Bridging Regulation and Innovation: A Systematic Review of Cryptocurrency Taxation and Fiscal Policy (2020–2025)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Taxation on cryptocurrency is becoming critical in global fiscal governance as digital assets adapt to the modern reality of existing outside of traditional regulatory constructs. Theoretical and practical understanding of cryptocurrency taxation is quite new, and so a systematic review was designed to present the most recent empirical research evidence on the legal, fiscal and behavioral aspects of cryptocurrency taxation from across the globe. Using the PRISMA-2020 guidelines, a structured search was applied to the Scopus database on 21 May 2025, with the search terms “crypto-currency”, “cryptoasset” and “taxation.” The inclusion criteria consisted of original research articles published between the years of 2020 and 2025 in English or Spanish, that could be accessed via institutional library support, and that were related to taxation, legal regulation and/or compliance. Out of the original identified 224 records, 36 met the eligibility criteria after screening and verification through seven different stages of review. Socially, five themes were produced by the findings: legal ambiguity surrounding fiscal treatment, limited tax literacy and compliance issues, macroeconomic and monetary issues, application of digital technologies for fiscal tracking, and environmental repercussions from crypto mining. Many countries do not have any coherent tax frameworks to govern the risk that emerges from cryptocurrency taxation, creating uncertainty for both regulators and investors. The findings outlined in this systematic review point to the urgent need for creating a coherent approach to cryptocurrency taxation based on definitions, digital approaches to traceability, and tax literacy compliance strategies. In order to create effective cryptocurrency taxation, there must be a base balance between ensuring innovation, fiscal responsibility, transparency, equity and sustainability in the developing digital economy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".