Pietro Saggese, Esther Segalla, Michael Sigmund, Burkhard Raunig, Felix Zangerl, Bernhard Haslhofer
{"title":"Assessing the Solvency of Virtual Asset Service Providers: Are Current Standards Sufficient?","authors":"Pietro Saggese, Esther Segalla, Michael Sigmund, Burkhard Raunig, Felix Zangerl, Bernhard Haslhofer","doi":"arxiv-2309.16408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Entities like centralized cryptocurrency exchanges fall under the business\ncategory of virtual asset service providers (VASPs). As any other enterprise,\nthey can become insolvent. VASPs enable the exchange, custody, and transfer of\ncryptoassets organized in wallets across distributed ledger technologies\n(DLTs). Despite the public availability of DLT transactions, the cryptoasset\nholdings of VASPs are not yet subject to systematic auditing procedures. In\nthis paper, we propose an approach to assess the solvency of a VASP by\ncross-referencing data from three distinct sources: cryptoasset wallets,\nbalance sheets from the commercial register, and data from supervisory\nentities. We investigate 24 VASPs registered with the Financial Market\nAuthority in Austria and provide regulatory data insights such as who are the\ncustomers and where do they come from. Their yearly incoming and outgoing\ntransaction volume amount to 2 billion EUR for around 1.8 million users. We\ndescribe what financial services they provide and find that they are most\nsimilar to traditional intermediaries such as brokers, money exchanges, and\nfunds, rather than banks. Next, we empirically measure DLT transaction flows of\nfour VASPs and compare their cryptoasset holdings to balance sheet entries.\nData are consistent for two VASPs only. This enables us to identify gaps in the\ndata collection and propose strategies to address them. We remark that any\nentity in charge of auditing requires proof that a VASP actually controls the\nfunds associated with its on-chain wallets. It is also important to report fiat\nand cryptoasset and liability positions broken down by asset types at a\nreasonable frequency.","PeriodicalId":501372,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2309.16408","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Entities like centralized cryptocurrency exchanges fall under the business
category of virtual asset service providers (VASPs). As any other enterprise,
they can become insolvent. VASPs enable the exchange, custody, and transfer of
cryptoassets organized in wallets across distributed ledger technologies
(DLTs). Despite the public availability of DLT transactions, the cryptoasset
holdings of VASPs are not yet subject to systematic auditing procedures. In
this paper, we propose an approach to assess the solvency of a VASP by
cross-referencing data from three distinct sources: cryptoasset wallets,
balance sheets from the commercial register, and data from supervisory
entities. We investigate 24 VASPs registered with the Financial Market
Authority in Austria and provide regulatory data insights such as who are the
customers and where do they come from. Their yearly incoming and outgoing
transaction volume amount to 2 billion EUR for around 1.8 million users. We
describe what financial services they provide and find that they are most
similar to traditional intermediaries such as brokers, money exchanges, and
funds, rather than banks. Next, we empirically measure DLT transaction flows of
four VASPs and compare their cryptoasset holdings to balance sheet entries.
Data are consistent for two VASPs only. This enables us to identify gaps in the
data collection and propose strategies to address them. We remark that any
entity in charge of auditing requires proof that a VASP actually controls the
funds associated with its on-chain wallets. It is also important to report fiat
and cryptoasset and liability positions broken down by asset types at a
reasonable frequency.