{"title":"工作文件38:亚洲及其他地区的加密货币:法律、监管和执法","authors":"Federico Paesano, Dorothy Siron","doi":"10.12685/bigwp.2022.38.1-69","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The crypto industry has exploded in recent years, and authorities in different countries have been reacting in very different ways. Some have banned cryptocurrencies, while others are embracing them to varying degrees. Some are working hard to align their anti-money laundering regulations with FATF standards, while others are turning a blind eye. A few countries have confiscated huge quantities of crypto assets linked to crime and money laundering. Others are at square one in terms of enforcement, risking becoming a hub for crypto crime and money laundering and posing a serious vulnerability in the world’s financial system. \nThis Working Paper draws on a detailed analysis of how selected countries are addressing legal, regulatory and enforcement issues around cryptocurrencies and other virtual assets. The analysis is focused on Asia, but set in the context of global trends in crypto law, regulation and enforcement. It explores critical questions that will shape policies around virtual assets at the corporate, national and international levels: \n \nWhat is working in terms of crypto regulation and enforcement? \nWhat are the implications of different policy choices on crypto assets – for the industry, for the countries themselves and for global financial integrity as a whole? \nWhat would the crypto wave possibly bring next? \n \nThe Paper also highlights broader developments needed to bring light and clarity to laws, policies and practices around the crypto industry, such as collaboration between both market players and governments. \nJurisdictions touched upon in this Working Paper alphabetically include Bhutan, Central African Republic, El Salvador, Hong Kong SAR, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Myanmar, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, the Philippines, the People’s Republic of China, Thailand, Ukraine and Vietnam. \nA list of key terms and abbreviations have been prepared in the Annex to this Working Paper for the readers’ easy reference. \nAbout this Working Paper \nThis Working Paper is a collaboration between Dorothy Siron, Co-Managing Partner, Zhong Lun Law Firm LLP and Federico Paesano, Senior Financial Investigation Specialist, Basel Institute on Governance. \nDorothy Siron provided the bulk of the analysis and discussion, while Federico Paesano provided a selection of case studies and was co-author of the seven recommendations contained in section 4. The collaboration was facilitated by the International Academy of Financial Crime Litigators, an independent, non-partisan global centre that shapes and advances financial crime litigation practices for the future.","PeriodicalId":447485,"journal":{"name":"Basel Institute on Governance Working Papers","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Working Paper 38: Cryptocurrencies in Asia and beyond: law, regulation and enforcement\",\"authors\":\"Federico Paesano, Dorothy Siron\",\"doi\":\"10.12685/bigwp.2022.38.1-69\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The crypto industry has exploded in recent years, and authorities in different countries have been reacting in very different ways. Some have banned cryptocurrencies, while others are embracing them to varying degrees. Some are working hard to align their anti-money laundering regulations with FATF standards, while others are turning a blind eye. A few countries have confiscated huge quantities of crypto assets linked to crime and money laundering. Others are at square one in terms of enforcement, risking becoming a hub for crypto crime and money laundering and posing a serious vulnerability in the world’s financial system. \\nThis Working Paper draws on a detailed analysis of how selected countries are addressing legal, regulatory and enforcement issues around cryptocurrencies and other virtual assets. The analysis is focused on Asia, but set in the context of global trends in crypto law, regulation and enforcement. It explores critical questions that will shape policies around virtual assets at the corporate, national and international levels: \\n \\nWhat is working in terms of crypto regulation and enforcement? \\nWhat are the implications of different policy choices on crypto assets – for the industry, for the countries themselves and for global financial integrity as a whole? \\nWhat would the crypto wave possibly bring next? \\n \\nThe Paper also highlights broader developments needed to bring light and clarity to laws, policies and practices around the crypto industry, such as collaboration between both market players and governments. \\nJurisdictions touched upon in this Working Paper alphabetically include Bhutan, Central African Republic, El Salvador, Hong Kong SAR, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Myanmar, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, the Philippines, the People’s Republic of China, Thailand, Ukraine and Vietnam. \\nA list of key terms and abbreviations have been prepared in the Annex to this Working Paper for the readers’ easy reference. \\nAbout this Working Paper \\nThis Working Paper is a collaboration between Dorothy Siron, Co-Managing Partner, Zhong Lun Law Firm LLP and Federico Paesano, Senior Financial Investigation Specialist, Basel Institute on Governance. \\nDorothy Siron provided the bulk of the analysis and discussion, while Federico Paesano provided a selection of case studies and was co-author of the seven recommendations contained in section 4. The collaboration was facilitated by the International Academy of Financial Crime Litigators, an independent, non-partisan global centre that shapes and advances financial crime litigation practices for the future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":447485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Basel Institute on Governance Working Papers\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Basel Institute on Governance Working Papers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12685/bigwp.2022.38.1-69\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Basel Institute on Governance Working Papers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12685/bigwp.2022.38.1-69","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
近年来,加密行业出现了爆炸式增长,不同国家的当局以截然不同的方式做出了反应。一些国家禁止加密货币,而另一些国家则在不同程度上接受加密货币。一些国家正在努力使其反洗钱法规与FATF标准保持一致,而另一些国家则睁一只眼闭一只眼。一些国家没收了大量与犯罪和洗钱有关的加密资产。其他国家在执法方面处于第一阶段,有可能成为加密犯罪和洗钱的中心,并对世界金融体系构成严重脆弱性。本工作文件详细分析了选定国家如何解决围绕加密货币和其他虚拟资产的法律、监管和执法问题。该分析侧重于亚洲,但背景是加密法律、监管和执法的全球趋势。它探讨了一些关键问题,这些问题将影响企业、国家和国际层面上围绕虚拟资产的政策:在加密监管和执法方面,什么是有效的?不同的政策选择对加密资产的影响——对行业、对国家本身以及对整个全球金融诚信的影响是什么?接下来的加密浪潮可能会带来什么?该文件还强调了为加密行业的法律、政策和实践带来光明和清晰度所需的更广泛的发展,例如市场参与者和政府之间的合作。本工作文件中涉及的司法管辖区按字母顺序排列包括不丹、中非共和国、萨尔瓦多、香港特别行政区、印度、印度尼西亚、日本、哈萨克斯坦、马来西亚、缅甸、俄罗斯、新加坡、韩国、菲律宾、中华人民共和国、泰国、乌克兰和越南。本工作文件的附件已编制了一份主要术语和缩略语的清单,供读者参考。关于本工作文件本工作文件由众伦律师事务所联席管理合伙人Dorothy Siron与巴塞尔治理研究所高级金融调查专家Federico Paesano合作完成。Dorothy Siron提供了大量的分析和讨论,而Federico Paesano提供了一些案例研究,并且是第4节中包含的七条建议的合著者。国际金融犯罪诉讼律师学会(International Academy of Financial Crime litiators)为此次合作提供了便利。该学会是一个独立的、无党派的全球中心,致力于塑造和推进未来的金融犯罪诉讼实践。
Working Paper 38: Cryptocurrencies in Asia and beyond: law, regulation and enforcement
The crypto industry has exploded in recent years, and authorities in different countries have been reacting in very different ways. Some have banned cryptocurrencies, while others are embracing them to varying degrees. Some are working hard to align their anti-money laundering regulations with FATF standards, while others are turning a blind eye. A few countries have confiscated huge quantities of crypto assets linked to crime and money laundering. Others are at square one in terms of enforcement, risking becoming a hub for crypto crime and money laundering and posing a serious vulnerability in the world’s financial system.
This Working Paper draws on a detailed analysis of how selected countries are addressing legal, regulatory and enforcement issues around cryptocurrencies and other virtual assets. The analysis is focused on Asia, but set in the context of global trends in crypto law, regulation and enforcement. It explores critical questions that will shape policies around virtual assets at the corporate, national and international levels:
What is working in terms of crypto regulation and enforcement?
What are the implications of different policy choices on crypto assets – for the industry, for the countries themselves and for global financial integrity as a whole?
What would the crypto wave possibly bring next?
The Paper also highlights broader developments needed to bring light and clarity to laws, policies and practices around the crypto industry, such as collaboration between both market players and governments.
Jurisdictions touched upon in this Working Paper alphabetically include Bhutan, Central African Republic, El Salvador, Hong Kong SAR, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Myanmar, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, the Philippines, the People’s Republic of China, Thailand, Ukraine and Vietnam.
A list of key terms and abbreviations have been prepared in the Annex to this Working Paper for the readers’ easy reference.
About this Working Paper
This Working Paper is a collaboration between Dorothy Siron, Co-Managing Partner, Zhong Lun Law Firm LLP and Federico Paesano, Senior Financial Investigation Specialist, Basel Institute on Governance.
Dorothy Siron provided the bulk of the analysis and discussion, while Federico Paesano provided a selection of case studies and was co-author of the seven recommendations contained in section 4. The collaboration was facilitated by the International Academy of Financial Crime Litigators, an independent, non-partisan global centre that shapes and advances financial crime litigation practices for the future.