Blockchain supervision mechanism in the United States

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- Blockchain supervision mechanism in the United States，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了美国的区块链监管机制。美国监管立法上分为州立法与联邦立法，州立法独立于联邦政府的立法。在美国经营虚拟货币业务和ICO，要分别满足联邦层面以及美国各州层面的法律监管要求。其中，联邦层面的法律监管具有全局性和根本性，尤其值得重视。就联邦层面对区块链领域的监管而言，主要监管机构包括美国证券交易委员会、 商品期货交易委员会、美国国内税务局和金融犯罪执法网络司等。

Blockchain is a great innovation in the field of Internet and information technology in the past decade, which promotes the transformation of information Internet to value Internet, and may affect or even challenge the current mode and system in many industrial fields. With the rapid development of blockchain technology, it also brings many risks. Different from the Internet revolution, bitcoin -- blockchain technology is not completely technology-neutral or value-neutral at the very beginning of its emergence, and it comes with certain financial risks. Up to now, blockchain, especially in the field of virtual currency, virtual currency exchange, ICO and various ICO in disguise, has great risks. Therefore, this industry by many countries financial regulatory institutions attention.

The United States is the "leader" of blockchain industry innovation in the world, the main participating country of blockchain and cryptographic virtual currency, and the most important issuing place and target market of ICO. Cryptowatch reports that in the first half of 2018, the United States was the country with the largest volume of virtual currency transactions, with $83.8 billion. The relevant regulatory authorities in the United States have been paying close attention to the trend of blockchain, ICO and virtual currency. In recent years, they have frequently taken steps to gradually strengthen their responsibilities of supervision, and, by analogy with the securities market, strengthen the supervision of virtual currency at a series of levels, including operation license, securities issuance registration and tax. In addition, the regulatory policy of the United States has a huge impact on the world, so any regulatory policy trend of the United States is worthy of practitioners' research and attention. Based on the latest development of blockchain in the United States, this paper comprehensively sorts out and analyzes its regulatory policies at the federal level, and makes corresponding thinking and evaluation, so as to provide some enlightenment for the Chinese government to include blockchain into the long-term regulatory mechanism in the future.

Different from the central financial regulatory system in countries like China, South Korea or Japan, the regulatory legislation in the United States is divided into state legislation and federal legislation, and the state legislation is independent of the legislation of the federal government. Therefore, the operation of virtual currency business and ICO in the United States should meet the legal regulatory requirements at the federal level and at the state level in the United States. Among them, the legal supervision at the federal level is of overall importance and fundamental.

In terms of the federal supervision of the blockchain field, the main regulatory agencies include the securities and exchange commission, commodity futures trading commission, the internal revenue service and the financial crime enforcement network division. Among them, the SEC is responsible for securities supervision and administration in the United States, and is the highest regulatory body in the securities industry in the United States, with quasi-legislative power, quasi-judicial power and independent enforcement power. The CFTC main duty and function is responsible for overseeing the commodity futures, options, futures, options market, protect the market participants and the public from fraud related to the commodity and financial futures, options, market manipulation and unfair business activities, safeguard the futures and options market open, competitive and financial reliability.

The SEC and CFTC, which together have a regulatory role similar to that of the China securities regulatory commission, represent the overall us position on virtual currencies. As federal regulators of financial markets, the SEC and CFTC have a responsibility to foster a regulatory environment for investors and market participants that promotes innovation, market integrity, and consumer confidence. To this end, the SEC has taken a series of measures in the supervision of virtual currency, ICO and related assets, such as requiring the registration of virtual currency trading platform. The SEC considered that the Token issued by some project parties falls within the regulatory scope of securities law but is not registered, so it stopped many icos.

In 2018, the SEC and CFTC cooperated to gradually strengthen the supervision of the blockchain field. In January 2018, the SEC and CFTC issued a joint statement on measures to be taken against virtual currencies to crack down on illegal activities in the field of virtual currencies. The joint statement said the SEC and CFTC will conduct "penetrating analyses" to determine the nature of their business and take regulatory action in accordance with the law, whether it is in virtual currencies, tokens or other names. In addition, the two regulators have repeatedly issued warnings to investors about the risks of market manipulation and fraud. In the same month, the CFTC filed a lawsuit against three virtual currency trading platforms, claiming they had defrauded customers and violated commodity trading rules. In February 2018, CFTC announced the establishment of the virtual currency committee and the blockchain committee at the virtual currency and blockchain supervision discussion conference. The former focused on the virtual currency industry, while the latter strengthened the application of blockchain technology in the financial field.

The IRS is bringing virtual currencies into the regulatory fold primarily from a tax policy perspective. In 2014, the IRS issued tax guidelines for transactions using virtual currencies, noting that "in general, the sale or exchange of convertible virtual currencies, or the use of convertible virtual currencies to pay for real-world goods or services, will result in tax liability." The tax guidelines define virtual currency as a broad category of "property," and the tax provisions that normally apply to property also apply to virtual currency transactions, requiring taxpayers to file their tax returns annually.

On January 15, 2017, Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase, revealed that the IRS has issued a subpoena to the company, requiring it to publish the account information of all us users within three years to meet its tax purposes. Armstrong argued that the IRS subpoena was too broad and "wrongly implied" that all bitcoin users were avoiding taxes by investing in digital currencies. Months later, after a campaign by Coinbase, 97 percent of the platform's users' information was not made public.

The IRS set up a panel in February 2018 to examine tax evasion on virtual currency exchanges and to investigate unlicensed exchanges with the international criminal organization. In March 2018, the IRS on 2014 file spirit, post again remind taxpayers from virtual currency trading income must be on the income tax return filing, and put forward the consequences of not declare, undeclared income taxpayers may be limited by the audit of virtual currency or need to pay the fine and fine for delaying payment ", is not correct to declare virtual currency trading revenues will face criminal charges.

The financial crime enforcement network division under the us Treasury Department mainly supervises the transactions of virtual currency by applying the bank secrecy act. In other words, the operators of virtual currency are regulated as the fund passers in the fund service business, with the purpose of anti-money laundering, preventing illegal transactions and preventing the financing of terrorist activities. As early as March 18, 2013, FinCEN issued a guide to clarify the application of the banking secrecy act in the creation, acquisition, distribution, exchange, acceptance or transfer of virtual money subject and behavior. In May 2015, FinCEN announced the first round of bank secrecy law audit for fund passers. The 50 federal states in the United States enforce their own rules and have different attitudes and policies regarding the risks associated with regulating blockchain. Some states are ahead of the federal government, such as New York, California and north Carolina, which have all enacted special regulations to regulate the business practices of virtual currencies.

Since 2017, the us regulatory authorities have gradually strengthened their supervision of virtual currencies and ICO fields. In particular, the SEC has frequently taken steps to bring securities tokens into the regulatory scope. At the same time, the regulatory authorities focus on issuing investor risk warning information, and focus on cracking down on fraudulent types of illegal virtual currency.

Members of the SEC and the house financial services committee discuss ICO regulation during a hearing on "examining cryptocurrencies and ICO markets" in the U.S. house of representatives on April 26, 2018. While William Hinman, head of corporate finance at the SEC, said the virtual currency and ICO sectors "continue to grow," "we should seek a balanced approach that protects new forms of financing while ensuring investor protection." But most members of the house of representatives are hostile to icos and even believe they have affected the number of existing ipos. In June 2018, the us congress passed the resolution of the SEC and established the us virtual currency trading commission, aiming to kill illegal virtual currencies such as aircoin, counterfeit coin and useless coin. The plan is to kill 99% of the virtual currencies in the market by 2018. ASEC talked with Gdax, Poloneix, Kraken, Genmu and other trading platforms and virtual currency issuers gradually, which caused the virtual currency to plummet.

In the regulatory process of the United States federal agencies, a very important work is to strengthen the risk education and warning of investors, reduce the possibility of successful fraud. The SEC acknowledges that the technical means behind icos may provide effective means for financing financial trading markets. Meanwhile, it believes that icos lack supervision and have high risks of fraud and market manipulation. Therefore, it provides investors with 3R information including risks, rewards and responsibilities on its official website.

In July 2013, the SEC issued the "ponzi scheme using virtual currency" warning to investors, which was mainly caused by the SEC's lawsuit against Shavers at that time. Shavers started a bitcoin arbitrage on BBS, promising investors returns of up to 7 per cent a week. After the SEC investigation, returned to the interest of investors from new investors to pay COINS, Shavers USES investors' money for personal daily consumption and gambling, the SEC think Shavers in violation of the securities law in 1933 (a) 5, 5 (c) and article 17, 1934 article lO (b) of the securities exchange act and law article 10 (b - 5).

In May 2014, the SEC issued an investment risk warning on bitcoin and other virtual currencies to investors on its website www.investor.gov. It introduces investors to what bitcoin is and reminds them to consider the risk of fraud, especially in the face of regulatory features such as promises of high investment returns, unsolicited marketing, unauthorized sellers, no net worth or income requirements, ultra-high returns and immediate buyers, which are characterized by collaborative supervision among several agencies. The agencies mainly arrange and allocate supervision work according to their own responsibilities. As mentioned above, the us SEC has comprehensive and important jurisdiction in this field, such as directly stopping some icos, even issuing charges against them, approving whether to use bitcoin ETF funds, etc. The CFTC has the ability to monitor spot market fraud and manipulation, and the power to regulate derivatives. FinCEN has the authority to inspect all exchanges for KYC/AML implementation. Various institutions cooperate with each other to close all kinds of regulatory loopholes as far as possible and prevent commercial institutions or individuals from arbitrage through regulation. Of course, each institution has its own views on virtual currency. For example, the SEC considers some virtual currencies to be securities. From a tax point of view, the IRS regards virtual money as property; The CFTC views virtual currencies as commodities.

The us government is cautious in introducing or enforcing regulatory policies. Regulators will not impose a one-size-fits-all policy until there is a strong consensus on emerging areas such as virtual currencies. For example, the us has the largest amount of ICO financing in the world, and before the lack of comprehensive regulatory regulations, the us, like China, had many frauds in this field. But while the SEC has halted a number of alleged fraudulent ICO programs, it has rarely directly prosecuted the sponsors of those programs, often ending up with the sponsors returning the money they raised to investors. The SEC did not directly impose a blanket ban on ICO, but mainly judged whether the tokens sold by ICO project were securities based on the specific facts and conditions of ICO project. In the case of securities, it is considered to be subject to federal securities laws.

The spirit of the congressional hearings echoed the regulators' measured approach. As of today, there is no law on blockchain. However, congress has been closely following the latest developments in the field, preparing the ground for detailed legislation, effective regulation, control of risks in the blockchain sector and encouragement of the development of the blockchain industry.

In terms of tax policies related to virtual currencies, the us government actively follows up. The IRS proposed that us citizens do not declare the consequences of virtual currency related taxes, on the one hand to avoid individuals or institutions using virtual currency tax evasion, on the other hand represents the government officially recognized the legal status of virtual currency property, in the future of justice has played a certain guiding role.

The American experience has implications for China. Chinese regulators now face a virtual dilemma. On the one hand, the regulated institutions to a negative attitude to the influence of virtual currencies, China's tax law and tax agencies cannot follow up in time, in view of the virtual currency detailed tax rules, the lawmakers have never considered how to into the existing tax system, there is a pay through virtual currency, cause the phenomenon of tax evasion, and this kind of tax avoidance is possible under the current legal system. On the other hand, if the regulatory authorities positively recognize the legal status of virtual currencies and give them positive views, they can bring them into the scope of the regulation of tax law and avoid tax loss. As a country with a large population and economy, China plays an important role in the field of virtual currency and blockchain. Any statement of the financial regulatory authorities on virtual currency is likely to cause uproar, and even trigger a frenzy of speculation and selling. A sharp rise or fall in the price of the currency could in turn shock financial stability and even social stability. That may be a big reason why the Chinese government has been wary of regulating the sector.

In addition, there are differences between blockchain technology and other fintech industries, especially the decentralization feature, which enables regulators to simply stop certain businesses, which may prevent related risks in the short term, while the long-term effect remains to be discussed. For similar problems, some researchers believe that the regulation method of total prohibition can control the risks of virtual currency, but inhibit financial innovation, which is not in line with the trend of financial development, and is only a temporary measure at the current stage. Referring to the regulatory experience of the United States, in the long run, China should still support the development of blockchain technology, regulate the trading of virtual currencies and build a sound regulatory framework. Specific regulatory approaches include: strengthening business access management; Strengthen the inspection of business law enforcement; Strengthen the hierarchical management of business; Strengthen guidance to business entities. Many relevant industries in the blockchain field often have no specific legal subject, and a large number of participants can freely enter or exit at any time and address in the global scope. This is particularly typical of the bitcoin issuance mechanism, as well as community self-maintenance mechanisms in some blockchain domains. As a result, it is difficult to achieve the expected effect and target in the implementation process. Based on the experience of the United States, we believe that there is still room for reconsideration of China's regulatory policy. For the issuance of ICO tokens, the United States regulatory agencies mainly focus on securities nature of the tokens. In this regard, the United States securities law has also played an important role. However, different from the us securities law and Howe test's extension of the definition and interpretation of "securities", China's securities law has a narrow definition of securities and strictly follows the existing Chinese securities law. How to punish the price manipulation behaviors of the cross-border virtual currency trading platform and some actual controllers of ICO tokens? There is still no legal basis in China. For such problems, there is still a gap in China's legal and regulatory mechanism, and it is urgent to establish a long-term regulatory mechanism.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创essay代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写、作业代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的essay代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多essay代写范文 提供代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。