2024年数字资产监管-41正式版

DigitalAssetsRegulation:

InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches

INSIGHTREPORT

OCTOBER2024

Images:GettyImages

Contents

Preface3

Executivesummary4

Introduction5

1Regulatoryapproaches,outcomesandunintendedconsequences7

1.1EuropeanUnion9

1.2Gibraltar11

1.3HongKongSAR,China12

1.4Japan14

1.5Singapore16

1.6Switzerland18

1.7UnitedArabEmirates20

1.8UnitedKingdom22

1.9UnitedStatesofAmerica23

2Recommendations26

2.1Anti-moneylaundering(AML)andknowyourcustomer27

(KYC)recommendations

2.2Regulatoryandtechnicalsandboxrecommendations28

2.3Decentralizedfinance(DeFi)recommendations29

2.4Privacyandsecuritypolicyrecommendations30

Conclusion31

Contributors32

Endnotes35

Disclaimer

Thisdocumentispublishedbythe

WorldEconomicForumasacontribution

toaproject,insightareaorinteraction.

Thefindings,interpretationsandconclusionsexpressedhereinarearesult

ofacollaborativeprocessfacilitatedand

endorsedbytheWorldEconomicForum

butwhoseresultsdonotnecessarily

representtheviewsoftheWorldEconomic

Forum,northeentiretyofitsMembers,

Partnersorotherstakeholders.

©2024WorldEconomicForum.Allrights

reserved.Nopartofthispublicationmay

bereproducedortransmittedinanyform

orbyanymeans,includingphotocopying

andrecording,orbyanyinformation

storageandretrievalsystem.

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches2

October2024

DigitalAssetsRegulation:

InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches

Preface

Astheadoptionofdigitalassetscontinues,2024

marksapivotalmomentforthegloballandscapeof

digitalassetregulation.AsofearlySeptember2024,

thetotalmarketcapitalizationofcryptocurrencies,

onetypeofdigitalasset,wasvaluedat$2.01trillion

andstablecoinscomprised8.5%ofthismarket,

amountingto$171billion.1Whenitcomestothe

statusofregulationglobally,accordingtoarecent

BankforInternationalSettlements(BIS)survey,two-

thirdsofthe86jurisdictionssurveyedwereorwill

soonberegulatingdigitalassets.2Themaingoalsof

implementingregulationaretoprotectinvestorsand

consumersandmaintainfinancialstability.

Asregulatorydevelopmentscontinue,countries

suchasAustralia,theUnitedKingdom,Brazil

andSouthKoreahavethisyearcommittedto

unveilingnewregulatoryframeworks.Inaddition,

thefullrolloutoftheEuropeanUnion’sMarketsin

Crypto-Assets(MiCA)regulationispoisedtoseta

precedentforcomprehensivedigitalassetoversight.

Althoughtherehasbeenrecentprogressindigital

assetregulation,countriesaretakingdivergent

approachesandhaveestablisheddifferenttimelines

forcreationandimplementation.Eachjurisdictionis

developingregulationsbasedonuniquegoalsand

objectives,whichrisksalackofcoordinationglobally.

Withthesevaryingapproaches,itisimperative

thatstakeholderscollaboratetoforgeasecureand

equitableregulatoryenvironment.Thisnecessitates

thesharingoflearningsfromglobalregulatory

experiments,identifyingbothsuccessfulpolicies

andshortcomings.Theanalysiscontainedinthis

reportaimstohighlightthesecriticalregulatory

insights,enablingpolicy-makersandregulators

tocrafteffectiveandharmonizedframeworks

thatpromoteinnovationwhilesafeguarding

stakeholders.Astheglobaleconomynavigatesthe

complexitiesofdigitalassets,thereportendeavours

tocontributeaclearandimpartialperspectiveon

theevolvingregulatorylandscape.

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches3

Executivesummary

Thisreportanalysesdigitalassetregulation

inseveraljurisdictionstoidentifyunique

approachesandprovideinsightstopolicy-

makersandprivate-sectorparticipants.

Thereisaneedforclearguidelinesinthefast-

evolvingdigitalassetsindustry.Thisreportprovides

acloseanalysisoftheregulatoryframeworksin

ninejurisdictionsandtheiruniqueapproaches

topolicycreationandimplementation.Thework

buildsonpreviousresearchundertakenbythe

WorldEconomicForumondigitalassetregulation,

whichestablishedafoundationtofurtherexplore

thejurisdiction-specificapproachesdetailedin

thisnewreport.

laundering(AML)andknowyourcustomer(KYC);

regulatoryandtechnicalsandboxes;decentralized

finance(DeFi);andprivacyandsecurity.These

subjectssurfacedasthemostpressingduringthe

assessment,standingoutastheindustry’smost

prominentissuesatthistime.

Drawingonthisjurisdictionalandtopic-specific

analysis,thereportoffersasetofrecommendations

forbothpublic-andprivate-sectorstakeholders,

categorizedbyissueassummarizedbelow.

Byexaminingninejurisdictions,thereportdraws

keylessonsfromeachapproachandrevealsthe

unintendedconsequencesthatmayresultfrom

differentregulatoryframeworks.Theninejurisdictions

areleadingeconomiesfordigitalassetactivityand

regulationimplementation–theEuropeanUnion;

Gibraltar;HongKongSAR,China(HongKong);

Japan;Singapore;Switzerland;theUnitedArab

Emirates;theUnitedKingdom;andtheUnitedStates.

Theanalysisenablesleaderstotakeajurisdictional

viewofboththepotentialadvantagesandthe

disadvantagesofimplementingcertainpolicies.

–AMLandKYC:BuildingonexistingAML/

KYCfoundations,focusingontheadoption

oftechnology-enhancedsolutions,global

cooperation,andtrainingandcompliance

programmes,tohelpcreateamoresecure

digitalassetslandscapeinthefuture.

–Regulatoryandtechnicalsandboxes:

Implementingclearsandboxobjectives

andsupportmechanismsandenablingthe

collaborativeparticipationofdiverseandbroad

networksinsandboxenvironments.

Thisinvestigationofeachjurisdictionnotonly

enhancestheunderstandingofthedirecteffects

ofregulatorymethodologiesbutalsoprovides

contextforpredictingupcomingtrendsand

preparingforpotentialchallengesintheevolving

digitalassetslandscape.Throughsuchanalysis,

policy-makersandregulatorscananticipatethe

impactsoftheirdecisions,betterenablingthem

tobuildandimplementregulationsthatareinline

withtheirintendedgoals.

Acrosstheseninejurisdictions,thereport

examinesfourkeyindustrytopics:anti-money

–DeFi:Prioritizingtheneedforriskmitigation

andtransparencyaswellastailoredlicensing

modelsandcleardefinitionstorefinethese

regulationsinacontrolledsettingwithout

compromisingtheuniquenatureofDeFi

anditstechnologicaladvancements.

–Privacyandsecurity:Underscoringtheneed

forstrongdataprotectionpoliciesthatprioritize

theconsumerandincluderegularsecurity

auditsandcompliancecheckstosafeguard

personalandfinancialinformation.

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches4

Introduction

Theglobalregulatorylandscapefordigital

assetsisevolving,withdifferencesinregulatory

approachesbetweenjurisdictions.

Digitalassetscontinuetohaveastrongpresencein

theglobaleconomy,asevidencedbyasignificant

marketcapitalization.3However,thelegalstatus

ofcryptocurrenciesvariessignificantlybycountry.

AccordingtoananalysisbytheAtlanticCouncil,

cryptocurrenciesarelegalin33countries,partially

bannedin17andgenerallyprohibitedin10.4

Inanassessmentofthestatusofdigitalasset

regulationglobally,theBankforInternational

Settlements(BIS)notedthatmorethan60%of

respondingjurisdictionspossessorarecreatinga

regulatoryframeworkfordigitalassets(Figure1).5

Mostarebringingforwardbespokeregulation

(48%)becausetheirexistingregulatoryframeworks

donotcoverdigitalassets.Jurisdictionsthat

haveestablishedoraredevelopingatailored

regulatoryframeworkforstablecoinsincludethe

UnitedKingdom,HongKongandSingapore,while

theEuropeanUnionisdevelopingaframework

fordigitalassetsmoregenerally.Injust9%of

jurisdictions,digitalassetsaresubjecttoexisting

financialregulation.Todate,around33%of

jurisdictionslackaregulatoryframeworkand

arenotcurrentlyworkingonone.

FIGURE1Centralbankresponsestodigitalassetregulationsurvey

Regulatoryframeworkforstablecoinsandothercryptoassets

Asapercentageofrespondents,2023

PresenceinthejurisdictionsRegulatoryobjectives

Yes

Investor/consumer

protection

Currentlyunder

development

Protectingfinancialstability

NoCounteringillicitfinance

Uncertain

Fair,efficientandtransparent

markets,innovationand/or

competition

Noanswer

Safetyandsoundness

ofregulatedinstitutions/

infrastructures

0%10%20%30%40%0%20%40%60%80%

BespokeregulationGeneralfinancialregulationBespokeregulationGeneralfinancialregulationNo

UncertainNoanswer

Source:BankforInternationalSettlements.(2024).AnnualeconomicreportNo.147:Embracingdiversity,advancingtogether–resultsofthe2023BISsurvey

oncentralbankcurrenciesandcrypto./publ/bppdf/bispap147.pdf

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches5

Thisreport

promotesa

nuancedapproach

toregulationrather

thana‘one-size-

fits-all’method,a

sentimentechoed

inthediverse

regulatoryregimes

exploredinthe

report.

Globally,digitalassetpoliciesandregulations

differtoalignwiththeneedsofeachjurisdiction,

basedonvariationsingoalsandriskappetites.

Inaddition,notalldigitalassetsarecreatedequal,

andtheirclassificationprofoundlyinfluences

theiruse,valuationandregulatorytreatment.

Thisreportpromotesanuancedapproachto

regulationratherthana“one-size-fits-all”method,

asentimentechoedinthediverseregulatory

regimesexploredinthereport.

Astheworldgrappleswiththeopportunities

andchallengespresentedinthedigitalassets

sector,theWorldEconomicForum’sCentrefor

FinancialandMonetarySystemsseekstoprovide

animpartialunderstandingoftheregulatory

landscapethroughtheDigitalAssetsRegulatory

(DAR)initiative.TheForumhasconducted

previousrelatedworkonthistopicincludingthe

DigitalCurrencyGovernanceConsortiumwhite

paperseriesandmostrecentlythePathways

toCrypto-AssetRegulationpaper.Thisearlier

worklaidthefoundationforfurtherexploration

ofjurisdiction-specificconsiderationsforshaping

newpoliciesandregulations.

TheDARinitiativeengagedmorethan80senior

leadersfromthepublicandprivatesectorsand

academiatoexaminethecurrentstateofdigital

assetregulationaroundtheglobe,andtoanalyse

outcomesfromregulatoryimplementationsto

dateinseveraladvancedjurisdictions.Thisreport

synthesizesthefindingsfromtheseexplorations.

Methodology

Insightshavebeengatheredfromoursteering

committeeandexpertworkinggroupthrough:

–Deskresearch

–Workshops

–Interviews

Audience

Thereportaudienceincludesglobalpolicy-makers

andregulators,alongwithexecutivesofprivate-

sectorcompanies,whoallhaveresponsibilities

connectedtodigitalassets.

Taxonomy

Giventhediverseactorsandrolesthatcomprise

thedigitalassetsecosystem,ageneraltaxonomy

isessentialforconsistentregulationandcanassist

withclarityandorganization,aswellasconsistent

benchmarkingacrossvariousjurisdictions.The

lackofacommontaxonomyhasbeenmentioned

inthedigitalassetspaceandwasreferencedin

thePathwaystoCrypto-AssetRegulationreport

asanimportantrisk.However,therearestillmany

perspectivesandalackofconsensuspersistson

definitionsamongecosystemparticipants.Bearing

inmindthesecomplexities,theterm“digitalasset”

willbeusedthroughoutthisreportasanall-

encompassingcategory.Withineachjurisdictional

context,theterminologyisusedinlinewitheach

respectivejurisdiction’susage.

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches6

1

Regulatoryapproaches,

outcomesandunintended

consequences

Thissectionexaminesninejurisdictions’

andunintendedconsequences.

digitalassetregulatoryapproaches,highlighting

importantindustryissues,initialpolicyoutcomes

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches7

Thejurisdictions

chosenfor

examinationhave

regulationsatan

advancedstage

ofdevelopment,

allowingforthe

impactsoftheir

implementation

tobeobserved.

Toexaminelessonslearnedinthedigitalassets

regulatorylandscape,acomprehensiveviewof

currentapproachesisneeded.Thejurisdictions

chosenforexaminationhaveregulationsatan

advancedstageofdevelopment,allowingforthe

impactsoftheirimplementationtobeobserved.

Theseare:theEuropeanUnion,Gibraltar,Hong

Kong,Japan,Singapore,Switzerland,theUnited

ArabEmirates,theUnitedKingdomandtheUnited

StatesofAmerica(Figure2).

–AMLandKYC:EffectiveAMLandKYC

measuresaremission-criticaltotheintegrity

ofthedigitalassetsecosystemastheyhelp

promoteatransparentandsafeenvironment.

–Regulatoryandtechnicalsandboxes:

Sandboxesplayapivotalrolebyallowing

companiestotestproductsunderoversight,

promotingresponsibleinnovationwhile

ensuringcompliancewithexistingand

upcomingstandards.

Foreachjurisdiction,therearefoursubsections:

“generalapproach”,“approachbytopic”,“outcomes”

and“unintendedconsequences”,eachdesignedto

exploredifferentelementsoftheregulatorylandscape.

“Generalapproach”describestheoverarching

regulatorymethodologyofagivenregion.Within

“approachbytopic”,thereportanalysesfourof

theindustry’smostpressingissues:anti-money

laundering(AML)andknowyourcustomer(KYC);

regulatoryandtechnicalsandboxes;decentralized

finance(DeFi);andprivacyandsecurity.While

evaluatingtheselectedjurisdictions,thesetopics

emergedasthemostprominent,witheachregion

adoptingauniqueregulatoryapproachtoaddress

them.Theadditionalrationalefortheirinclusionis

discussedbelow:

–DeFi:DeFi’sgoalofalteringtheexisting

paradigmofcentralizationhassignificant

implicationsforhowusersinteractwith

technologyapplicationsandintroduces

novelregulatorychallengesinthefuture.

–Privacyandsecurity:Robustmeasuresprotect

consumers’assetsanddatafromthreatsand

buildasecuredigitalassetslandscapeand

increaseconsumertrust.

Inthe“outcomes”and“unintendedconsequences”

segments,thereportanalysestheresultsofdigital

assetspoliciesthathavebeenevidenttodate,as

wellasanyunexpectedresultsstemmingfromthe

regulatoryframeworksinplace.

FIGURE2Ninejurisdictionsassessed

UnitedKingdom

UnitedStatesofAmerica

Japan

EuropeanUnion

Switzerland

UnitedArabEmirates

Gibraltar

HongKongSAR,China

Singapore

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches8

1.1EuropeanUnion

GeneralapproachApproachbytopic

TheEuropean

Unionisoneofthe

largestmarkets

withadvanced

digitalasset

regulation.

TheEuropeanUnionisoneofthelargestmarkets

withadvanceddigitalassetregulation.In2023,the

EUfinalizedthecomprehensiveMarketsinCrypto-

Assets(MiCA)regulation,animportantpieceof

theEU’sdigitalfinancestrategy,providinglegal

clarityonprivacy,securityandtransparencyfor

digitalassets,whichdoesnotincludenon-fungible

tokens(NFTs)anddecentralizeddigitalassets.6

MiCArequiresallissuerstocreateawhitepaper

forassets,subjecttoapprovalandlicensing,with

non-complianceleadingtofines.7Theregulation,

effectivefrom30June2024forstablecoinsand

fullyeffectivebytheendof2024,aimstoharmonize

regulationsamongmemberstates,replacing

existingdomesticlaws,whiletheimplementationis

delegatedtorespectivejurisdictionalauthoritiesfor

enforcement.8MiCAfocusesoninvestorprotection

andmarketintegrity,primarilyaddressingcrypto-

assetserviceproviders(CASPs)andcertaintypes

oftokens.Italsoincludesrulesforstablecoins,

mandatinggovernanceandreservemanagement,

andcompliancewithrelevantexistinglegislation.9

Itisimportanttodistinguishbetweencrypto-assets

thatfallunderMiCAandfinancialinstrumentsin

digitalformthatfallundertheexistingsecurities

regulations(e.g.MarketsinFinancialInstruments

Directive[MiFID]).TheEU’sDigitalOperational

ResilienceAct(DORA)andtheDLTPilotRegime

providethelegalframeworkfortradingand

settlementofotherdigitalassetsunderMiFIDII

(effectivesince2018),facilitatingcross-border

expansionandmitigatingregulatoryarbitrage.10

Withtheseadvances,theEUwillbetheworld’s

largestmarketwithlegalandregulatoryclarity

fordigitalassets.

Anti-moneylaundering(AML)

andknowyourcustomer(KYC)

In2021,theEUpresentedseveralproposals

forstrengtheningAMLprotections,including

establishinganewentitycalledtheAnti-Money

LaunderingandCounteringtheFinancingof

TerrorismAuthority(AMLA).11Manyofthese

proposalsarecurrentlyindevelopmentand,subject

todiscussions,workingtowardsagreements.12,13

AsamemberoftheFinancialActionTaskForce

(FATF),theEUalignswithTravelRuleregulations.14

TherevisedTransferofFundsRegulation(TFR)

mandatescapturingalltransactioninformation,

regardlessofsize,withathresholdof€1,000

forself-hostedwallets.

MiCArequiresCASPstocomplywithKYCand

AMLrules,performingenhancedduediligence

forcustomersfromhigh-riskcountries.

ItisimportanttoclarifyherethattheseAML

protectionsarenotcrypto-specific,andthat

theTFRappliesexclusivelytoserviceproviders,

andthereforeexplicitlyexcludesobligationsfor

providersofhardwareandsoftwareorproviders

ofself-custodywalletsthatdonothavecontrol

overthecrypto-assets.Assuch,AMLandKYC

remainkeyelementsoftheupcomingregulations.

Regulatoryandtechnicalsandboxes

MiCAisgenerallysupportiveofregulatoryand

technicalsandboxes.In2023,theEUlaunched

theEuropeanBlockchainRegulatorySandbox,

whichwillrunforthreeyears,withcohortsof20

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches9

blockchainusecases.15Whenitcomestodigital

securities,thelaunchoftheDLTPilotRegimeis

dedicatedtoallowingcompaniestoexperiment

withdistributedledgertechnology(DLT).16

Portugal,anEUmembercountry,alsohasaunique

TechnologicalFreeZoneregulatorysandboxfor

encouragingthedevelopmentandexperimentation

ofnewtechnologyapplications.17,18

Decentralizedfinance(DeFi)

MiCAexplicitlycarvesoutDeFifromtheupcoming

regulation,asperrecital22:“Wherecrypto-asset

servicesareprovidedinafullydecentralised

mannerwithoutanyintermediary,theyshould

notfallwithinthescopeofthisRegulation.”19

However,theregulationcallsforseveralstudiesof

componentsoftheDeFiecosystem,decentralized

protocolsandapplications.

TheEuropeanSecuritiesandMarketsAuthority

(ESMA)recentlypublishedareport,Decentralised

FinanceintheEU:DevelopmentsandRisks,toinform

thefutureofMiCA.20Additionally,theEuropean

Commissionisexpectedtoprepareareportby

December2024thatexaminestheDeFimarket.

thelawisbindinganddirectlyapplicableinallEU

memberstates.Proponentsarguethatitavoids

regulatoryfragmentation,safeguardsconsumer

protectionsandfacilitatescross-borderexpansion

forCASPs,whichwillmitigateregulatoryarbitrage.

TheEuropeanBlockchainRegulatorySandbox

hasledtomixedopinions.Somestakeholdershave

givenpositivefeedbackabouttheabilitytorun

innovativeexperiments,establishbestpractices

alongsideregulatorsandcollaboratewithauthorities

effectively.However,thesandboxhasalsobeen

criticizedbyindustryparticipantsforitsnarrow

scopeofpermittedusecases,whichhasresulted

inarelativelylimitedpoolofapplicants.

Europeanauthoritieshavebeenabletoinstil

increasingconfidenceonthetopicofKYCand

AMLwiththetakedownofcryptocurrencymixers

suchasChipMixerandBitzlato,whichenabled

moneylaundering.23,24

Otheroutcomesincludethegrowthofinward

investmentintotheEUbyinternationaldigital

assetfirms,whichareearlysignsofincreased

marketdevelopment.

Privacyandsecurity

Unintendedconsequences

MiCAwillrequireidentityverificationofasset

holders,andmandatesthattradingplatforms

mustnotallowuserstotradeassetswithfull

anonymization.Additionally,theTravelRule’s

identityrequirements,towhichtheEUsubscribes,

willincludesupervisionoffinancialtransactions.21

Someaspectsofdigitalassetshavebeenexcluded

fromregulation,whileothersarebeingseenasoverly

prescriptive.MiCAhasbeencriticizedforexcluding

technologyapplicationssuchascentralbankdigital

currencies(CBDCs),utilitytokens,DeFiandNFTs,

leadingtopotentialunintendedconsequences.

TheEUhasalsoenactedtheGeneralData

ProtectionRegulation(GDPR),whichisseenas

oneofthemostcomprehensiveprivacyand

securitylawsintheworld.Authoritiesareevaluating

howGDPRandMiCAwillworktogether.22

OtheraspectsofMiCAcanbeseenasbeingtoo

strict,suchasstablecoinreserverequirements.

Also,themandatedtransparencyconflictswith

digitalassetanonymity,raisingprivacyconcerns.

IndustryplayersareurgingtheEUtoconsider

alternativecompliancemethodsthatbetterprotect

privacy.Lastly,theDataAct’sprovisionsfor

interruptingorterminatingsmartcontractshave

facedbacklashfromblockchainadvocacygroups,

whoviewthesecontrolsasoverreaching.

Outcomes

TheintentionoftheMiCAregulationisfor

regulationtobeharmonizedacrossEurope,as

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches10

1.2Gibraltar

Generalapproach

allowingDeFiprojectstotesttheirproducts

andservicesinacontrolledenvironment.

Gibraltarhasestablisheditselfasaprominent

centreforblockchainanddigitalassets.In

January2018,theterritorypioneeredlegislation

forDLT,thefirstjurisdictiontodosoworldwide,

emphasizingregulation,reputationandquick

marketimplementation.Itiswidelyrecognized

foritseffortsinadvancingblockchaintechnology

andensuringsustainabilityandsecuritywithin

theindustry.

TooperateinGibraltar,cryptocurrencycompanies

mustobtainalicencefromtheGibraltarFinancial

ServicesCommission(GFSC)undertheFinancial

ServicesActof2019.TheGFSCreviews

applicationsandmaygrantalicenceifcertain

criteriaaremet.Gibraltarhasclearregulatory

frameworkssuchastheFinancialServices

Regulationsof2020,whichregulatefirmssuchas

cryptocurrencyexchangesandwalletproviders.

TaxationundertheGibraltarCompaniesActof

2014exemptsdividends,capitalgainsandincome

generatedfromdigitalassettransactionsiftheyoccur

outsideGibraltar.25Thistaxframeworkisattractive

forcompaniesandinvestorsfocusedonblockchain-

relatedactivities,significantlyreducingthetaxburden

oncross-borderdigitalassettransactions.

Approachbytopic

Furthermore,theGFSCcollaboratesclosely

withindustrystakeholderstostayupdatedon

technologicaladvancesandemergingtrendsin

DeFi,ensuringthatregulationsremainrelevant

andeffective.

Privacyandsecurity

TheGFSCmandatesstringentdataprotection

andcybersecuritymeasuresforblockchain

businesses,ensuringcompliancewithinternational

standardssuchasGDPR.Additionally,the

ProceedsofCrimeActprovidesthoroughguidelines

onsecurityandprivacy,facilitatingastable

commercialsettingforbusinesses.29Moreover,it

providesclearguidelinesonriskmanagementand

thesafeguardingofcustomerassetstoprevent

databreachesandunauthorizedaccess.This

proactiveregulatorystancehelpsbuildtrustand

createsasecureenvironmentfordigitalasset

transactionsinGibraltar.30

Outcomes

TherehasbeenaninfluxofcompaniestoGibraltar’s

digitalassetsecosystemonaccountofitsfavourable

regulatoryenvironment.Thepresenceofdigitalasset

firmsinthecountryisexpanding,withmoreentities

establishingoperationsthere.

Anti-moneylaundering(AML)

andknowyourcustomer(KYC)

TheGFSCsetsKYCandAMLprinciples,requiring

firmstomaintainrecords,monitorsystemsand

reportsuspiciousactivitieswhileallowingadaptation

toevolvingchallenges.Thisregulatoryframework

aimstobalanceeffectiveoversightwiththeneedfor

innovationandgrowthinthefinancialsector.26

Regulatoryandtechnicalsandboxes

Additionally,Gibraltar’sregulatoryframeworkhas

attractedinternationalbusinesses,bolstering

economicgrowthandpositioningtheterritory

asacompetitivehubfordigitalassets.Moving

forward,thecountryaimstocontinueenhancingits

regulatorylandscapetosustaingrowthandattract

moreblockchaininnovators.

Unintendedconsequences

Gibraltar’s

taxframework

isattractivefor

companiesand

investorsfocused

onblockchain-

relatedactivities,

significantly

reducingthetax

burdenoncross-

borderdigitalasset

transactions.

Gibraltar’sregulatorysandboxesallowcompanies

totestnewproductsinacontrolledenvironment,

ensuringcomplianceandreducingrisksbefore

marketlaunch.TheGFSCoverseestheseinitiatives,

ensuringthattheproductsaretestedwithinstrict

regulatoryparameterstosafeguardconsumer

interestsandmaintainmarketstability.27

Decentralizedfinance(DeFi)

Gibraltar’sproactiveDeFiregulationbythe

GFSCensuresflexibility,transparency,security

andconsumerprotectionwhileavoidingoverly

prescriptiverules.28TheGFSC’sregulatory

sandboxplaysasignificantroleinthisapproach,

Gibraltar’sstraightforwardregulatorycompliance

processeshavethepotentialtoattractfirmsseeking

regulatoryarbitrageopportunities.Specifically,the

easeofacquiringDLTproviderlicencesandlower

operationalcostsinGibraltarhavesignificantly

reducedthebarrierstoentry.Thiscouldattractless

desirablemarketplayersandintensifyregulatory

arbitragepractices,ascompanieslooktobenefit

fromGibraltar’smoreaccommodatingregulatory

environment.Therehasbeenalackofharmonization

ofGibraltar’sregulatorypracticeswithother

economiesintheregion.Thepossibilityofregulatory

arbitrageexistsinthesegapsbetweenjurisdictions

andthereneedstobeagreaterfocusoncross-

bordercooperationontheseregulatoryrequirements.

DigitalAssetsRegulation:InsightsfromJurisdictionalApproaches11

AddressingthesechallengeswillbekeytoGibraltar

sustainingitsreputationasatrustworthyand

innovativehubfordigitalassets.Inthefuture,

Gibraltarwillwishtostrikeabalancebetween

itsappealingregulatoryframeworkandstrong

enforcementmeasurestocurbpotentialabuses.

1.3H