WAYS OF CHANGING THE LEGAL REGULATION OF CRYPTOACTIVES: AN ANALYSIS OF FOREIGN EXPIRIENCE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The proliferation of cryptocurrency transactions and the increase in their value raises the question of the need for a final solution to the problem of legal regulation of their circulation. The urgency of this task is exacerbated by the fact that leaving cryptoassets out of the legal field promotes their use in illegal activities and deprives the state of significant revenues from their proper taxation. The purpose of this article is to study the approaches to the legal regulation of the circulation of cryptoassets, which are recently formed in the world, to determine the positive experience and opportunities to borrow successful legislative decisions. The article analyzes approaches to the regulation of relations arising from cryptocurrencies in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Germany, Austria, Estonia, China, Singapore and Australia. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the European unified approach to the regulation of cryptocurrencies for all European countries, as well as cryptocurrency services. According to the results of the study, it is concluded that today the attitude to cryptocurrencies differs depending on the level of development of the country. However, recently there has been a tendency to focus efforts on the implementation of cryptoassets in the legal field and ensure legal regulation of their circulation. In general, 2020, the year of the pandemic and the transfer of life to the online format, was marked by special attention to the development of legal regulation of cryptocurrency circulation. Of particular concern to the authorities are features of cryptocurrencies such as decentralization and anonymity, which allow these assets to be used to launder criminal proceeds and finance terrorism. It is in this direction that government regulation of cryptocurrency circulation has been moving recently. Most countries in the world of cryptocurrency regulation focus on licensing cryptocurrency exchanges, identifying their users, taxing, and countering money laundering and terrorist financing. These principles are the basis of the unified approach to the regulation of cryptocurrency activities for all European countries proposed by the European Commission. It is noteworthy that both in the European unified approach to the regulation of cryptoassets and in their legal regulation in some European countries and the United States, it is proposed to classify cryptocurrencies and divide them into several categories depending on the functions they perform. These approaches to the classification of cryptoassets should be considered when determining the legal framework for regulating the circulation of cryptoassets (virtual assets) in Ukraine.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».