Taxation within the realm of cryptoassets and transactions involving cryptocurrencies presents a formidable and intricate challenge for both the tax and regulatory sectors. The complexity is underpinned by multiple factors, chiefly the intricate classification and characterization issues associated with cryptoassets. Moreover, the inherently flexible nature of cryptoassets, allowing for considerable restructuring in terms of origin, issuance, division, redemption, and more, further compounds this challenge.
Yet, an equally significant factor contributing to the
complexity and potential inconsistency in taxing cryptocurrencies across
various jurisdictions is the intriguing comparison with fiat currency or
traditional money.
Understanding the Distinctions and Overlaps
To comprehend the intricacies of taxing cryptoassets, it's vital
to explore the fundamental characteristics of fiat currency or traditional
money. Money, in its fiat form, is distinguished by three core traits: it
serves as a unit of account, a store of value, and a medium of exchange.
Debatably, cryptocurrencies, including specific crypto assets,
may not unconditionally align with these three principles. There is room for
debate regarding whether they effectively function as a unit of account, a store
of value, and a medium of exchange. This leads to an instinctive inclination to
reject a direct comparison or similarity between crypto and traditional money.
However, it's imperative to acknowledge that the crypto
community, characterized by a diverse array of crypto assets, may embrace these
novel instruments as a medium of exchange, a store of value, and a unit of
account. Consequently, they could be viewed as akin to money. Some
jurisdictions have already bestowed legal tender status or foreign currency
recognition upon certain cryptocurrencies, further blurring the boundaries.
An Exploratory Path Forward
To gain deeper insights into the apparent disparities between
fiat currency and cryptocurrencies, a comprehensive exploration of this subject
is essential. Gieve below succinct comparison
delving into this exploration, shedding light on the complexities and nuances
that define the taxation landscape concerning cryptoassets.
In conclusion, the intricacies of taxing cryptoassets stem from
a confluence of classification challenges, the flexible nature of cryptoassets,
and the nuanced comparison with traditional fiat currency. Striking a balance
that addresses these complexities is a pressing concern for the tax and
regulatory domains, necessitating ongoing dialogue and in-depth analysis to
develop effective tax frameworks within this evolving landscape.
Basis |
Fiat Currency |
Crypto |
Issue |
Issued centrally by an institution i.e., central bank. |
Issued by a decentralized network of computers |
Supply |
Money supply
is controlled and
influenced by external factors. Generally, it is decisions taken by humans. |
Supply is based on an
algorithm. For example, one can
know how many bitcoins will be in circulation, e.g.,
in a month, a year,
or in a decade from now. |
Distribution |
Fiat
money can be multiplied at will, has no
upper limit. |
Certain crypto assets have
a limited supply. For example, there
will ever only be 21 million bitcoins. |
Intermediary |
Fiat money can only be transferred by using intermediaries (e.g.,
banks, credit card companies, PayPal,
Apple). |
There are no intermediaries involved in most of the crypto
cases (there have been new
crypto cases where the operational protocols have been modified to make the originator an intermediary); |
Risk of censorship / loss |
·
Since fiat money is transferred electronically through intermediaries, a transaction may be prevented by an intermediary, often
for legal reasons (e.g.,
the application of money laundering regulations, sanctions or restrictions on capital movements).
· With
fiat money, bank
balances can be lost through seizure, expropriation or insolvency of the bank. |
·
Since cryptos are transferred without using intermediaries, nobody can
prevent a transaction from occurring,
so that this payment system
is censorship-resistant.
· Cryptocurrencies, on the other hand,
are not claims
against an intermediary and
as long as the private key is not
disclosed, the cryptocurrency
cannot be accessed (this
is different when a user decides to |
|
|
entrust an exchange to hold the cryptocurrency). |
Time |
Opening a bank account for fiat money
is a lengthy process, due to, among
other things, the
need to comply with
legal provisions on money laundering and taxation. |
In contrast, with cryptocurrency, the
generation of an address (which is similar
to a bank account number) and the corresponding private key (which is similar to a PIN code
securing the bank account) is a mathematical operation, which
does not require
the consent of a third
party. |
Transfers abroad |
With fiat money, transfers abroad are slower and more expensive than domestic transfers. |
Cryptos are electronic money systems that know no national boundaries; there is no distinction between
domestic and foreign
addresses. |
Reversibility |
In the case of fiat money, remittances are often reversible. |
With cryptocurrencies, on the other hand, transactions are mostly
irreversible. |
Tracking/Trail |
With fiat money,
there is no database that tracks the fate of every single bill and coin. |
On the other
hand, transactions with Cryptos are recorded in a public
ledger (the blockchain). |
Divisibility |
Fiat money
is divisible to two decimal places (to hundredths). |
In contrast, Bitcoin (Cryptos) are divisible to
eight decimal places (to hundred millionths), with the smallest unit being called
a ‘Satoshi’ or a ‘Sat’ in
honor of the pseudonymous founder. |
Security |
The security of fiat currencies is maintained by central banks, the police, the public
prosecutor’s office, courts,
safes, money transporters, and specialized printing presses. |
In contrast, the security of Cryptos is purely based
on mathematics (cryptography). |
No comments:
Post a Comment