Dr. Tejaswini S, Bhashitha Jain P L, Neil Chris Dsouza, Vibha Bhat
I. INTRODUCTION Cryptocurrency has rapidly transformed from a niche technological curiosity to a mainstream financial asset with millions of participants across the globe, and India is no exception to this trend. By 2022, India was estimated to have one of the largest populations of cryptocurrency holders in the world, with figures ranging from 10 to 20 crore users according to various industry reports. This explosive growth brought an urgent question to the forefront of Indian tax policy: how should gains and income arising from such digital assets be taxed, and how should compliance be ensured in a space that has historically operated in a regulatory grey zone? The term cryptocurrency, or more broadly Virtual Digital Asset (VDA), refers to any information, code, number, or token - other than Indian currency or foreign currency — generated through cryptographic means, providing a digital representation of value exchanged with or without consideration. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and a wide spectrum of altcoins and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) fall under this definition as formally adopted in India's Finance Act 2022. The Finance Act 2022 was a watershed moment in India's regulatory journey with digital assets. It introduced Section 115BBH into the Income Tax Act, 1961, which imposed a flat 30% tax on income arising from the transfer of VDAs, irrespective of the holding period or the taxpayer's income slab. Simultaneously, Section 194S mandated Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) at 1% on payments related to VDA transfers, placing the obligation on crypto exchanges and certain buyers to withhold tax at the point of transaction. These twin provisions created a definitive, if controversial, legal framework for cryptocurrency taxation in India.
"Decentralization" in on-chain finance has become theater: a rhetorical banner that masks the competing forms of centralization actually governing protocol behavior, producing both judicial overreach (invalidated in Van Loon v. Department of the Treasury) and regulatory paralysis (the SEC's withdrawn investigation of Uniswap Labs). Drawing on Oliver Williamson's transactioncost theory of economic governance, this Article proposes a three-layer taxonomy of DeFi as three discrete structural equilibria: Layer 1 (crypto-native, corresponding to Williamson's market), Layer 2 (hybrid, tokenized voting and delegated authority), and Layer 3 (permissionedinstitutional, corresponding to Williamson's hierarchy)-operationalized through a multidimensional coding scheme covering validator concentration, governance entropy, asset whitelisting, user permissioning, dependency profile, and legal-entity exposure. The taxonomy is validated through a triple-event study of OFAC's 2022 sanctions on Tornado Cash, the 2023 district-court affirmance, and the 2025 delisting following the Fifth Circuit's reversal, using layershare time series constructed from DeFiLlama and RWA.xyz data. Activity redistributes across layers predictably under each shock-a pattern that a binary or spectrum framework cannot produce-and the mismatch between regulatory tools and governance forms is not a failure of agency imagination but the predictable cost of asking the wrong question; replacing "is this decentralized?" with "which layer is this?" converts the current enforcement impasse into a tractable matching problem between tool and tier.
On August 15, 2025, Gemini Space Station, Inc. filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) contemplating the offering of up to 16,666,667 shares of Common Stock. After receiving comments from the Commission and the additional filing of amendments to the prospectus, the offering of about 15.2 million shares was priced before market opening on September 12, 2025, at $28 per share. Gemini’s “shares opened at $37.01 . . . at which it raised $425 million,” valuing the Company at $4.4 billion. Gemini’s disclosure documents provide an excellent description of the many new blockchain-enabled Decentralized Finance [DeFi] technological and operational challenges facing participants. These valuable disclosures benefit investors and all those who seek to understand important developments impacting the future stability of global crypto, financial and currency markets. Many readers may find Gemini entities to be of particular interest due to the involvement of executive officers Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss of Facebook/Meta start-up fame. It is Gemini’s actual disclosure language that is the focus of this Article.
Conventional corporate governance frameworks have historically been characterized by centralization and hierarchical structures, marked by a clear separation of ownership and control. While this separation has its merits, it also presents inherent challenges. In pursuit of effective corporate governance, it is imperative to provide shareholders with a diverse array of tools and mechanisms, empowering them to actively monitor and shape corporate decision-making processes. General Meetings are essential in this regard, offering a crucial door for shareholders to exert influence over corporate decision-making. Nonetheless, the traditional model of General Meetings currently encounters various flaws related to transparency, verification, and shareholder identification, which are present in the voting process per se, in proxy voting, and in voting verification. In addition, economic burdens related to corporate monitoring imposed on shareholders are making this mechanism function sub-optimally. Recent developments in blockchain technology have attracted the attention of both legal academics and tech experts as a potential solution to these corporate governance challenges, as blockchain's decentralized, autonomous and tamper-proof transaction records promise enhanced transparency, accuracy, and cost-efficiency within corporate decision making in commercial companies. This dissertation will thus focus on assessing whether and how Portuguese commercial companies can leverage emerging blockchain applications such as Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO) and Blockchain Enabled E-Voting (BEV) to address the specific issues associated with the traditional model of the General Meeting. For this purpose, it will suggest the creation of a hybrid corporate entity/body, based on the implementation of a DAO structure within a legally incorporated company and the use of BEV for corporate voting. It will conclude that, although legally possible and advantageous in theory, the deployment of these technologies in a corporate setting ought to still overcome various legal challenges and structural limitations.
This paper revolves around the evolving policies of India regarding cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology are extensively analyzed in this study with an objective to establish a dynamic and sustainable regime.India currently follows an observational or wait-and-watch approach instead of an active regulatory role, as per a review of government statements, legislative measures1, and infrastructure initiatives. The thesis focuses specifically on the taxation of crypto-assets in the Indian scenario. It examines critically the current tax provisions under the Income Tax Act and the Finance Act, 2022,where cryptocurrencies have been categorized as Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs)2, thus making them subject to special taxation and reporting requirements. The research assesses how these provisions relate to wider regulatory and economic goals, including investor protection, financial stability, and technological advancement. This study suggests a two-character regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies depending on their function and usage. This purpose-based, time-bound categorization aims to offer clarity and adaptability so that policymakerscan modify rules for the changing applications of digital assets.
Feroz Ahmad Ahmad, Prashant Kumar, Gulshan Shrivastava, Med Salim Bouhlel
ON 12 JANUARY 2009 a pseudonymous entity signed a transaction that instructed a distributed network to transfer a small amount of digital currency to Hal Finney, one ofthe key figures of the cypherpunk movement. After a few minutes, the transaction was recorded on a distributed public ledger, permanently updating the balance ofbothparties. This transaction— the first Bitcoin transaction—marked the beginning of a new era of decentralized payment systems, ushering in a variety of financial Services that do not depend on any centralized clearinghouse or other financial middleman. Bitcoin is regarded by many as a powerful technological innovation that could disrupt many sectors, in the realm of finance and beyond. But the underlying technology on which the network operates, the Bitcoin blockchain can do much more than that. Just as the internet did in the early-1990s, blockchain technology carries with it a whole new range of promises concerning how decentralization can support and promote individual freedoms and autonomy. Blockchain proponents believe that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency platforms will revolutionize mechanisms of value exchange in the same way that the internet transformed information sharing, by providing a platform for people to exchange digital resources, in a secure and decentralized manner without the need to rely on any intermediary or trusted authority. But this revolutionary potential also carries with it serious implications for censorship, intellectual property, and the regulated flow of information. A blockchain is a decentralized database of transactions maintained by a distributed network of computers, which all contribute to the verification and the validation of transactions. Once accepted, these transactions are recorded inside a “block” of transactions, which incorporates a reference to previous blocks. This creates a long chain of blocks—a “blockchain”—that stores the history of all transactions in a chronological order. Every block contains information about a particular set of transactions, a reference to the preceding block in the blockchain, and the answer to a complex mathematical puzzle that is used to validate the data associated with that block. A copy of the blockchain is stored on every computer in the network, making it virtually impossible for anyone unilaterally to modify the data stored on this decentralized database: if anyone tries to modify any transaction the fraud will be immediately detected by all other network participants.
Open access
43 source records
Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
Advanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Bitcoins are scarce digital commodities that enable parties to transmit messages over a network that serves as a universal public ledger. Bitcoins fall within the definition of “commodity” under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) such that derivatives contracts that reference bitcoins are subject to regulation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Like other derivatives, Bitcoin derivatives would likely not be subject to the full scope of regulation under the CEA to the extent such derivatives involve physical delivery (as opposed to cash settlement) or are nonfungible and not independently traded. In addition, Bitcoin swaps are currently too illiquid to be subject to mandatory clearing. A growing number of firms are offering Bitcoin derivatives, most of which are for retail traders. In addition to traditional derivatives that reference bitcoins, the Bitcoin (block chain) protocol can potentially enable automated derivatives contracts that securely trade, clear, and settle without the use of trusted intermediaries. The CFTC should consider an exemption for block chain derivatives that meet its policy objectives as a result of the rules that the underlying code applies to the transactions.