Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues

Q2 Social Sciences
Global Jurist Pub Date : 2020-07-01 DOI:10.1515/gj-2019-0046
Sandeep Thomas Chandy, Prakhar Bhardwaj
{"title":"Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues","authors":"Sandeep Thomas Chandy, Prakhar Bhardwaj","doi":"10.1515/gj-2019-0046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Taking Venezuela’s complaint against the United States at the World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) as the inflection point, this Article will explore whether a characterisation of cryptocurrencies as a ‘currency’ (similar to a fiat currency) would ensure that cryptocurrencies are not covered by WTO disciplines on goods and services. Despite customary international law principles such as ius cudendae monetae and the persuasive argument that a ‘currency’ is neither a good or service – the Article answers this question in the negative. It will divide issues that can arise during such a WTO dispute into three categories: threshold, substantive and compliance issues. Threshold issues would involve interpretative challenges to determine whether the General Agreement on Trade in Services (“GATS”) and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (“GATT”) regulate cryptocurrencies. Since the GATS Schedule of Commitments has historically been interpreted in a technologically neutral manner, identifying cryptocurrencies as a ‘service’ may not prove to be insurmountable. However, the claim that cryptocurrencies are barter goods that will be subject to disciplines of the GATT deserves critical scrutiny – more so because the GATT regulates tangible products and contains specific provisions relating to balance-of-payments. The Article also undertakes a theoretical analysis of the heterodoxical nature of the cryptocurrency to evaluate whether it can be classified as a ‘security’ within the meaning of the GATS’ Annex on Financial Services. These threshold issues are, however, the tip of the iceberg. Once a WTO Panel commences its analysis, the substantive issues for consideration would involve determining whether a unique product such as cryptocurrencies has a ‘like product’ in the respondent Member’s market. Further, the Panel’s analysis would involve a consideration relating to ‘general exceptions’ under Article XIV, GATS or Article XX, GATT which would entail an examination of whether the measure was necessary to achieve, amongst other regulatory objectives, either compliance with domestic regulations or the maintenance of public order. If the measure adversely impacting cryptocurrencies is determined to be WTO-inconsistent, issues of compliance and suspension of concessions are imminent. WTO Panels have historically estimated the . quantum of suspensions of concessions by determining the trade volumes affected by the WTO-inconsistent measure and factoring it for a future time period. The decentralised nature of the distributed ledger technology underlying cryptocurrencies complicates any country-specific quantification of the impact on trade volumes of cryptocurrencies affected by the WTO inconsistent measure. Accordingly, determining suspensions of concessions in relation to cryptocurrencies would require significant judicial innovation by the arbitrator. Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues.","PeriodicalId":34941,"journal":{"name":"Global Jurist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2019-0046","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Jurist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2019-0046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Taking Venezuela’s complaint against the United States at the World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) as the inflection point, this Article will explore whether a characterisation of cryptocurrencies as a ‘currency’ (similar to a fiat currency) would ensure that cryptocurrencies are not covered by WTO disciplines on goods and services. Despite customary international law principles such as ius cudendae monetae and the persuasive argument that a ‘currency’ is neither a good or service – the Article answers this question in the negative. It will divide issues that can arise during such a WTO dispute into three categories: threshold, substantive and compliance issues. Threshold issues would involve interpretative challenges to determine whether the General Agreement on Trade in Services (“GATS”) and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (“GATT”) regulate cryptocurrencies. Since the GATS Schedule of Commitments has historically been interpreted in a technologically neutral manner, identifying cryptocurrencies as a ‘service’ may not prove to be insurmountable. However, the claim that cryptocurrencies are barter goods that will be subject to disciplines of the GATT deserves critical scrutiny – more so because the GATT regulates tangible products and contains specific provisions relating to balance-of-payments. The Article also undertakes a theoretical analysis of the heterodoxical nature of the cryptocurrency to evaluate whether it can be classified as a ‘security’ within the meaning of the GATS’ Annex on Financial Services. These threshold issues are, however, the tip of the iceberg. Once a WTO Panel commences its analysis, the substantive issues for consideration would involve determining whether a unique product such as cryptocurrencies has a ‘like product’ in the respondent Member’s market. Further, the Panel’s analysis would involve a consideration relating to ‘general exceptions’ under Article XIV, GATS or Article XX, GATT which would entail an examination of whether the measure was necessary to achieve, amongst other regulatory objectives, either compliance with domestic regulations or the maintenance of public order. If the measure adversely impacting cryptocurrencies is determined to be WTO-inconsistent, issues of compliance and suspension of concessions are imminent. WTO Panels have historically estimated the . quantum of suspensions of concessions by determining the trade volumes affected by the WTO-inconsistent measure and factoring it for a future time period. The decentralised nature of the distributed ledger technology underlying cryptocurrencies complicates any country-specific quantification of the impact on trade volumes of cryptocurrencies affected by the WTO inconsistent measure. Accordingly, determining suspensions of concessions in relation to cryptocurrencies would require significant judicial innovation by the arbitrator. Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues.
WTO对加密货币的裁决:潜在门槛和实质性问题
摘要以委内瑞拉在世界贸易组织(“WTO”)对美国的投诉为转折点,本文将探讨将加密货币定性为“货币”(类似于法定货币)是否会确保加密货币不受WTO商品和服务纪律的约束。尽管习惯国际法原则如货币原则,以及“货币”既不是商品也不是服务的有说服力的论点,但该条款对这个问题的回答是否定的。它将把世贸组织争端期间可能出现的问题分为三类:门槛问题、实质性问题和合规问题。门槛问题将涉及解释性挑战,以确定《服务贸易总协定》(“GATS”)和《关税及贸易总协定”(“GATT”)是否监管加密货币。由于《服贸总协定承诺一览表》历来以技术中立的方式进行解释,将加密货币视为“服务”可能并非不可逾越。然而,加密货币是受《关贸总协定》约束的易货商品的说法值得仔细审查,因为《关贸协定》监管有形产品,并包含与国际收支有关的具体条款。该条款还对加密货币的非毒性进行了理论分析,以评估其是否可以被归类为《服贸总协定》金融服务附件所指的“证券”。然而,这些门槛问题只是冰山一角。一旦世贸组织小组开始分析,需要考虑的实质性问题将涉及确定加密货币等独特产品在被调查成员的市场上是否有“同类产品”。此外,专家小组的分析将涉及对《服贸总协定》第十四条或《服贸总协定》第二十条下的“一般例外情况”的审议,这将需要审查该措施是否是实现遵守国内条例或维持公共秩序等监管目标所必需的。如果对加密货币产生不利影响的措施被认定与世贸组织不一致,那么合规和暂停特许权的问题迫在眉睫。世贸组织专家小组历来估计。通过确定受世贸组织不一致措施影响的贸易量并在未来一段时间内将其考虑在内,暂停减让的数量。加密货币背后的分布式账本技术的去中心化性质使任何国家对受WTO不一致措施影响的加密货币贸易量影响的具体量化变得复杂。因此,确定暂停与加密货币相关的特许权需要仲裁员进行重大的司法创新。WTO对加密货币的裁决:潜在门槛和实质性问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Jurist
Global Jurist Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Global Jurist offers a forum for scholarly cyber-debate on issues of comparative law, law and economics, international law, law and society, and legal anthropology. Edited by an international board of leading comparative law scholars from all the continents, Global Jurist is mindful of globalization and respectful of cultural differences. We will develop a truly international community of legal scholars where linguistic and cultural barriers are overcome and legal issues are finally discussed outside of the narrow limits imposed by positivism, parochialism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and chauvinism in the law. Submission is welcome from all over the world and particularly encouraged from the Global South.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信