CHAPLIAN Serhiy,
Postgraduate Student of Scientific Research Institute of Private Law
and Entrepreneurship named after academician F. G. Burchak, NPRC of Ukraine
LEGAL STATUS OF CRYPTOCURRENCY
Background. In terms of rapid development of modern technologies, e-commerce and the emergence of such newest means of payment as cryptocurrency, there is a problem of proper legal qualification of the latter, the definition of their place in the system of calculations of participants in economic turnover, as well as the ratio of cryptocurrency with other means of payment, primarily, with traditional cash.
Analysis of recent researches and publications. This problem has led to a lot of research, but, despite the close attention of scholars, it is too early to argue for a thorough study of the nature and legal qualifications of cryptocurrency, taking into account the multichoice of approaches and the absence of a firm stand on issues that require the continuation of theoretical study.
The aim of the article isdefinition of the legal status of cryptocurrency according to the legislation of Ukraine and foreign countries.
Materials and methods. General scientific methods (dialectic, analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, abstraction) and special methods (formal and legal, comparative and law, interpretation of the norms of law, etc.) were methodological basis of the study. The laws and subordinate acts of Ukraine and foreign countries, scientific works on the subject of the article were the information base.
Results. At the legislative level, currently there is no special legislation on emissions and circulation of cryptocurrency. The analysis of the Draft Law of Ukraine «On the Circulation of Cryptographic Goods in Ukraine» № 7183 and the Draft Law of Ukraine «On Stimulation of the Cryptographic Market and its Derivatives in Ukraine»№7183-1 which are currently under consideration by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, testifies to fundamentally different approaches to the legal qualification of cryptocurrency, however, these approaches cannot be considered successful because of the efforts, on the one hand, to regulate the circulation of cryptocurrency with the help of monetary mechanisms, and, on the other hand, to avoid their identification with cash. As shows the analysis of the characteristics of cryptocurrency, the main functions of cash are inherent to them, and the absence of recognition of cryptocurrency as money should be explained, primarily, by public interests of the state.
Conclusion. For a balance between stated interests and the legal nature of cryptocurrency in Ukraine, the institute of non-documentary electronic money surrogates, which would include cryptocurrency should be introduced.
FREE FULL TEXT (PDF)
