比特币竞价:中国同北约国家的分歧

原文始发于微信公众号(瑞中法协):比特币竞价:中国同北约国家的分歧




最近,美国股市投资者对Coinbase–一家主要的加密货币交易所兴趣盎然–在纳斯达克首次亮相时的估值为759亿美元,这距离比特币的诞生已然过去了大约12年。你不禁要问,对这种平台的所有兴趣和狂热来自哪里?难道市场上的投机者看到了我们其他人没有看到的加密货币的未来?货币从根本上存在,因为它们促进了商品和服务的购买。但 “虚拟货币 “意味着两个额外的概念:其持有者的匿名性和货币自始至终的自由流通的能力,无论其来源是合法还是非法。但问题是,金融市场似乎并不真正介意这些货币被贴上 “虚拟 “或 “真实 “的标签。他们也不介意比特币、以太坊或类似的东西是否被用来购买 “真正的 “商品和服务。


本文探分析及探讨了美国、土耳其和中国的当局如何以非常不同的方式介入解决这个问题的方式。分析了在此情况下,法律和立法者承担了什么角色?本文作者Maurizio Gardenal是北约防务学院基金会的定期撰稿人,是 “Lawfare “专栏的编辑和科学委员会的成员。本文发表于《瑞中法律评论》第三期,版权所有。点击 “阅读原文”,阅读更多的文章。



Bitcoin Bid: Are China and NATO countries diverging on cryptocurrencies?



  • AMERICACHINAEUROPEOPINION

    比特币竞价:中国同北约国家的分歧

Recently, US stock market investors valued Coinbase – a major cryptocurrency exchange – at $75.9 billion on its Nasdaq debut, some twelve years after the creation of bitcoin.

You can’t help but wonder where all this interest and frenzy about such platforms come from. Have the market speculators seen something in the future of cryptocurrencies that the rest of us haven’t?

Currencies fundamentally exist as they facilitate the purchase of goods and services. But a “virtual currency” implies two additional concepts: its holders’ anonymity and the ability of money to always circulate freely regardless of its origin, whether legal or illegal.

The fact of the matter is, financial markets do not really mind if the currencies are labeled “virtual” or “real”. Nor do they mind whether bitcoins, ethereum or the like are used to buy “real” goods and services.

What role has the law and lawmakers taken on under these circumstances?

There are three significant examples of how authorities in the US, Turkey and China have stepped in to address this issue in the past few years in very different ways.

In March 2018 the District Court of New York upheld the jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission thus giving all the virtual currencies the status of commodities, under the Commodity Exchange Act.

According to this ruling, virtual currencies should not be utilised to carry out standard transactions since a commodity is broadly defined to include goods, such as wheat, and cotton, along with the relative trading services, rights, and interests.

Furthermore, Turkey – which has the largest volume of cryptocurrency transactions in the Middle East – has recently barred, through an administrative order, the use of cryptocurrencies for purchasing goods and services. The country’s central bank issued a regulation to prohibit the direct and indirect use of crypto-assets as payments on the grounds that the anonymous use of virtual money “may cause non-recoverable losses”. It’s use would “undermine the confidence in methods and instruments used currently in payments”, a statement from the bank said.

However, this level of uncertainty and vagueness is the opposite of what we find in countries like China, one of the most fast-growing economies in the world.

During Chinese New Year celebrations a few months ago, for example, several cities across the country gave away tens of millions of Renminbi as new year “red packets”, to be downloaded to a smartphone.

This was a commendable initiative for sure, although perhaps not as thrilling for people without a smartphone.

Indeed, beyond celebrations and red packets, the Chinese authorities seem to have paved the way for the adoption of a “digital Renminbi” on a very large scale and for the creation of a “Central Bank Digital Currency” (CBDC).

This “e-Yuan” would be overseen by a central governmental authority, removing any anonymity – a key trait in the decentralised, blockchain-ledger of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin or ethereum. The new CBDC would provide a massive prevention of fraud or crime and, among other things, can bring down all transaction costs.

Notably, the CBDC would secure Beijing’s financial independence from the US Dollar and curb the influence and control of outside financial institutions.

So what’s the scorecard on cyber currencies? Beyond the clear boost of a major financial payoff, China is clearly interested in testing and developing the idea of the virtual currency. Perhaps very much so, compared to the restrictive approach taken in the US and Turkey.

Behind closed doors, it is easy to imagine a fierce battle raging amongst the superpowers over the control of the new economic and financial order.


Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on pinterest
Pinterest

发表评论

您的电子邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注