Blockchain as a technology is not subject to any state regulation. Cryptocurrencies are also free from regulations or control by third parties in large parts of the world. But the question of the differences in blockchain regulation is about the efforts of central banks, governments and state financial regulators to monitor, manage and control the trading of crypto assets.
content
- Blockchain regulation comparison USA and EU
- ECB or US FED – who is ahead?
- Blockchain regulation planned in the EU
- EU Commission wants to regulate crypto service providers
- Uniform blockchain regulation of the EU
- USA Blockchain Legislation Act 2020
- US-FED and the classification of Bitcoin
- USA is targeting P2P connections
- Libra systemically important and regulated by the US Fed?
- What about Turkey?
1- Blockchain regulation comparison USA and EU
Since the beginning of 2020, trading transactions with digital assets in Germany have been controlled by BaFin. The Federal Ministry had exceeded the regulations required by the EU Commission, but they are now forced to take further measures. Probably also because the number of trading venues and the demand for digital assets, also due to the increasing presence of the DeFi sector, is literally crying out for a new regulation on blockchain regulation.
The secure legal framework in Germany is considered exemplary within the European community of states. But the considerations at EU level to create a uniform and therefore EU-wide regulatory concept for digital values are now more concrete. In the case of blockchain regulation, the lack of intermediaries in particular is a reason for further restrictions by state authorities or instances, because of course the central banks are concerned about the positive development of the far more efficient digital transactions.
An adaptation of the infrastructures currently in use at banks and stock exchanges does not happen as quickly as desired, but regulations can be implemented promptly or at least significantly faster than the technological change in the traditional financial sector.
2- ECB or US-FED – who is ahead?
While there is still no consistent direction within the EU, other countries are a step further and have recognized that decentralized technologies hold great innovation potential in store that could make states and public administrations more efficient.
In addition, a real race for supremacy in the crypto sector has broken out on the global financial markets. The focus of almost daily reports from all over the world, including CBDC, Central Bank Digital Currency, a digital central bank money such as a digital euro on a blockchain basis.
When looking at the two great powers, the USA and China, it is clear how great the pressure is on those in power. Last but not least, this is also evident from Donald Trump’s attempts to shower the US postal vote with allegations of susceptibility to manipulation. In China, meanwhile, they are working on the digital yuan, also state central bank money. But that of course brings the US central bank under pressure and so the current news reports of its own plans for a digital currency.
Obviously, the call for a supervisory authority or at least a state regulation has arrived there too, because the Federal Reserve wants to research such a form of money together with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology MIT. The foreign policy pressure is great and currently the Middle Kingdom is miles ahead of the USA.
A scalable, accessible platform for digital assets and central bank digital money. This is the vision of a future of purely digital representations for values and rights on Blockckain-based systems. However, in order to offer legal certainty for companies, to guarantee investor protection and, above all, to prevent criminal activities, a uniform ordinance is to come within the EU.
3- Blockchain regulation planned in the EU
The interesting thing is that this is a binding, uniform specification that is applied directly in the EU member states and does not allow the individual member states any scope for implementation.
That would be the case with a directive, but it is clearly not planned. Instead, with the creation of an EU-wide legal framework, the binding and uniform regulation of digital values should take place.
But what about the German special solution that was only launched in early 2020? The regulation of the so-called crypto custody business in this country would then possibly become obsolete. Especially since the new regulation should contain digital assets that have not yet been taken into account in the national solution.
The EU regulation on blockchain regulation and the treatment of digital assets should not only apply to conventional requirements for assets. For example, a white paper is to be made mandatory for the issuers, i.e. the publishers of digital assets. This sensible requirement is based on criticism from investor circles that ICOs often did not have enough information about the publisher.
4- EU Commission wants to regulate crypto service providers
The inadequate information for investors should now be a thing of the past with EU regulation. Also new is the plan that the services related to digital values should be classified in the existing regulations. At BaFin, banks, financial institutions, payment and e-money institutions as well as insurers, pension funds and capital management companies are supervised and controlled.
Transactions that require a license, currently including some digital assets such as ICOs, must be approved in writing beforehand. The European Central Bank is the higher-level authority, as regulated by the Single Supervisor Mechanism SSM since 2014 . With this European system of financial supervision, the 125 largest banking groups in the euro area are currently supervised by the ECB.
As with the regulation of banks, the blockchain regulation is intended to guarantee general payment transactions. Since the service providers are now to come under this control umbrella, companies that are active in the Bitcoin , Ethereum or other crypto currencies sector must expect significant effects. So far, it was mainly the so-called stablecoins that were analyzed for the package of measures.
Their technical foundation differs fundamentally from that of the crypto currencies and that is precisely why Bitcoin & Co. are subject to strong price fluctuations. As volatile money, the lack of price stability is an obstacle, especially for investors. Some providers try to compensate for this by pegging them to existing currencies such as the US dollar or the commodity gold.
An expanded blockchain regulation in the EU protects investors and offers more legal security. But it would also significantly limit the decentralization of digital values and currencies. According to the will of the EU Commission and within the framework of the new regulations, there should be extensive changes for stablecoins.
5- Uniform blockchain regulation of the EU
Experts agree that the EU’s current efforts, including the announced stricter legal requirements, are related to Facebook’s announcement that it will issue its own digital money (Libra). The states, above all the USA, naturally see this as an attempt to dispute their monopoly on money. From their point of view, there is a risk that digital currencies and means of payment could develop a kind of substitute currency for classic fiat money.
Comprehensive regulation is now eagerly awaited as many questions remain unanswered. However, many within the EU also welcome the upcoming package of measures. They see in this the possibility of stronger funding for the dissemination of digital assets and their accompanying services. Blockchain regulation at the European level could thus strengthen the future of crypto assets on the European financial markets.
Back to the US and its efforts to catch up with the leaders in central bank digital currencies. The US-FED press release on August 13, 2020 stated that the Federal Reserve Board’s Technology Lab (TechLAB) had started research and experimentation with MIT to improve the central bank’s understanding of the opportunities and risks of digital currencies.
Given the important role of the dollar, it is important that the Federal Reserve stay on the verge of research and policy development regarding the central bank’s digital currencies, Federal Reserve Board governor Lael Brainard said source .
6- USA Blockchain Legislation Act 2020
Over the next several years, a collaboration between the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and MIT researchers will build a hypothetical digital currency geared towards central bank use.
Read the US-FED’s publicly available blog posts through (Rod Garratt, Michael Lee, Brendan Malone, and Antoine Martin, “ Token or Account-Based? A Digital Currency Can Be Both ,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics , August 12, 2020), then it quickly becomes clear that the valuation of Bitcoin in particular causes difficulties. Because from the point of view of the US central bank, Bitcoin fulfills the criteria as a token-based currency as well as an account-based digital currency.
As a token-based system, the current transaction history is used to check the validity of the new “object”. As an account-based currency, Bitcoin also uses an address with a private key as proof of the owner’s identity.
7- US FED and the Classification of Bitcoin
In this context, the FED sees Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as UTXO , which stands for Unspent Transaction Output. UTXO refers to the amount of digital currency that is left after the transaction is executed. Every Bitcoin transaction starts with coins that are used to balance the ledger.
UTXOs are processed continuously and are responsible for the beginning and the end of each transaction. Although confirmation of the transaction will result in dispensed coins being removed from the UTXO database, there is still a record of coins dispensed in the ledger.
In the US, the Blockchain Legislation 2020 is also known as the Crypto-Currency Act 2020. A total of 32 bills were introduced at the 116th Congress that preceded the bill. Apparently there is great interest in the United States in blockchain politics, the clear regulation of the industry and the novel concept of a digital US dollar.
Of the 32 bills, 12 deal with the use of cryptocurrencies in potential terrorism, money laundering and human trafficking. 13 templates focus on the legal framework and treatment of cryptocurrency and blockchain. Five bills address the US government’s stronger promotion of blockchain technology, and two drafts deal with the introduction and concept of a digital dollar.
8- USA is targeting P2P connections
Far more interesting, however, is the plan that every cryptocurrency must enable transactions to be traced. Concerned about peer-to-peer encryption and legal immunities, the US is introducing the so-called EARN IT Act. The law ” Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act ” provides the possibility to force companies to give up P2P connections. The pressure medium: Internet offers should be liable for the content of their users. This law is now available in a weakened version.
Assets on digital stablecoins under the umbrella of the US FED are certainly also due to the introduction of Libra planned by Facebook. According to the draft law, real currencies should serve as collateral for the Libra. The Senate obviously wants to be prepared for the final live version. Apparently, Facebook no longer sees Libra as just a serious threat. There is now the realizable possibility of a digital means of payment on the social media platform.
I n another draft law, the authors even wanted to go so far as not to allow any social networks for financial activities. The Bill “Protecting Consumers from Market Manipulation” stipulates that the Financial Stability Oversight Council FSOC regards digital currencies as a designated financial market company. Additionally, any non-financial company like Facebook that makes a minimum profit from digital currencies would need to be a bank holding company regulated by the Federal Reserve.
9- Is Libra systemically important and regulated by the US Fed?
Libra would then be viewed as systemically important for the financial system and would therefore have to be subject to a high level of official control and additional regulatory reporting requirements. The Federal Reserve would essentially be the sole regulator for cryptocurrencies in the United States.
The term “digital dollar” can also be found in the Blockchain Legislation Act 2020. For example, the central bank’s digital currency legislation will be pursued.
The blockchain regulation in the USA and Europe in comparison does not produce a clear winner. Too many open points, ambiguities and a lot of theory. But it is also obvious that the states are struggling to find solutions and that everyone wants to take a leading position for themselves. At the same time, however, it has also become clear what power there is behind Facebook and Libra. Above all, what dangers this results in on the monopolistic money markets of this world.
10- What about Turkey?
FATF report published in July 2020 in Turkey is still one of the two member countries that have no regulations regarding crypto money. Turkey to remain silent and regulations do not make this up not even be positive even open to discussion. But crypto money institutions in Turkey generally implement prudential self-regulations.