Search results

This paper aims to analyse the virtual currency regulation especially in Finland, Sweden and Norway. Different member states had a bit differently incorporated regulation of AMLD5. Finland has gone the furthest in regulation and even issuers of virtual currency are under the Finnish regulation.

In one hand, the study approach is legal dogmatics, but in other hand it is comparative legal research. Both approaches can be found in this paper.

The EEA is going from a more fragmented regulatory landscape based on 5th Anti-Money Laundering Directive to a more uniform regulatory approach provided by a legislative package that regulates crypto assets more broadly, coupled with an overhaul of the anti-money laundering rules, bringing them into a single European rulebook. Finland has taken a step further in this matter. Therefore, it would be reasonable for the AMLD5 scope to be expanded in this respect. It is a welcome development that the regulation will be unified and that investor protection will be better taken into account in the future as well.

This paper gives a picture of what kind of challenges is there in Fennoscandic in terms of money laundering regulation of virtual currencies. On the other hand, this paper brings into the discussion the rather clever solutions of Fennoscandic (especially Finland) regarding money laundering of virtual currencies.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the recent (Dec`15) introduction of the Bitlicensing rules in New York and consider from a banking perspective how this will impact on their own risk assessment processes. The paper also outlines the challenges of applying financial regulation to companies that have an area of expertise and business that is more aligned to software development, rather than financial service provision.

This paper is a viewpoint paper, which offers a critical discussion on the FATF guidelines on virtual currencies. The paper compares developments that are currently occurring within the virtual currency sector in particularly the new Bitlicensing process in New York State and discusses the implications to the banking sector on risk assessment processes for virtual currency transactions.

This paper will benefit the banking and regulation industries as well as economic and banking academics and anyone with an interest in virtual and digital currency technology.

This paper is unique in that it examines the issue of virtual currency regulation from a banking perspective. It explains the virtual currency technology as a means to be enhancing banking risk assessment, for clients seeking to incorporate virtual currency transactions into their business. This paper impacts on the banking and regulatory sectors because it critically examines the current practice of over regulation and the impact that this has on alternative financial systems, such as digital and virtual currencies. The paper offers a theoretical framework as well as citing current practical reports of how regulation has already started to affect the financial services landscape. The impact of getting this wrong can lead to increased criminal activity, and this paper highlights how susceptible the financial sector is to this.

To analyze the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) final BitLicense regulations with respect to Bitcoin and other virtual currencies.

This article discusses the specific requirements outlined in the NYDFS’s regulations. The article goes on to provide background information on Bitcoin and virtual currencies and examines previous regulatory approaches prior to these regulations.

This article examines how the new regulations require all persons engaging in a virtual currency business to apply and obtain a BitLicense, and to maintain certain minimum standards and programs to help ensure customer protection, cyber-security and anti-money laundering compliance. Financial intermediaries that already are regulated by NYDFS under the New York Banking Law are not required to obtain a BitLicense if they are approved by NYDFS under their existing regulation to conduct virtual currency business activity.

This article contains insight and analysis into recent NYDFS regulations on a new currency type from attorneys experienced in financial services and regulatory matters.

This paper aims to explore the implications of the 2014 Financial Action Task Force (FATF) publication and guidelines on virtual currency definitions and the overall impact of blockchain technology on anti-money laundering (AML) compliance and regulation. The report cites three case study examples, which the FATF paper uses and which this paper questions as to their relevance, especially to the formal banking sector.

The paper has provided a critical analysis of a FATF publication and guideline document. Additional secondary data has been used on blockchain technology and to analyse the relevance and implications of the case studies used in the FATF document.

The main findings are that virtual currency technology has the potential to support AML frameworks within banking when and if they are better understood. However, generic case examples of virtual currency legal cases are not necessarily useful when developing AML risk assessment frameworks within the banking sector.

The implications from the research affect any financial organisation undertaking AML risk analysis or compliance especially for virtual currencies. It applies to the banking, insurance and auditing professions and is of interest to academics working on virtual and digital currencies.

The social implications are that virtual currency technology can be used to add protection to banking transactions and could also be considered for client identity information such as beneficial ownership.

The originality of this paper is the topic of blockchain technology being considered in AML frameworks and the critical analysis of the FATF cases.

This paper aims to explain the current stage of blockchain and virtual currency regulation in the EU.

The paper explains the current state of blockchain and virtual currency regulation in the EU, presenting the EU institutions’ main policy and regulatory initiatives on, and approaches to, blockchain and virtual currency.

Though the EU is looking seriously at the potential of blockchain and distributed ledger technologies, many European institutions are of the opinion that it is still too early to regulate in this field. As far as virtual currencies are concerned, Member States’ central banks do not consider them to be equivalent to money or legal tender. However, with the current high profile of and interest in virtual currencies, one can expect the European Commission to at least consider what regulation might be called for.

This study provides practical guidance on and introduction to the current regulatory and policy landscape of blockchain and virtual currency in the EU.

Regulation of digital currency is still at its infancy as authorities around the world grapple with its mechanics, and study its impact and the best method to regulate it. Significant increase in the use of digital cryptocurrency based on Blockchain technology post-Bitcoin phenomenon had challenged the conventional idea of central bank monopoly in currency issuance. This had also raised concern that digital currency being used as an instrumentality of crime given its anonymity feature that allows for the flow of funds without tracing and the fact that it is built on trustless system that provides security of transaction. This concern, plus other consideration including the prospect of issuing central bank digital currency, had driven some authorities around the world to adopt countermeasures either via an outright ban or a regulatory regime that suits the nature of digital currency, which is purely virtual and anonymous. However, in coming out with an appropriate legal regime, authorities faced multiple difficulties especially when the pace of legal development does not sync congruently with the rapid progress of technology. In addition, given the growing prominence of Islamic finance around the world, questions also arise pertaining to the legality of digital cryptocurrency from the Islamic perspective. Through a qualitative study of relevant literatures as well as legislations in different countries, this chapter discusses the various categories of digital currency, its position from the Islamic perspective, regulatory regimes of digital cryptocurrency in selected jurisdictions and challenges faced by authorities around the world in regulating this new medium of exchange.

This chapter attempts to clarify and describe the legal and regulatory framework for cryptocurrency with special focus on Malaysia and the threats that it poses from the anti-money laundering perspective. Currently, very few countries have legislations that regulate cryptocurrency. Nonetheless, the crazy surge in prices (to more than 20-folds at some point) has sent both legitimate investors and criminals flocking to cryptocurrencies. This chapter analyses and compares the official reports from various governments, writings of government officials, experts and scholars in journals and newspapers, interviews and draws conclusions on the legal framework of cryptocurrency, and money laundering challenges. The study notes that the decision of the US regulators in allowing Bitcoin futures to trade on major exchanges to be one of the reasons behind the sudden surge. The study also finds that the South Korean regulators’ approach in banning its financial institutions from dealing with virtual currency is a positive one. The chapter stresses that it is not adequate for regulators to warn the public to act with extreme caution and increase their understanding on the risks they take on if they choose to invest in cryptocurrencies. Instead, it is necessary to have comprehensive international and national laws and regulations for the control and management of cryptocurrencies. In addition, the anti-money laundering legal framework must be improved to cater to the new threats posed by cryptocurrency.

This study aims to explain how cryptocurrency is leveraged for illicit purposes across the global financial system. Specifically, it establishes how cryptocurrency has been changing the nature of transnational and domestic money laundering (ML). It then assesses the effectiveness of conventional anti-money laundering (AML) policy and legislation against the proliferation of crypto laundering, using Canada as a critical case study.

Data was collected from court cases and secondary sources to build cross-case trends of cryptocurrency use in ML. Illicit International Political Economy forms the theoretical foundation for this study, whose contribution is situated in the current literature on crypto-ML.

This study finds that Bitcoin is common among crypto-money launderers, though most also use some form of alt-coin, and that the use of third-party currency exchanges is a prevalent method to create illicit funds and conceal proceeds of crime. The findings validate two hypotheses that illicit use of crypto is prevalent in the first two stages of ML, and that crypto is most often used in conjunction with other fiat currencies. Although law enforcement is improving on monitoring and understanding popular cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, alt-coins pose a significant challenge for criminal intelligence. New regulations for third-party currency exchanges are having a positive impact on curtailing crypto-laundering but are shown to be insufficient per se to contain the use of crypto in criminal activity.

This study contributes to a more robust understanding of the use of virtual currency in transnational and domestic ML. It contributes to an emerging body of literature on the role of technological change in enabling the global flow of illicit funds. It also informs public policy on virtual currency in general, and on AML regulation in Canada in particular.

This paper aims to illustrate how virtual assets are used in such criminal offenses as money laundering and seeks to study the role of financial intelligence (monitoring) of transactions with virtual assets effectively in combating money laundering.

This research methodology includes system and structural methods that help analyze the theoretical, organizational and legal bases of the financial intelligence (monitoring) of transactions with virtual assets. The authors use the doctrinal legal research approach to analyze and describe the legislation connected to the financial intelligence (monitoring) operations with virtual assets. To identify critical issues of understanding the “virtual assets” and “cryptocurrency” essence, the peculiarities of the scientific community views on the given definitions, the authors use the method of terminological analysis and concepts operationalization. The authors use the extrapolation method to determine the possibility of implementing the analyzed best practices of foreign countries in the domestic practice of financial intelligence (monitoring) of transactions with virtual assets as an effective way in combating money laundering.

This study demonstrates the role of financial intelligence (monitoring) of transactions with virtual assets as an effective way to combat money laundering.

The article is devoted to comprehensively studying “virtual assets” and “cryptocurrency” concepts. The authors carried out a comparative analysis of these two concepts with the definition of their features and the main characteristics and features that separate them from each other. The authors also stressed the need for countries to strengthen the requirements for situations and activities with virtual assets, where there is a high level of risk in a risk-based approach.

To explain and draw conclusions from six recent bitcoin and virtual currency regulatory and law enforcement developments.

Discusses and draws conclusions from six recent, important developments: two administrative rulings from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), recent remarks by New York State Department of Financial Services Superintendent Benjamin Lawsky, remarks by Mark Wetjen of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), a recent Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) informational sweep of crowdsales of crypto-equity, and the US Department of Justice proceedings against Trendon Shavers.

Rather than trying to stifle or control virtual currencies, US governmental entities recognize the long-term value of virtual currencies and are trying to create a regulatory regime to foster growth and development, and an atmosphere where institutional and retail investors are protected.

Provides an overview of the key United States regulatory issues facing companies engaged in Bitcoin-related businesses.