Crypto-assets: Economic Nature, Classification and Regulation of Turnover

Abstract

This article is devoted to the study of the economic nature of cryptoassets, the development of their original classification, and the determination of the main directions of regulation of their turnover. These topics are the objects of modern discourse of international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank (MB), the Group of 7 (G7), the Group of 20 (G20), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), and the Financial Stability Board (FSB). The study reviews the modern discourse of international organizations regarding cryptoassets, presents an interpretation of cryptoassets as a new class of financial assets, justifies the classification of cryptoassets, and identifies the main types and economic characteristics of digital assets. The study was conducted using a system-functional and system-structural method. As a result of this study, it is concluded that the activities of international organizations are focused on developing recommendations and principles for regulating transactions with cryptocurrencies and global stablecoins, prudential supervision of their issuers, unifying approaches to taxation, and countering illegal transactions using cryptoassets. The study concluded that crypto-assets are private digital assets that are recorded digitally in a distributed ledger and can be used as a means of exchange and/or investment tool and/or means of access to goods and services of issuer. According to the authorʼs classification crypto-assets are divided into two main types: virtual currencies and digital tokens. Virtual currencies are a means of exchange or payment as well as a means of saving. The two main subtypes of virtual currencies are cryptocurrencies and stablecoins. Digital tokens are issued for specific investment functions or consumer purposes. Tokens can be divided into investment tokens and utility tokens. The study also finds that there is no international regulation of cryptoassets turnover. National regulation is significantly differentiated between countries due to the lack of common interpretation and classification of cryptoassets and different assessments of economic risks of their turnover for national financial systems. In most developed countries: the USA, EU countries, UK, Switzerland, etc. – a flexible approach to regulating various types of cryptoassets and their issuers prevails. In emerging market countries such as China, Turkey, and Russia, regulation is more stringent and characterized by the widespread use of prohibitive measures. The main problem of the legal regulation of cryptoassets in Russia is its fragmentation and the predominance of a prohibitive bias. Modern regime of regulation of cryptoassets in Russia is weakly related to their economic nature and is not equivalent to the risks of turnover of cryptoassets.