{"title":"加密货币,DLT和加密资产-通往欧洲监管认可的道路","authors":"Agata Ferreira, Philipp G. Sandner, Thomas Dünser","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3891401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With Bitcoin, a new type of technology was born in 2008 when Satoshi Nakamoto released the white paper for a new cash payment system (Nakamoto 2008), which effectively invented blockchain technology. By 2015 the technology already gained a lot of interest among startups, financial institutions, and industrial enterprises. Besides Bitcoin, many other crypto assets emerged with various design approaches such as stablecoins, utility tokens, security tokens, decentralized finance (DeFi), and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Many of these tokens have an identifiable issuer to whom existing regulatory frameworks could potentially apply. However, other types of assets that are based on fully decentralized protocols are governed entirely by technology and either do not have an issuer (like in the case of Bitcoin) or the initiators designed the technology in an ‘issuerless’ way - and have no relation to any ‘real-world asset’. It is the latter class of assets that are truly new and that have recently attracted increasing attention from regulatory authorities, international organizations, standard-setting bodies, and the like. On the part of regulators and policymakers, interest in and the activity surrounding cryptocurrencies, crypto assets, and stablecoins peaked in 2019 so far. Of the several key regulators and policymakers at the supra-national level, nearly all issued a report, warning, study, or recommendations on some aspect of blockchain technology in financial markets. This spike in interest is related to the increasing business activity in this area and growing interest of investors and consumers. The exponential rise in the price of Bitcoin also attracted the interest of a wider audience (Edwards et al. 2019). The increasing business activity always preceded the actions of regulators and policymakers, thus rendering the activities of the latter a ‘reaction’ to the market developments. According to the Financial Stability Board (FSB), crypto assets reached an estimated total market capitalization of $830 billion on January 8, 2018, before falling sharply in subsequent months (Financial Stability Board 2018). While the global value of the crypto assets market is still relatively small compared to the entire financial system, its absolute value and daily transaction volume are substantial, and its rapid development continues, gaining increasing market acceptance (Basel Committee on Banking Supervision 2019). This paper seeks to analyze regulators’ and policymakers’ efforts to understand and develop an adequate regulatory approach to crypto assets, tokens, and the distributed ledger technology (DLT) in general. After several years of innovation in the space of decentralized technologies, several principles became clear on how to treat both issuer-based tokens and issuerless tokens. However, when regulators and policymakers tried at first to understand these new decentralized technologies and the assets they enable, it was not clear to them from the beginning how to treat assets based on this new technology. Only recently has it been possible to identify best regulatory practices and to disentangle good approaches to regulation from the ‘noise’ of warnings, recommendations, or studies. Liechtenstein has adopted a remarkable perspective on and vision for crypto assets and tokens by creating a set of abstract definitions and models and applying them in their bespoke regulatory approach. The Liechtenstein Token Act has therefore inspired other policymakers and subsequent regulatory actions. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. First, we seek to present the history of ‘opinions’' on behalf of regulatory bodies and policymakers over the last years. These opinions often lacked clear definitions, understanding, and models but also included valuable contributions. In the next section, we present key definitions and models of the Liechtenstein Token Act and describe how these have been included in Liechtenstein’s national framework to build a solid basis for the emerging token economy. Thereafter, we describe how the European Union’s approach to regulate crypto assets - the Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation (MiCA) - tackles crypto assets and tokens, and how it relates to the Liechtenstein Token Act. In the subsequent section, we review a variety of regulatory approaches and strategies. Finally, we offer concluding remarks.","PeriodicalId":233958,"journal":{"name":"European Finance eJournal","volume":"100 3-4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cryptocurrencies, DLT and Crypto Assets – the Road to Regulatory Recognition in Europe\",\"authors\":\"Agata Ferreira, Philipp G. Sandner, Thomas Dünser\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3891401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With Bitcoin, a new type of technology was born in 2008 when Satoshi Nakamoto released the white paper for a new cash payment system (Nakamoto 2008), which effectively invented blockchain technology. By 2015 the technology already gained a lot of interest among startups, financial institutions, and industrial enterprises. Besides Bitcoin, many other crypto assets emerged with various design approaches such as stablecoins, utility tokens, security tokens, decentralized finance (DeFi), and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Many of these tokens have an identifiable issuer to whom existing regulatory frameworks could potentially apply. However, other types of assets that are based on fully decentralized protocols are governed entirely by technology and either do not have an issuer (like in the case of Bitcoin) or the initiators designed the technology in an ‘issuerless’ way - and have no relation to any ‘real-world asset’. It is the latter class of assets that are truly new and that have recently attracted increasing attention from regulatory authorities, international organizations, standard-setting bodies, and the like. On the part of regulators and policymakers, interest in and the activity surrounding cryptocurrencies, crypto assets, and stablecoins peaked in 2019 so far. Of the several key regulators and policymakers at the supra-national level, nearly all issued a report, warning, study, or recommendations on some aspect of blockchain technology in financial markets. This spike in interest is related to the increasing business activity in this area and growing interest of investors and consumers. The exponential rise in the price of Bitcoin also attracted the interest of a wider audience (Edwards et al. 2019). The increasing business activity always preceded the actions of regulators and policymakers, thus rendering the activities of the latter a ‘reaction’ to the market developments. According to the Financial Stability Board (FSB), crypto assets reached an estimated total market capitalization of $830 billion on January 8, 2018, before falling sharply in subsequent months (Financial Stability Board 2018). While the global value of the crypto assets market is still relatively small compared to the entire financial system, its absolute value and daily transaction volume are substantial, and its rapid development continues, gaining increasing market acceptance (Basel Committee on Banking Supervision 2019). This paper seeks to analyze regulators’ and policymakers’ efforts to understand and develop an adequate regulatory approach to crypto assets, tokens, and the distributed ledger technology (DLT) in general. After several years of innovation in the space of decentralized technologies, several principles became clear on how to treat both issuer-based tokens and issuerless tokens. However, when regulators and policymakers tried at first to understand these new decentralized technologies and the assets they enable, it was not clear to them from the beginning how to treat assets based on this new technology. Only recently has it been possible to identify best regulatory practices and to disentangle good approaches to regulation from the ‘noise’ of warnings, recommendations, or studies. Liechtenstein has adopted a remarkable perspective on and vision for crypto assets and tokens by creating a set of abstract definitions and models and applying them in their bespoke regulatory approach. The Liechtenstein Token Act has therefore inspired other policymakers and subsequent regulatory actions. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. First, we seek to present the history of ‘opinions’' on behalf of regulatory bodies and policymakers over the last years. These opinions often lacked clear definitions, understanding, and models but also included valuable contributions. In the next section, we present key definitions and models of the Liechtenstein Token Act and describe how these have been included in Liechtenstein’s national framework to build a solid basis for the emerging token economy. Thereafter, we describe how the European Union’s approach to regulate crypto assets - the Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation (MiCA) - tackles crypto assets and tokens, and how it relates to the Liechtenstein Token Act. In the subsequent section, we review a variety of regulatory approaches and strategies. Finally, we offer concluding remarks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":233958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Finance eJournal\",\"volume\":\"100 3-4\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Finance eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3891401\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Finance eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3891401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
2008年,中本聪发布了一种新的现金支付系统(Nakamoto 2008)白皮书,有效地发明了区块链技术,比特币诞生了一种新型技术。到2015年,这项技术已经引起了初创公司、金融机构和工业企业的极大兴趣。除了比特币之外,许多其他加密资产也以各种设计方法出现,如稳定币、实用代币、安全代币、去中心化金融(DeFi)和不可替代代币(nft)。其中许多代币都有一个可识别的发行人,现有的监管框架可能适用于该发行人。然而,基于完全去中心化协议的其他类型的资产完全由技术控制,要么没有发行人(如比特币),要么发起者以“无发行人”的方式设计技术——与任何“现实世界的资产”都没有关系。后一类资产才是真正的新资产,最近吸引了监管机构、国际组织、标准制定机构等越来越多的关注。到目前为止,监管机构和政策制定者对加密货币、加密资产和稳定币的兴趣和活动在2019年达到顶峰。在超国家层面的几个关键监管机构和政策制定者中,几乎所有人都就区块链技术在金融市场的某些方面发布了报告、警告、研究或建议。这种兴趣的激增与该地区日益增加的商业活动以及投资者和消费者日益增长的兴趣有关。比特币价格的指数级上涨也吸引了更广泛受众的兴趣(Edwards et al. 2019)。不断增加的商业活动总是先于监管机构和政策制定者的行动,从而使后者的活动成为对市场发展的“反应”。根据金融稳定委员会(FSB)的数据,加密资产在2018年1月8日达到了估计的8300亿美元的总市值,然后在随后的几个月急剧下降(金融稳定委员会2018)。虽然加密资产市场的全球价值与整个金融体系相比仍然相对较小,但其绝对价值和每日交易量相当可观,并且其快速发展仍在继续,获得越来越多的市场接受度(巴塞尔银行监管委员会2019)。本文旨在分析监管机构和政策制定者在理解和制定加密资产、代币和分布式账本技术(DLT)的适当监管方法方面所做的努力。经过几年在去中心化技术领域的创新,关于如何对待基于发行者的代币和无发行者的代币,一些原则变得清晰起来。然而,当监管机构和政策制定者最初试图理解这些新的去中心化技术及其所支持的资产时,他们从一开始就不清楚如何对待基于这种新技术的资产。直到最近才有可能确定最佳监管实践,并将良好的监管方法从警告、建议或研究的“噪音”中分离出来。列支敦士登通过创建一套抽象定义和模型,并将其应用于定制的监管方法,对加密资产和代币采取了非凡的视角和愿景。因此,列支敦士登代币法案激励了其他政策制定者和随后的监管行动。本文的其余部分结构如下。首先,我们试图代表监管机构和政策制定者展示过去几年的“意见”历史。这些观点往往缺乏明确的定义、理解和模型,但也包括有价值的贡献。在下一节中,我们将介绍列支敦士登代币法案的关键定义和模型,并描述如何将这些定义和模型纳入列支敦士登的国家框架,为新兴的代币经济奠定坚实的基础。此后,我们描述了欧盟监管加密资产的方法-加密资产监管市场(MiCA) -如何处理加密资产和代币,以及它与列支敦士登代币法案的关系。在接下来的章节中,我们将回顾各种监管方法和策略。最后是结束语。
Cryptocurrencies, DLT and Crypto Assets – the Road to Regulatory Recognition in Europe
With Bitcoin, a new type of technology was born in 2008 when Satoshi Nakamoto released the white paper for a new cash payment system (Nakamoto 2008), which effectively invented blockchain technology. By 2015 the technology already gained a lot of interest among startups, financial institutions, and industrial enterprises. Besides Bitcoin, many other crypto assets emerged with various design approaches such as stablecoins, utility tokens, security tokens, decentralized finance (DeFi), and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Many of these tokens have an identifiable issuer to whom existing regulatory frameworks could potentially apply. However, other types of assets that are based on fully decentralized protocols are governed entirely by technology and either do not have an issuer (like in the case of Bitcoin) or the initiators designed the technology in an ‘issuerless’ way - and have no relation to any ‘real-world asset’. It is the latter class of assets that are truly new and that have recently attracted increasing attention from regulatory authorities, international organizations, standard-setting bodies, and the like. On the part of regulators and policymakers, interest in and the activity surrounding cryptocurrencies, crypto assets, and stablecoins peaked in 2019 so far. Of the several key regulators and policymakers at the supra-national level, nearly all issued a report, warning, study, or recommendations on some aspect of blockchain technology in financial markets. This spike in interest is related to the increasing business activity in this area and growing interest of investors and consumers. The exponential rise in the price of Bitcoin also attracted the interest of a wider audience (Edwards et al. 2019). The increasing business activity always preceded the actions of regulators and policymakers, thus rendering the activities of the latter a ‘reaction’ to the market developments. According to the Financial Stability Board (FSB), crypto assets reached an estimated total market capitalization of $830 billion on January 8, 2018, before falling sharply in subsequent months (Financial Stability Board 2018). While the global value of the crypto assets market is still relatively small compared to the entire financial system, its absolute value and daily transaction volume are substantial, and its rapid development continues, gaining increasing market acceptance (Basel Committee on Banking Supervision 2019). This paper seeks to analyze regulators’ and policymakers’ efforts to understand and develop an adequate regulatory approach to crypto assets, tokens, and the distributed ledger technology (DLT) in general. After several years of innovation in the space of decentralized technologies, several principles became clear on how to treat both issuer-based tokens and issuerless tokens. However, when regulators and policymakers tried at first to understand these new decentralized technologies and the assets they enable, it was not clear to them from the beginning how to treat assets based on this new technology. Only recently has it been possible to identify best regulatory practices and to disentangle good approaches to regulation from the ‘noise’ of warnings, recommendations, or studies. Liechtenstein has adopted a remarkable perspective on and vision for crypto assets and tokens by creating a set of abstract definitions and models and applying them in their bespoke regulatory approach. The Liechtenstein Token Act has therefore inspired other policymakers and subsequent regulatory actions. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. First, we seek to present the history of ‘opinions’' on behalf of regulatory bodies and policymakers over the last years. These opinions often lacked clear definitions, understanding, and models but also included valuable contributions. In the next section, we present key definitions and models of the Liechtenstein Token Act and describe how these have been included in Liechtenstein’s national framework to build a solid basis for the emerging token economy. Thereafter, we describe how the European Union’s approach to regulate crypto assets - the Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation (MiCA) - tackles crypto assets and tokens, and how it relates to the Liechtenstein Token Act. In the subsequent section, we review a variety of regulatory approaches and strategies. Finally, we offer concluding remarks.