization already reaches trillions of dollars, and millions of individuals and legal entities use crypto assets as an investment instrument, payment method, and value storage mechanism. From this reality, critical legal questions arise about inheritance in cases of cryptocurrency holders’ death. The complexity of the problem is determined by the unique characteristics of cryptocurrency: decentralized nature, cryptographic protection, private key system, and high degree of anonymity create specific difficulties for heirs’ access to and identification of these assets. This research analyzes the current state of cryptocurrency inheritance legal regulation using comparative legal methods, identifies existing problems, and develops recommendations for improving legal regulation based on international experience from the USA, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and Australia.
The development of blockchain technology has introduced smart contracts as a new form of automated commercial agreement. Smart contracts are self-executing programs that perform contractual obligations when predetermined conditions are met, reducing the need for intermediaries and increasing efficiency in commercial transactions. Their growing use raises important legal questions regarding their validity and enforceability under existing legal systems, particularly under U.S. commercial law. This article examines the legal nature and enforceability of smart contracts within the framework of United States commercial law. It analyzes whether smart contracts satisfy the essential elements of contract formation, including offer, acceptance, consideration, and mutual assent. The article also explores the applicability of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and its role in recognizing electronic and automated agreements. The article concludes that smart contracts can be legally enforceable under U.S. commercial law if they meet traditional contract requirements. Existing legal principles are flexible enough to accommodate smart contracts, making them a reliable tool for modern digital commerce.
The article is devoted to the study of mechanisms for managing reputational risks in decentralized autonomous organizations (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations – DAO) operating on the basis of blockchain technologies. The relevance of the research is determined by the rapid development of decentralized digital ecosystems, the spread of algorithmic governance models, and the need to ensure trust among participants in an environment where traditional institutional mechanisms of centralized control are absent. Under such conditions, the issue of reputational risk management becomes particularly important, as the level of trust directly affects the stability and sustainability of decentralized organizations. The aim of the study is to identify and substantiate mechanisms for managing reputational risks in decentralized autonomous organizations based on blockchain technologies, taking into account the specific features of their functioning and the principles of decentralized governance. The methodological basis of the research includes methods of systemic analysis, institutional approach, comparative analysis, and modeling. To identify the key factors shaping reputational risks, the study employs the analysis of contemporary scientific publications, generalization of DAO project practices, and examination of digital governance tools within blockchain ecosystems. As a result of the study, the main sources of reputational risks in decentralized autonomous organizations were systematized, including information asymmetry among participants, insufficient transparency of decision-making procedures, technical vulnerabilities of smart contracts, and potential manipulation of voting mechanisms. The key mechanisms for managing reputational risks in the DAO environment were generalized, including participant reputation evaluation systems, transparent decentralized voting mechanisms, smart contract auditing, and moderation tools for digital communities. Based on the conducted analysis, a conceptual model for managing reputational risks in DAO was developed, which provides for the integration of blockchain transparency tools, collective control mechanisms, and procedures for evaluating the reputational behavior of participants in digital ecosystems. The scientific novelty of the study lies in substantiating a conceptual approach to reputational risk management in decentralized autonomous organizations, which combines the capabilities of blockchain infrastructure with self-regulation mechanisms of decentralized digital communities. The practical significance of the obtained results lies in the possibility of their application by developers of DAO projects, blockchain platforms, and digital ecosystems for the development of reputational risk management systems, increasing the level of trust among participants, and ensuring the stable functioning of decentralized organizations.
The article examines digital asset inheritance in Web3 ecosystems, where the economic value of cryptocurrencies, NFTs, tokenised assets, cloud-stored intellectual property and high-value platform accounts is not supported by sufficiently reliable legal and technical mechanisms for intergenerational transfer. The relevance of the topic is determined by the fact that traditional inheritance law is oriented mainly toward tangible objects or documented property rights, whereas blockchain-native assets depend on private keys, platform accounts are restricted by terms of service, and the cross-border nature of digital portfolios complicates the determination of applicable law. The purpose of the study is to develop an integrated conceptual model of the Self-Sovereign Digital Heritage System (SSDHS), combining self-sovereign identity, decentralised identifiers, verifiable credentials, digital safes, smart-contract execution of inheritance conditions and regulatory compliance. The methodological basis includes comparative legal analysis, system analysis, functional modelling, conceptual design and regulatory impact assessment. The article substantiates a six-layer SSDHS architecture consisting of the identity layer, digital asset inventory layer, secure storage layer, blockchain layer, inheritance execution layer and legal compliance layer. It is shown that SSI addresses the problem of cryptographic heir authentication, whereas the digital safe ensures secure preservation of private keys, inheritance instructions, DID material and the digital testament. A comparative analysis of the regulatory frameworks of the United States, the European Union and Ukraine is conducted, including fiduciary access to digital assets, electronic wills, digital identity, crypto-asset markets, personal data protection, virtual assets and electronic identification. The study substantiates that SSDHS can serve as a legal-technological reference model for reducing the risk of digital asset loss caused by inaccessible private keys, improving heir identification reliability, reducing dependence on centralised intermediaries and preparing future legislative solutions for digital heritage.
Abstract This article examines the creation, perfection, and enforcement of security interests in digital assets—such as cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens, and tokenized securities—under Korean law, and compares Korea’s legal framework with those of other major jurisdictions. Despite South Korea’s prominence as a cryptocurrency market and technological hub, existing Korean statutes do not expressly recognize digital assets as objects of property rights or collateral. Consequently, market participants must rely on legal analogies, such as pledging contractual claims against custodians or transferring title outright, creating significant uncertainty. This article undertakes a doctrinal analysis of Korean law, judicial precedents (most notably, the 2018 Korean Supreme Court ruling confirming that digital assets have property-like economic value), and scholarly sources. It also surveys comparative legal developments, including the USA’s creation of ‘controllable electronic records’ under its Uniform Commercial Code amendments, Japan’s workaround of pledging claims against custodians, the United Kingdom’s Property (Digital Assets etc) Act 2025, which confirms crypto-tokens as a new form of personal property, Germany’s Electronic Securities Act for dematerialized securities, and Switzerland’s Distributed Ledger Technology Act for ledger-based rights. In each jurisdiction, legislators and courts increasingly acknowledge ‘control’ of digital assets—a framework akin to possession of tangible property—as the functional basis for perfecting and prioritizing security interests (Unidroit Principles on Digital Assets and Private Law). This article concludes by proposing legislative reforms for South Korea, including: (i) explicit recognition of digital assets as property; (ii) adopting ‘control’ as a method of perfection with corresponding priority rules; (iii) expanding the Movables Security registry to accommodate digital assets; and (iv) clarifying enforcement procedures, particularly in insolvency contexts. These steps would harmonise South Korea’s secured transactions framework with global best practices, reduce legal uncertainty, and enhance the accessibility of credit secured by digital assets in a rapidly evolving financial environment.
This paper examines the dynamic spillovers between the VIX stock sentiment index, the Cryptocurrency Fear & Greed Index, and the returns of leading high-tech firms from 2018 through 2024. We quantify the direction and magnitude of spillovers between these variables by applying the Quantile Vector Autoregression (Q-VAR) model across lower, middle, and upper quantiles. Results indicate a stronger connection between technology firms and the VIX, with tech stocks being more influenced by cryptocurrency fear during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings highlight the growing influence of technology firms upon financial markets, particularly during periods of heightened uncertainty in traditional markets and increased volatility in digital assets, reflecting their continually growing role in the evolving digital financial landscape. • Examines the influence of cryptocurrency fear on major tech firms from 2018 to 2024. • Applies Quantile-VAR model to analyse sentiment-driven volatility spillovers. • Highlights stronger spillovers from traditional stock fear than cryptocurrency fear. • Reveals tech stocks’ resilience during periods of high market and crypto volatility. • Identifies technology firms as key intermediaries in evolving digital financial markets.
This chapter examines the applicability of international investment law to emerging digital asset classes such as data packages, cryptocurrencies, and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). These assets, now mainstream investments, raise unique issues in terms of their protection under investment treaties. The chapter explores whether digital assets qualify as ’investments’ under traditional treaty definitions, and the application of the common protections offered under investment treaties to such assets. It assesses digital assets against criteria often applied by investment treaty tribunals to argue that digital assets can broadly be classified as investments. The chapter also analyses the key questions arising from the application of the fair and equitable treatment (FET) standard and protection against expropriation to digital assets, especially given the current relative lack of regulation in this area. Valuation complexities, including market volatility and the absence of benchmarks, are addressed, emphasising the need for close consideration of these issues in the context of investment treaty claims. Lastly, the chapter addresses structuring investments via corporate vehicles to enhance treaty protections and mitigate risks. It concludes that, while investment law can accommodate digital assets, careful structuring and awareness of treaty terms are vital for investor protection within an uncertain and ever-evolving regulatory environment.
The article examines digital payment tokens circulating in decentralized finance. The aim of the study is to de-velop a typology of digital payment tokens for their subsequent adaptation to the cross-border payment infra-structure as a specific payment token type that meets the necessary economic characteristics. The objectives of the study include an overview of the key innovations that led to the emergence and spread of decentralized finance, an analysis of the capabilities and advantages of smart contracts for creating digital tokens, a systema-tization of approaches to the regulatory framework for unsecured cryptocurrencies and stablecoins, and the selection of the optimal type of digital payment token for use in a cross-border payment infrastructure based on distributed ledger technology. The results of the study include a developed typology of digital payment tokens based on their suitability for use in a cross-border payment system. The study concludes that, in order to elimi-nate the fragmentation of national legislation that hinders the use of digital payment tokens in cross-border payment infrastructure, it is advisable for national regulators in countries participating in the unified cross-border payment space to focus their attention on the development and implementation of harmonized regula-tion of stablecoins.
Crypto currency has emerged as a transformative innovation in the global financial ecosystem, offering decentralized, borderless, and technology-driven alternatives to traditional monetary systems. Built on block chain technology, crypto currencies provide opportunities such as faster cross-border transactions, reduced transaction costs, enhanced financial inclusion, and new investment avenues. They also promote transparency and security through distributed ledger systems. However, alongside these benefits, crypto currencies pose significant regulatory and legal challenges. Issues such as price volatility, lack of investor protection, cyber security risks, money laundering, tax evasion, and the absence of a unified global regulatory framework create uncertainty for governments and financial institutions. Policymakers across countries face difficulties in balancing innovation with financial stability and consumer protection. This study explores both the opportunities presented by crypto currency adoption and the major regulatory challenges that hinder its integration into the mainstream financial system. The paper highlights the need for coordinated international regulations, technological safeguards, and policy measures to ensure sustainable and secure growth of the crypto currency market