应对加密数字货币监管挑战的域外经验与中国方案

资讯 2024-06-29 阅读:44 评论:0
进入21世纪后,区块链技术、加密数字货币在金融科技(Fintech)领域深受关注。加密数字货币包括传统的比特币、以太币、数字化法币以及稳定币(Stablecoin)。以比特币为标志的加密数字货币是以“货币的非国家化”为目标,以颠覆传统公...
美化布局示例

欧易(OKX)最新版本

【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   全球官网 大陆官网

币安(Binance)最新版本

币安交易所app【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址

火币HTX最新版本

火币老牌交易所【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址

进入21世纪后,区块链技术、加密数字货币在金融科技(Fintech)领域深受关注。加密数字货币包括传统的比特币、以太币、数字化法币以及稳定币(Stablecoin)。以比特币为标志的加密数字货币是以“货币的非国家化”为目标,以颠覆传统公司融资路径、重构个体金融地位以及国家金融市场为表征,以新兴的区块链技术为手段的一场全方位的金融科技试验。作为连接加密数字货币与传统金融的桥梁,稳定币进一步成为去中心化金融(DeFi-Decentralized Finance)交易的基础解决方案。当前稳定币模式层出不穷,技术架构迭代迅速,市值和流通量在全球范围内呈几何数级增长。稳定币作为加密数字货币中的金融科技创新产品,可能会影响世界宏观金融格局和金融稳定。稳定币的产生和发展与加密数字货币的发展直接联系,对稳定币监管的国外经验可以为全面规制加密数字货币提供借鉴。因此,突破地域限制研究世界主要国家对稳定币的规制经验,探索我国依法监管稳定币的路径,也就有了特殊的紧迫性和必要性。

In the twenty-first century, block-chain technology, crypto-digital money, has received considerable attention in the area of financial science and technology. As a bridge linking encrypted digital money to traditional finance, crypto-digital currency has become the basis for decentralized financial transactions (DeFi-Decentralized Finance). As a result, the current currency-stabilization paradigm has been characterized by a “non-stateization of currencies” with the aim of destabilizing traditional corporate financing paths, re-establishing individual financial positions, and national financial markets. A full-scale financial science and technology experiment, with emerging block-chain technology as a means of influencing the world’s macro-financial architecture and financial stability.


一、问题的提出

I. Questions raised


2017年9月4日中国人民银行等七部委发布《关于防范代币发行融资风险的公告》(以下简称《公告》)之后,我国境内不再允许加密数字资产交易所直接进行法币与加密数字货币之间的兑换交易。自此加密数字货币在中国境内的场内交易宣告结束。2021年9月24日,中国人民银行、中央网信办、最高人民法院、最高人民检察院等十部门联合发布《关于进一步防范和处置虚拟货币交易炒作风险的通知》(以下简称《通知》),将加密数字货币相关业务定性为非法金融活动。但与此同时,稳定币在世界范围内迎来了一次飞跃发展。由于法定货币与“虚拟货币”的直接兑换途径以及作为兑换中介的交易所运营在我国境内被禁,我国的加密数字货币投资者纷纷选择稳定币作为法定货币与加密数字货币流通的替代途径。换言之,由于我国完全禁止法定货币与加密数字货币的交易,实际上对推动以泰达币(USDT)为代表的稳定币在我国成为加密数字货币的“法币”起到了一定的促进作用。质言之,我国对加密数字货币从严监管的政策倒逼了稳定币在中国的爆发式发展。

On 24 September 2021, the People’s Bank of China, the Central Networking Office, the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, among other 10 departments, jointly issued the Circular on Further Protection against the Risk of Financing Virtual Currency Transactions (hereinafter referred to as the Circular), which classifies encrypted digital currency-related operations as illegal financial activity. At the same time, the stable currency has witnessed a world-wide leap forward.


从稳定币业态在中国的发展来看,为了应对中国国内的监管障碍,稳定币积极寻求以各种方式挂钩人民币,在世界范围内构建包括中国在内的加密数字金融生态。例如,泰达公司于2019年9月9日正式宣布推出与离岸人民币挂钩的稳定币CNHT(Tether Chinese Yuan)。泰达公司的姊妹公司Bitfinex交易所,在CNHT发布的第二天就宣布支持以下三种币对的兑换交易:比特币(BTC)与CNHT, USDT与CNHT,以及离岸人民币与CNHT。CNHT的推出会进一步推动离岸人民币的流动性,但是这也引发中国监管机构的关注。尽管现在与CNHT的交易币对流动性有限,但无论如何,稳定币对我国金融的影响已不仅仅停留在理论层面。此外,由于政策限制和监管环境的影响,稳定币在中国的普及与发展情况至今尚无官方的统计,但我们还是可以从一些第三方机构的数据中发现中国投资者对稳定币的需求非常旺盛。单就USDT而言,据估算约有60%的USDT流向中国的投资者。此外,与传统的外汇支付和跨境结算方式不同,稳定币无需依赖银行和政府,任何人都可以通过互联网获得其所带来的全球化金融服务。虽然《公告》和《通知》不断对我国境内包括稳定币在内的加密数字货币交易炒作活动保持高压打击态势,但在技术上极难做到完全封禁稳定币。稳定币的便捷性和全球性也带来了诸如跨境洗钱、逃避外汇监管等诸多监管难题。因此,我国应主动积极推进对稳定币监管。本文尝试在分析稳定币的金融生态和世界主要监管模式的基础上,提出监管稳定币的中国方案。

China’s sister company, Bitfinex Exchange, announced on the day after CNHT’s release that it would support exchange transactions in three currencies: Bitcoin and CNHT, USDT and CNHT, as well as offshore renminbi and CNHT, are actively seeking ways to link the renminbi worldwide. For example, Tedar’s launch on 9 September 2019 officially announced the introduction of a stable currency, CNT, linked to the offshore renminbi.


二、稳定币的界定及我国现行法律规制的局限性

II. Definition of a stable currency and limitations of the existing legal regime in our country


中国人民银行指出稳定币“将给国际货币体系、支付清算体系、货币政策、跨境资本流动管理等带来诸多风险和挑战。”加密数字货币的价格相对于法币体系以及数字货币存在巨幅波动,使得加密数字货币与法币世界缺乏稳定的价值锚,无法成为价值尺度和流通媒介,阻碍了加密数字货币在现实世界的应用。稳定币的出现恰恰解决了这一问题,其发展壮大已经势不可挡。截至2021年7月,以美元为计价基础的稳定币市值已经超过了1160亿美元,稳定币在我国民间也广泛流通。如何认识稳定币的性质以及如何监管是一个关系我国金融稳定、金融体系健康发展和未来国家核心竞争力的重要问题。然而,世界各国对稳定币的法律监管才刚刚起步。2021年7月,美国现任财长珍妮特·耶伦(Janet Yellen)在总统金融市场工作组(The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets)会议上,就指出当前稳定币正在快速增长,而法律监管框架仍尚付阙如,美国金融监管机关应当立即行动,制定针对稳定币的法律规范和监管路径。欧盟则已经通过分散性立法试图对稳定币进行规制。

The People’s Bank of China has pointed out that currency stabilization “will pose many risks and challenges to the international monetary system, the payment clearing system, monetary policy, the management of cross-border capital flows, etc.” As of July 2021, the market value of a stable dollar, based on the United States dollar, had exceeded $116 billion, and stable currency was widely circulating among the country’s citizens. At the meeting on how to understand the nature of a stable currency and how to regulate it is an important issue for the country’s financial stability, the healthy financial system, and the core competitiveness of future countries.


(一)稳定币的特点

(i) Characteristics of currency stabilization


作为加密数字货币的一类,稳定币产生和发展都与加密数字货币生态的形成和建构息息相关。顾名思义,稳定币的特点之一是价值稳定且全球流通。它是与目标价值(如美元)保持价格稳定的加密数字货币。尽管稳定币在发展初期颇受争议,但其渐已为主流金融所接受。稳定币不依赖任何国家的中央银行,以成为真正的世界货币为愿景。与加密数字货币高速迭代、价值波动性大以及发展路径独立这三个挑战相对应,稳定币展现出了强大的实用价值与生命力。

As an encoded digital currency, stable currency generation and development are linked to the formation and construction of an encrypted digital monetary ecology. One of the characteristics of stable currency is, by definition, stable value and global circulation. It is an encrypted digital currency that maintains price stability with its target value (e.g., the United States dollar).


稳定币的第二个特点是其独特的桥梁纽带作用。稳定币的主要应用方向包括为波动性强的加密货币提供价值衡量尺度;为加密数字货币提供交易媒介;为链外资本的进入提供入场媒介;为市场提供避险和保值的功能;为国际支付提供点到点且无需信任的低成本支付、转账渠道。作为加密数字货币市场的压舱石,稳定币凭借其稳定的价值担当起价值尺度和交易媒介的角色,并连接起传统金融市场与加密数字货币生态,解决了加密数字货币交易及生态发展的重要问题。因此,各国金融监管机构以及央行愈发关注加密数字货币尤其是稳定币对货币政策和金融稳定造成的影响。

The second feature of stabilizing the currency is its unique role as a bridge link. The main applications of stabilizing the currency include providing a value measure for highly volatile encrypted currencies; providing a trade medium for encrypted digital currencies; providing an entry medium for off-chain capital entry; providing a safe haven and value-insurance function for the market; and providing a point-to-point, untrustworthy low-cost payment and transfer channel for international payments. As a ballaststone for an encrypted digital currency market, stabilizing the currency by virtue of its stable value as a value measure and a trade medium, and linking traditional financial markets to an encrypted digital money ecology, resolving important issues of digital exchange and ecological development.


(二)稳定币的分类及基础资产属性

(ii) Classification of stable currencies and underlying asset attributes


2012年1月,威利茨(J. R. Willett)发表了《第二比特币白皮书》(Second Bitcoin White Paper),首次提出了“锚定资产价值的加密货币”的概念,即稳定币的概念雏形。2014年,Nubits项目、Bitshare项目和Tether项目先后提出了稳定币概念的雏形,即一种和法币有效实现价格锚定的加密数字货币。当前业界一般将稳定币分为以下四类。

In January 2012, the Second Bitcoin White Paper, published by J. R. Willett, introduced, for the first time, the concept of “encrypted currency that anchors the value of assets,” i.e., the concept of stable currency. In 2014, the Nubits project, the Bitshare project, and the Tether project introduced the concept of stable currency, i.e. an encrypted digital currency in which French and French currencies effectively anchor prices.


第一类是法币资产抵押型稳定币,也称链下抵押型稳定币。这类稳定币以法币作为锚定抵押物,因此并不能做到去中心化。其核心要求是以100%法币存款作为发行准备金,保证稳定币与锚定法币可随时平价兑付,实质就是一种非金融机构的存托凭证。此类最著名的稳定币即是泰达公司(Tether Limited)2014年10月6日发行的稳定币Tether USD,即USDT(United States Dollar Tether)。理论上,USDT与美元是1:1的对应关系,即每发行一个USDT,泰达公司都会储备一美元的法币或者等价资产。迄今为止,USDT提供了良好的流动性,但其透明性和潜在的利益冲突也一直广为业界诟病,并在近年来演变为监管和法律危机。

The first is a stable currency of French assets, also known as a stable currency under a chain of mortgages. Such a stable currency is not centralized as an anchor mortgage. Its core requirement is to issue a reserve of 100% of deposits in French currency to ensure that stable currency and an anchor currency can be paid at any time at the same price, which is in essence a deposit with a non-financial institution. The most famous is a stable currency, Teth Limited, which was issued on 6 October 2014.


法币资产抵押型稳定币发行方的另一个代表是Stably,Inc.。它吸取了泰达公司透明性欠佳的教训,USDS所有的存储法币由内华达州一家持牌信托公司Prime Trust代为托管。此外,Stably,Inc.在白皮书中承诺将定期公布审计报告。在主流资产抵押型稳定币之外,还有另类资产抵押型稳定币。此类稳定币与主流法币资产抵押型稳定币最大的不同就是其底层的锚定资产并非法币而是其他商品或资产。例如,一部分稳定币的锚定对象不是美元,而是贵金属。例如,一个稳定币DGX代表1克黄金。

In addition, Stably, Inc., the other representative of the issuer of the French asset-backed stable currency. It draws lessons from the poor transparency of the Tedar company, where the USDS-owned banknotes are held in trust by Prime Trust, a licensed trust company in Nevada. In addition, Stably, Inc., in the White Paper, promised to publish audit reports on a regular basis. In addition to the mainstream asset-backed stable currency, there are alternative asset-backed stabilizers. The biggest difference between such a stable currency and the mainstream-money-backed stable currency is that it is its bottom anchor and illicit currency, but that it is other commodities or assets. For example, a portion of the stable currency is anchored not in the United States dollar, but in precious metals. For example, a stable currency DGX represents 1 gram of gold.


第二类是加密数字资产抵押型稳定币,也称链上抵押型稳定币。这类稳定币一般由一种或者一篮子加密数字货币作为抵押,因此也是纯粹的去中心化稳定币。以Dai为例,其白皮书将Dai定位于“一个价格稳定的加密数字货币并且能被用作一个去中心化的杠杆交易平台”。与USDT不同,Dai通过独有的智能合约系统,即抵押债仓机制(CDP-Collateralized Debt Positions)实现抵押、发行、赎回和风险控制,并与美元实现1:1的锚定。用户只要超额抵押一定数量的以太币(ETH),系统就会根据抵押债仓机制按照抵押比率为用户发放一定数量的Dai。这种链上智能合约机制CDP,也给Dai带来了更高的安全性和透明性。但此种模式下稳定币的规模和价值受制于加密货币市场波动。同时,尽管该模式设计了诸如强制平仓等机制以确保价格稳定,然而智能合约系统是否能在黑天鹅事件中完成全局清算仍然存疑,该模式亦面临黑客攻击破坏系统或者盗取质押物的风险。

In the case of Dai, the white paper places Dai at “a price-stabilized digital currency and can be used as a decentralised trading platform.” Unlike the USDT, Dai brings greater security and transparency to Dai through a unique smart contract system, the Mortgage Repository Mechanism (CDP-Collatalized Debt Positions), which provides collateral, issuance, redemption, and risk control, and is based on a basket of encrypted digital currencies, and thus a purely decentralized stabilization currency with the dollar.


第三类是依靠算法维系稳定的算法类中央银行型稳定币。此类稳定币不以任何资产作为抵押,正如罗伯特·萨姆斯(Robert Sams)在著名的加密稳定币论文《加密稳定币的注解:铸币税股份》(A Note on Cryptocurrency Stabilisation: Seigniorage Shares)中写到的,此类稳定币是一种“类似比特币的加密数字货币,依靠简单而确定的货币供应规则控制货币供应量”。他因此提出了一个弹性供币规则以回应币价波动,以算法替代中央银行的机制来维持币的价值稳定性。

The third category is central bank-type stable currencies, which rely on algorithmic stability. Such stable currencies are not held hostage by any asset, as Robert Sams wrote in his famous crypto-stabilized currency-stabilization paper A Note on Cryptogency Taxation: Seigniorage Shares, which is a “encrypted digital currency similar to bitcoin, which relies on simple and defined rules for the supply of money to control the supply of money”. He therefore proposes a flexible currency rule to respond to currency price fluctuations and to replace the central bank's mechanism with algorithms to maintain value stability.


加密数字货币交易所Bitbay发行的稳定币BAY综合了算法机制和投票治理机制,是算法类中央银行型稳定币的代表。稳定币BAY的最大特点在于无需第三方托管、审计或者运营监管,而是以动态挂钩机制,通过“流动”和“冻结”稳定币以及去中心化治理机制实现币值的稳定。此类稳定币较前两类稳定币不为人知,原因就在于其实现稳定的机制较差。由于缺少锚定价值的底层财产,在其价值发生小幅波动时,大量持币方由于恐慌情绪纷纷抛售,从而造成币价踩踏式下跌的恶性循环。

The stability currency BAY, issued by the encrypted digital currency exchange Bitbay, combines algorithmic mechanisms and voting governance mechanisms as representative of the algorithmic central bank-type stable currency. The greatest feature of stability BAY is that it is not subject to third-party trusteeship, audit, or operational supervision, but rather to a dynamic linkage mechanism that stabilizes the value of the currency through “mobility” and “freezing” and decentralized governance mechanisms. Such stability is not known to the extent that it is less stable than the previous two.


第四类是由传统金融机构发行的基于自有私链研发的金融机构背书型稳定币。这类稳定币与上述三种稳定币在应用范围、透明性和面向群体方面都有较大区别。金融机构背书型稳定币的应用场景一般局限于金融机构日常业务的区块链技术赋能;由于有金融机构的声望信誉背书,其透明性较之一般的稳定币更好;其面向的群体也非大众客户,而是经过认证的机构客户或者同业客户。第一家发行此种稳定币的银行是位于美国纽约的全牌照商业银行——签名银行(Signature Bank)。签名银行于2018年12月4日率先推出基于私有许可版本以太坊创建的稳定币——Signet。Signet为商业客户而非个人客户提供了全天候实时支付的区块链技术解决方案,并得到了纽约州金融服务部(New York State Department of Financial Services)的监管批准。随后,摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase)在2019年2月也推出了基于自研私有链Quorum的JPM Coin。现实中,稳定币的形态还在不断发展中,但其主要形态和机制基本上还是围绕以上四类展开。

The fourth group, which is based on private chain-based R & D, is issued by traditional financial institutions. This type of stable currency is much different from the three stable currencies mentioned above, in terms of scope, transparency and group orientation. The application of the financial institutions’ endorsement-stabilized currency is generally limited to the technical capabilities of the financial institutions’ block chain of operations; because of the reputational reputation of the financial institutions, transparency is better than general stability currency; it is directed to groups that are not public customers, but rather to certified institutional customers or counterparts. The first bank to issue such a stable currency is the Signature Bank, a fully licensed commercial bank in New York, the United States.


(三)稳定币的法律基础及规制漏洞

(iii) Legal basis for currency stabilization and regulatory loopholes


  1. 民法典的肯认:稳定币的虚拟财产属性

    The Civil Code recognizes the virtual property attributes of stable currency


《中华人民共和国民法典》(以下简称《民法典》)第127条规定,法律对数据、网络虚拟财产的保护有规定的,依照其规定。这使我国的民法典成为目前世界上第一个对虚拟财产作出规定的法典。根据2013年12月5日由央行等五部委联合发布的《关于防范比特币风险的通知》,我国将比特币等加密数字货币定性为“一种特殊的虚拟商品”。因此,虽然对于虚拟财产的权利属性还颇具争议,但不可否认包括稳定币在内作为“虚拟商品”的网络虚拟财产价值属性已经得到《民法典》的肯认。

Article 127 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code) stipulates that the law provides for the protection of data and virtual Internet property, in accordance with its provisions. This makes our civil code the first law in the world to provide for virtual property. According to the Circular on Protection against the Risk of Bitcoin, issued jointly by the Central Bank and five other ministries on 5 December 2013, we characterize encrypted digital currencies, such as Bitcoin, as “a special virtual commodity.” Thus, while the property of rights in virtual property is controversial, it is undeniable that the virtual property property attributes of “virtual goods” including stable currency have been recognized in the Civil Code.


《民法典》第127条位于各类民事权利的列举之后,民事权利的保护、取得和行使规定之前,从其所处的文本位置可以推导出立法者并未将其认定为一项新的法定权利,而仅是《民法典》列举的某种民事权利的客体。至于其中稳定币的法律性质,学者们也有诸多争议。在当前条件下,稳定币不具有在一国领土范围内被广泛接受和使用的特性,虽然在功能上满足货币的交易媒介和稳定性要求,但由于它们均未得到法律的认可,故在法律性质上自然不构成法定货币。对于稳定币是否属于物,有的学者从管理可能性说出发,认为“数字货币虽然只存在于虚拟空间,但是只要能够借助相应的技术手段可以对其加以控制与支配,以数据电文为形态的数字货币成为所有权客体,并无理论上与制度上的障碍”,因此可以认定为一种物。但有的学者却认为,物权法的支配彰显现实世界的占有秩序,虚拟空间中对加密数字货币的支配很难被认定为物权法意义上的支配,公示性难以满足交易观念上的要求,也无法满足物权法定的原则,并可能产生规则适用上的困难,不能简单定性成物。当前我国稳定币市场仍处于萌芽阶段,尚未形成监管共识,法院也没有形成统一的裁判思路,现存的法律体系似乎并不足以对其特殊性加以规制。质言之,虽然我国民商事法律已经奠定了规范稳定币的基础,但由于《民法典》第127条实际指向的对稳定币直接予以规范的民事法律法规在我国依然缺失,稳定币在事实和法理上还没有获得法律的完全承认,这也直接影响了刑法和行政法对稳定币的规范和评价。

Article 127 of the Civil Code, which is situated after the enumeration of various civil rights, naturally does not constitute a legal currency by virtue of the fact that they are protected, acquired and exercised before they are recognized by law. Some scholars do not consider it to be a new statutory right, but rather a mere object of a civil right, as enumerated in the Civil Code. As to the legal nature of the stable currency, there are many disputes. Under the current conditions, the stable currency does not have the character of being widely accepted and used within the territory of a country, although it is not functionally satisfying the requirements of the money's medium of dealing and stability, since they are not recognized by law as such, it is not possible to assume that, from the point of view of view of the existence of the stable currency as a matter of law, it is difficult for some scholars, from the point of view of view, that “Digital currency, although it exists only in virtual space, can be controlled and controlled by the corresponding technical means, it becomes a form of digital money as a object of ownership, there are no theoretical obstacles to the need to preserve the legal norms of law, which are not readily available, and which are not readily available, nor to characterize the principles of the law of the law, nor the legal norms of law.


2.刑事规范的欠缺:反洗钱漏洞和刑事评价的模糊

2. Deficiencies in criminal norms: anti-money-laundering loopholes and ambiguities in criminal evaluation


洗钱因其高额利润、手法复杂多样且法律存在一定滞后性,成为中国金融机构和监管机关的难题。“面对我国洗钱活动异常活跃的态势,司法实务却给出令人大跌眼镜的答卷。我国目前反洗钱所存在的关键问题是司法适用明显地不能适应我国反洗钱的现实需要。”而稳定币的出现更加放大了洗钱犯罪中司法适用的滞后性。近年来,犯罪分子利用加密数字货币,以稳定币为媒介的洗钱活动、恐怖筹资和逃避外汇管理行为屡见不鲜。但是我国现行法律法规都没有针对稳定币的反洗钱义务以及可能涉及的非法买卖外汇行为做出明确规范。受稳定币民商事法律缺位和监管缺位的影响,有关稳定币的刑事法律规范也处于缺失状态,对稳定币的刑事法律评价模糊,直接影响对相关刑事犯罪的打击。

Money-laundering is a difficult problem for Chinese financial institutions and regulatory agencies because of its high profits, its complex methods, and the lag in law. “In the face of the unusual dynamics of money-laundering in our country, judicial practice has given a sharp contrasting response. The key problem with respect to money-laundering in our country is that the application of justice is clearly not adapted to the reality of anti-money-laundering in our country.” The emergence of currency stabilization has magnified the lag in the application of justice in money-laundering offences. In recent years, criminals have used encrypted digital currency, using it as a medium for money-laundering, terrorist financing, and evasion of foreign exchange management.


就我国稳定币相关的刑事司法实践,虽然USDT首发于2015年,但我国首个涉及USDT的刑事裁判文书直至2019年才出现。2019全年我国涉USDT的刑事判决仅有14份,2020年增长到103份,2021年预计会有进一步地缓慢增长。从文书案由来看,共涉及20个罪名,主要集中在诈骗罪、帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪、掩饰、隐瞒犯罪所得、犯罪所得收益罪、组织领导传销活动罪,占到涉USDT刑事裁判文书总数的85%以上。以上数据与USDT以及其他稳定币在洗钱等犯罪活动中广泛充当媒介形成了鲜明对比。细究其原因,主要是对稳定币的财产属性存疑,司法机关在认定犯罪数额时惯以传统银行的法币流水为定案依据,即要求犯罪嫌疑人完成稳定币到法币的转换。中心化交易所的电子数据证据和专业机构对链上数据转移追踪与分析的证据还非常罕见。

In terms of criminal justice practices related to the stabilization of our currency, the first USDT-related criminal jurisprudence in the country, although first issued in 2015, did not appear until 2019. Only 14 USDT-related criminal sentences were handed down throughout 2019, increasing to 103 in 2020 and expected to grow further slowly in 2021. From the source of the document, a total of 20 offences were dealt with, focusing mainly on fraud, help with cybercrime activities, concealment of proceeds of crime, proceeds of crime, and the organization of leading distribution activities, which accounted for more than 85 per cent of the total number of USDT-related criminal adjudication documents. These data contrast with the widespread use of the USDT and other stable currency as a medium in criminal activities such as money-laundering.


3.行政监管规制:缺失上位法的强监管

Administrative regulation: missing superiors for strong regulation


关于对货币金融的监管,我国在金融法、行政法等法律规范方面所存在的缺位问题尤其明显。由于现有法律法规的立法时代、立足点和出发点与后发的金融科技革命不处在同一水平,细究其中内容并推及立法目的和适用范围,可以发现我国还没有成型的针对稳定币的金融行政监管法律。此外,我国目前对加密数字货币金融行政监管范式,在其效力、体系和激进的“禁止性”监管路径上都存在较大争议。

With regard to the regulation of monetary and financial matters, the gaps in the country’s laws and regulations, such as financial and administrative laws, are particularly evident. Given that existing laws and regulations are not at the same level of legislation, their bases and starting points, and the subsequent financial and technological revolution, a closer look at their content and their purpose and scope of application can be seen in the absence of a legal framework for financial and administrative regulation of the stable currency.


当前我国规范加密数字货币包括稳定币的三个规范性文件既不是法律、行政法规、地方性法规,也不是规章,而是一般意义上的行政规范性文件。这与美国和欧洲制定专门法律规范稳定币发行、流转的模式完全不同。总的来说,我国现行的稳定币法律监管框架层级不高,法律效力存疑。《公告》虽为七部委联合下发,但其性质显然不属于法律、行政法规,而是属于行政规范性文件或者行政规定,《通知》从效力上来说也仅属于规范性文件。行政规章、规范性文件等一般情况下只具有约束行政行为的作用,而不应对民事行为效力产生影响。因此,《公告》和《通知》实际上不能作为否定稳定币和其他加密数字货币相关民事行为效力的依据。以其作为依据认定合同违反法律强制性规定是不恰当的。此外,《公告》本身并未明确禁止公众参与虚拟货币交易,而是提示公众虚拟货币交易存在多重风险,投资者须自行承担投资风险。因此有些法院依据《公告》,不支持返还投资区块链项目投资款或者稳定币交易,进而认定合同无效,属于不恰当的扩大解释。

The circular, which is issued jointly by seven ministries, is clearly not a legal, administrative or administrative document, but rather a regulatory document, and the circular is, in effect, a regulatory document. Administrative regulations, normative documents, etc., generally have a binding effect on administrative acts and not on the effects of civil actions. Thus, the Proclamation and the circular cannot in practice serve as a basis for denying the effectiveness of civil acts relating to stable currency and other encrypted digital currencies. It is inappropriate to consider them as a basis for finding a breach of the mandatory provisions of the law. Moreover, the bulletin itself does not explicitly prohibit public participation in virtual currency transactions, but rather suggests that there are multiple risks in virtual currency transactions for the public and that investors themselves bear the risk of investment.


(四)我国司法实践中对稳定币的认定标准不一

(iv) Differing criteria for determining the stability of the currency in our judicial practice


近年来,我国涉及稳定币USDT的案件主要集中在民事纠纷,且呈现以下特点:首先,案件数量逐年增加趋势明显。截至2021年8月19日,在中国裁判文书网搜索“USDT”,有203份民事裁判文书,其中判决书172份,裁定书31份;其次,194份裁判文书集中在“合同、无因管理、不当得利纠纷”案由。这从一个侧面说明USDT已经在我国民事流通与交易中崭露头角;再次,案件当事人绝大多数是自然人。这说明,我国对风险识别和风险控制能力较差的自然人恰恰是稳定币的主要用户,因此制定针对稳定币的监管法律有其特殊的紧迫性与必要性;此外,案件涉及全国28个省、自治区和直辖市,呈现案件在全国总体地域分布较为分散,但个别地区分布较为集中的特点。

In recent years, the number of cases involving the stabilization of the currency USDT has been concentrated on civil disputes and is characterized by the following: first, the tendency to increase the number of cases from year to year is evident. As of 19 August 2021, there were 203 “USDT” searches in China's network of adjudicative instruments, of which 172 were judgements and 31 were decisions; secondly, 194 were focused on “contracts, administrative disputes, and improper profit disputes”. This shows that, on one side, the number of cases in which the USDT has become apparent in the country's civil circulation and transactions; again, the vast majority of the persons involved are natural persons. This shows that the natural persons with less capacity for risk identification and risk control are precisely the main users of the stable currency, and that there is therefore a special urgency and need for a regulatory law for the stable currency; and, on the other hand, cases involving 28 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities across the country, which are characterized by a more dispersed but concentrated geographical distribution of the country as a whole.


在司法实践中,由于法院对于稳定币的性质认识不一,相关案例的裁判规则较为混乱,并无明显规律。一旦法院援引《公告》,多会认定买卖稳定币(如USDT)的行为不具有合法性,进而判定所涉及的民事法律行为无效。如此,过错方不用承担法律后果,相对方往往只能无奈承担损失。这与鼓励交易、维护公平交易秩序的民商事立法初衷相悖。通过分析案件结果,涉及稳定币的案件中,诉讼请求得到全部或部分支持的仅有三十余件,其余案件的诉讼请求均被驳回。将稳定币认定为虚拟商品、虚拟财产或者虚拟数字资产的法院,大多肯认了涉及稳定币的交易有效性,给予当事人合理救济。对于稳定币性质的认定,往往取决于裁判者能否正确理解《民法典》第127条和《公告》等法律法规、行政规范性文件。正是如此泾渭分明的解读,审判实务中出现了对稳定币截然相反的判断和定性。

In judicial practice, the rules governing cases are rather confusing and irregular. Once the Court has invoked the Proclamation, it is often held that the sale of stable currency (e.g. USDT) is not lawful and that the civil legal act in question is not valid. Thus, the wrong-doing party does not have to bear the legal consequences, and the counterpart is often unable to bear the loss. This is contrary to the original intent of civil and commercial legislation that encourages transactions and the maintenance of a fair trading order. By analysing the outcome of the case, in cases involving stable currency, only more than 30 requests for action have been supported, in whole or in part, and in the remaining cases, claims have been rejected.


三、稳定币监管的比较法镜鉴:以美国和欧盟为视角

III. Comparative approach to currency stabilization: United States and European Union perspectives


稳定币在不同国家被当作现金、存款、电子货币、支付工具、集合投资计划、证券、商品、衍生品、其他应当受监管的金融产品、加密金融资产、加密数字货币或者不受任何监管的商品。稳定币的监管与法律评价至今还是一个世界性难题。美国和欧盟对稳定币的监管尽管仍处在不断摸索之中,但其监管原则和立法努力都颇具代表性,值得我国认真学习研究。

Stable currencies are treated as cash, deposits, e-money, payment instruments, pooled investment schemes, securities, commodities, derivatives, other financial products subject to regulation, encrypted financial assets, encrypted digital currencies, or non-regulated commodities in different countries. Stable currency regulation and legal evaluation are still a worldwide challenge.


(一)美国监管特点:双线多极模式下的渐进性监管

(i) United States regulatory characteristics: progressive regulation under a two-line multipolar model


美国金融监管体制以碎片化、叠床架屋的多极监管机构、州与联邦的双线监管体系为特征。正是美国经历的多次历史性金融危机塑造了这一金融监管体制,如今稳定币再次对美国金融监管提出了重大挑战。根据美国法律,稳定币可能会被定性为电子货币、证券或者虚拟商品。因此,稳定币的监管从一开始就非常容易陷入如同首次代币发行(ICO)和加密数字货币类似的不确定的政策监管环境当中。稳定币还要符合包括反洗钱(AML)和“知道你的客户”(KYC)在内的传统的金融合规要求。当前美国双线多极监管体制采取渐进式监管,从司法、立法和行政政策等多个层面试图规范独具“跨界”品格的稳定币生态。

The US financial regulatory system is characterized by fragmentation, overlapping multipolar regulators, and state-to-fed bipolar regulatory systems. It is precisely the historical financial crisis that has shaped this financial regulatory regime in the US, and it is now the stable currency that poses a major challenge to US financial regulation.


  1. 司法机关对稳定币的个案监管探索:合规性争议

    The judiciary's case-by-case regulatory exploration for the stabilization of the currency: compliance disputes


在美国,USDT作为当前市值最大的稳定币,从诞生之日起就饱受争议。泰达公司曾长期奉行全额法币保证金制度,承诺每发行一个USDT就会在银行存入一美元,泰达公司也承诺不会将作为基础锚定资产的美元用作信贷或投资。但2019年3月14日,泰达公司突然宣布将全额传统货币保证金制度改为非全额传统货币保证金制度。这样,虽然当日USDT的总市值仍约为20亿美元,但根据新规则,泰达公司只需将20亿美元的一部分存入银行,剩余的资金可用于信贷或投资业务。如果泰达公司能够盈利,则每一个USDT仍能获得足够资产支持,甚至泰达公司还会将这些投资收益当作利息发给USDT的持有者。但如果遭遇信贷违约或者投资失败,作为保证金的底层资产就不能为USDT价值提供足够支持。很明显,修改后的保证金制度实际上动摇了人们对原有的USDT的风险预测。

However, on 14 March 2019, the company announced that it would convert the full traditional currency guarantee system to a non-full traditional currency bond system. Thus, while the total market value of the firm was still approximately $2 billion on that date, under the new rules, the company would have to deposit only a portion of the $2 billion into a bank, with the remainder available for credit or investment.


纵观泰达公司修改保证金制度所引起的轩然大波,可以看出稳定币发展的挑战主要来自两个方面:监管问题与隐形超发。实际上,泰达公司修正保证金制度也并非是仓促之间的商业决定,更多的是对法律合规挑战的应激策略。泰达公司声称其母公司是一家注册在英属维京群岛(BVI)的香港公司iFinex Inc.,而iFinex Inc.同时也是一家加密数字货币交易所Bitfinex的母公司。不仅在控股关系上泰达公司与Bitfinex互为关联公司,泰达公司与Bitfinex的高级管理人员也多有交叉。此外,长期以来泰达公司在透明性方面一直饱受诟病,许多观察人士和媒体都怀疑泰达公司是否真的为其发行的USDT提供了足够的法币抵押。2017年12月,泰达公司宣布其与审计师Friedman LLP的聘用关系告一段落,自此USDT事实上开始了无外部审计的“裸奔”状态。

The challenge of stabilizing the currency is essentially two-fold: regulatory problems and invisibility. In fact, Tedda’s revision of the bond system is not a hasty business decision, but rather a stressful strategy for legal compliance challenges. The company claims that its parent company is a Hong Kong company, iFinex Inc., registered in the British Virgin Islands (BVI), and iFinex Inc. is also the parent of Bitfinex, an encrypted digital currency exchange.


以上多重质疑、矛盾和冲突不久就演变成为多个针对泰达公司及其关联公司的政府执法行动、行政诉讼和投资者的集体诉讼。实际上,自2018年,纽约执法机构就开始调查泰达公司及其关联公司。2019年4月24日,纽约州总检察长利蒂希娅·詹姆斯(Letitia James)指控泰达公司、加密数字货币交易所Bitfinex及其母公司iFinex Inc.等相关方涉嫌危害纽约州投资者利益的诈骗,并向位于曼哈顿的纽约州最高法院(实为纽约州的初审法院)申请令状。检方所依据的法律是在美国有“至恶之法”之称的纽约州马丁法案(Martin Act)。

Indeed, since 2018, law enforcement agencies in New York have been investigating the company and its affiliates. On 24 April 2019, the State Attorney General of New York, Letitia James, accused the parties concerned of fraud against investors in New York, such as Tedar, Bitfinex and its parent company, iFinex Inc., of allegedly harming the interests of investors in New York, and of applying for a writ to the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan, which is the New York State Court of First Instance.


在本案中,根据检方的指控,自2017年3月开始,由于富国银行(Wells Fargo Bank)等主流金融机构纷纷与其解除合作关系,加密数字货币交易所Bitfinex先是情急之下先后与位于巴哈马和波多黎各的两家银行建立业务联系以开辟法币通道,不幸的是两家银行不久都先后以歇业告终。随后,Bitfinex在万般无奈之下只能求助于一些资质可疑的“影子银行”,如Crypto Capital等,以解法币通道之急。但由于Crypto Capital被波兰、葡萄牙和美国的多家监管机构调查,资金被冻结,因此无法向Bitfinex归还其托管的8.5亿美元。检方指控Bitfinex试图隐瞒损失也未向投资者透露过相关损失,而是把手伸向了自己的姊妹公司——泰达公司用于兑付USDT的法币准备金,偷偷挪用了至少6.5亿美元来弥补财政亏空。法院随后批准了检方的请求,判令泰达公司等被告提供涉及用户、运营、财务等信息,禁止被告动用泰达公司的美元储备,并禁止被告损毁证据。

In the present case, according to the prosecution, since March 2017, mainstream financial institutions such as the Bank of Rich Countries (Wells Fargo Bank) have had to resort to “shadow banks” of questionable quality, such as Crypto Capital, whose funds have been blocked by several Polish, Portuguese and United States regulatory agencies to establish business links with two banks located in the Bahamas and Puerto Rico to open up French currency channels, and which have unfortunately been closed down in the near future. The prosecution accused Bitfinex of trying to conceal the losses and not disclosing the related losses to investors, but of using his own sister, the company Tedar, for example, to pay USDT's dollar reserve, to steal at least $650 million to compensate for the financial losses.


2019年9月24日,纽约州最高法院上诉庭暂时中止检方令Bitfinex和泰达公司提交与6.5亿美元的内部交易和9亿美元信贷额度事件有关所有文件的要求,但是法庭判令继续执行禁止泰达公司将资金借贷给Bitfinex的禁令。泰达公司随即提出上诉,要求法院解除此项禁令。2019年12月4日,检方提交给法院一份上诉答辩状,重申管辖权并指出被告没有能配合提交文件和证据,且试图阻止纽约州总检察长办公室对潜在证券和商品诈骗的调查。值得注意的是,纽约州总检察长自始至终并未对泰达公司以及关联公司提出任何正式的指控,案件争论的中心集中在管辖权和被告是否必须披露信息这两个问题上。2020年7月10日,法院指出因泰达公司在纽约州内有用户及员工,因此纽约法院对此案有管辖权。同时,法院同意纽约州总检察长继续调查泰达公司,并要求泰达公司配合调查,提供相关资料和文件。2021年2月23日,纽约州检察长办公室宣布与泰达公司达成和解协议,结束了自2019年以来的法律纠纷。

On 24 September 2019, the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Court of New York temporarily suspended the prosecution's request for the filing of all documents relating to the $650 million internal transaction and the 900 million credit line incident by Bitfinex and the New York State Attorney General's Office, but the Court ordered the continued enforcement of the injunction prohibiting Tedar from lending funds to Bitfinex. The company then appealed, requesting the Court to lift the injunction. On 4 December 2019, the prosecution filed an appeal brief with the Court, reiterating its jurisdiction and stating that the accused had failed to cooperate with the submission of documents and evidence and had attempted to prevent the New York State Attorney's Office from investigating potential securities and commodity fraud. It is noteworthy that the Attorney General of New York had not raised any formal charges against the company and associated companies from the outset, and that the central issue of the case was jurisdiction and whether the defendant had to disclose information. On 10 July 2020, the Court stated that the New York State Attorney's office had concluded a settlement agreement with the company in New York, and that the New York court had jurisdiction over the case.


与此同时,iFinex Inc.、泰达公司、Bitfinex的相关运营主体BFXNA Inc.和BFXWW Inc.等关联主体也先后在四起集体诉讼中成为被告。这些集体诉讼的理论基础都来自于2019年发表在世界顶级金融学期刊《金融杂志》(The Journal of Finance)上的一篇论文—《比特币是否真的没有“泰达化”?》(Is Bitcoin Really Un-Tethered?)。论文在运用算法分析了比特币在2009年1月至2018年3月间数据的基础上,披露并分析了两个重要发现。其一,作者在文中宣称泰达公司其实是比特币价格的操纵者,并通过滥发USDT大幅抬高比特币价格。具体表现为:每当比特币价格下跌,或者跌至关键价位,泰达公司就会增发USDT,拉动比特币价格实现大幅上涨。其二,该文指出泰达公司一直声称USDT有充足的1:1美元储备实为妄言。这也与纽约州总检察长对泰达公司以及其关联实体的诉讼一脉相承。在这四起集体诉讼中,原告都是加密数字货币的交易员,对以上被告提出了以下三项指控:(1)被告违反了《商品交易法》(Commodity Exchange Act)中禁止市场操纵行为的规定;(2)以垄断手段控制了80%以上的稳定币市场,从而违反了《谢尔曼反垄断法》(The Sherman Antitrust Act);(3)计划并实施敲诈勒索,违反了《反勒索及受贿组织法》(The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act)。截至2021年底,这些集体诉讼依然尚未了结。

At the same time, related subjects such as iFinex Inc., Tetco, Bitfinex, BFXNA Inc. and BFXW Inc. also became defendants in four collective lawsuits. The rationale for these class actions was based on a paper published in 2019 in The Journal of Finance, the world’s leading financial science journal, The Journal of Finance, published in 2019 – “Is Bitcoin really “Tedaization”?” (Is Bitcoin Real Un-Tethered?), which used algorithms to analyse Bitcoin’s data between January 2009 and March 2018, revealing and analysing two important discoveries. One author stated that Teda was in fact the manipulator of Bitco’s prices and, by distributing USDT, substantially raised the price of bitcoins?


综上所述,与美国独特的诉讼文化相适应,无论是执法机关还是认为稳定币发行人侵犯其合法权益的自然人、法人和其他组织都在试图通过法律诉讼启动执法程序或者挽回损失。值得注意的是原告提起这些诉讼的法律依据都是在美国司法实践中被援引频率颇高且已经非常成熟的法律规定。面对以稳定币代表的金融科技所带来新型监管争议和诉讼纠纷,美国司法机关通过法律解释和推理展现出了其强大的适应能力和演绎能力。

It is worth noting that the legal basis for plaintiffs to bring such lawsuits is well-repeated and well-established in United States judicial practice. In the face of new regulatory and litigation disputes brought about by stable currency-based financial technology, the United States judiciary has demonstrated, through legal interpretation and reasoning, its strong adaptive capacity and capacity to act.


2.合规监管

2. Compliance monitoring


鉴于稳定币在加密数字货币生态系统中独特而重要的作用,美国各州和联邦金融监管当局开始寻求稳定币合规化以及监管稳定币的合理路径。美国对稳定币监管历程是从地方开始的。2018年9月10日纽约州金融服务局(New York State Department of Financial Services-NYDFS)批准Gemini Trust Company, LLC以及Paxos Trust Company, LLC发行以1:1锚定美元的稳定币Gemini Dollar(GUSD)和Paxos Standard(PAX)。这两种稳定币与USDT最大的区别是依规运作,受监管程度更高。GUSD、PAX等稳定币由信托公司托管,因此他们都得到了地方监管部门的批准。加密数字货币经常会与洗钱等非法行为联系在一起,纽约州金融服务局批准两种稳定币的前提是发行方保证这些稳定币具备有效的风险控制、反洗钱等措施,可以防止其代币被用于洗钱或恐怖主义融资。但受监管的稳定币也有缺点:在增加了对投资者和持有者的保护的同时,也在隐私性和去中心化方面有所牺牲。这两个项目获批,对美元影响力的提升有很大意义,意味在全球范围内不同国家的居民都可以通过持有加密货币间接持有美元。

Given the unique and important role of a stable currency in an encrypted digital monetary ecosystem, United States state and federal financial regulatory authorities have begun to seek reasonable ways to stabilize currency compliance and to regulate a stable currency. The U.S. regulatory framework for a stable currency begins at the local level. New York State Financial Services Authority (New York State Department of Financial Services-NYDFS) approved the Gemini Trust Company, LLC, and Paxs Trust Company, LLC issues a stable currency of 1:1 anchor, Gemini Dollar (GUSD) and Paxos Standard (PAX) on September 10, 2018. The biggest difference between these two stable currencies and USDT is that they operate in accordance with regulations and are more regulated.


此后,稳定币合规进程在深度、广度上进一步发展。在纵深上,2019年9月5日,Paxos Trust Company, LLC再度发力,宣布推出首个经纽约州金融服务局可兑换实体黄金的加密黄金币PAX Gold(PAXG)。在广度上,一家加密数字货币交易所与Paxos合作推出了1:1比例锚定美元的稳定币HUSD。2020年1月,HUSD也获得了纽约州金融服务局的批准。

At depth and depth, on 5 September 2019, Paxos Trust Company, LLC re-energized the launch of the first encrypted gold currency, PAX Gold (PAXG), a convertible entity of the New York State Financial Services Agency. At depth, an encrypted digital currency exchange, in collaboration with Paxos, launched a 1:1-scale anchored dollar stabilization currency, HUSD. In January 2020, HUSD also obtained approval from the New York State Financial Services Authority.


与此同时,稳定币在美国的合规大潮也由地方性合规向全国性合规发展。美国以合规经营著称的加密数字货币交易所Coinbase与区块链综合金融服务机构Circle共同推出一款稳定币USDC就是这方面的代表。Circle首先创制了一个技术标准CENTRE联合体,以期实现任何接入CENTRE的钱包之间可以互联互通,实现跨链和跨数字资产转换。USDC是一种锚定美元的稳定币,由Circle基于CENTRE开源架构开发、并受到CENTRE以及官方在传统金融领域管制框架的监管。USDC和美元1:1挂钩,用户每购买1个USDC, Circle就会存1个USD到指定的Silvergate银行,并将铸造的USDC发给用户。USDC的发行方也必须获得当地的加密资产行业牌照。2015年9月,USDC的发行方Circle成为首个获得纽约州数字货币许可证(BitLicense)的公司。Circle目前还拥有美国、英国和欧盟的支付牌照,是加密资产行业全球牌照数目最多的公司,拥有美元、英镑、欧元兑换加密资产的合规通路。与USDC相比,其他稳定币的托管方为信托公司,但信托公司本身也存在一定风险,需要取得牌照来证明其合规性。而USDC的资产由银行托管,由于USDC的托管方银行本身受政府监管,并对其他金融业务起监管作用,因此USDC的资产安全度更高。

At the same time, the steady currency compliance boom in the United States has evolved from local compliance to national compliance. The United States is represented by the introduction of a stable currency USDC by Coinbase, an encrypted digital currency exchange known for compliance, and Circle, an integrated financial services agency with a chain of blocks. With a link of 1:1 for each buyer of a technical standard CENTRE, with a view to interconnecting any wallet that has access to CENTRE, trans-linkage and trans-digital asset conversion. The USDC issuer must also have a local encryption license, developed by Circule based on the CENTRE open-source structure, and regulated by CENTRE and the official regulatory framework in the traditional financial sector.


在联邦层面,美国立法机关在稳定币监管方面多有尝试。2020年12月,民主党众议员特莱布·加西亚(Jesús García)和史蒂芬·林奇(Stephen Lynch)共同提出《稳定币挂勾和银行执照执行法案》(Stablecoin Tethering and Bank Licensing Enforcement,简称STABLE)。特莱布在声明中指出,与美元等传统货币挂勾的稳定币为监管带来新的挑战,并且对市场、流动性和信用造成日益增长的风险。因此,《稳定币挂勾和银行执照执行法案》旨在通过对Facebook的Diem等新兴数字支付工具的发行和相关商业活动进行监管,来保护消费者,帮助其识别和抵御风险。从草案内容看,《稳定币挂勾和银行执照执行法案》将对稳定币提出一系列要求,包括规定从业者必须取得银行执照、在发行前先获得银行监管机构批准、提交系统性风险报告并做持续追踪、获得联邦存款保险公司保险以随时备妥充足的准备金,几乎比照国家商业银行办理。因此,稳定币业界立即对这个法案恶评如潮,至今这个法案还没有付诸国会表决。

In December 2020, Democratic Congressman Jesús García and Stephen Lynch co-sponsored the Stability Currency and Bank Licensing Enforcement Act to protect consumers and help them identify and resist risks. From the text of the draft, the Stability Currency and Bank Licensing Enforcement Act, known as STABLE, would impose a series of requirements on the stability currency, including the requirement that traders obtain bank licences, prior to issuance obtain approval from bank regulators, submit systematic risk reports and continue to monitor and secure sufficient reserves from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which has not yet been approved by the Congress.


现有的联邦金融监管部门对稳定币的监管也纷纷发声。美国证券交易委员会(SEC)基本采取了与其他加密数字货币相似的监管路径。尽管近年全球央行竞相发力于央行数字货币(CBDC),但美国货币监理署(Office of Comptroller of Currency)的代理署长布莱恩·布鲁克斯(Brian Brooks)则表示,美国已经建立了百亿美元规模的私有稳定币市场,私有加密数字货币领域应该是发展的重点,而政府的作用是监管稳定币,并非投身研发央行数字货币。这样,私有稳定币已经成为美国金融治理和监管机构重点关注的金融产品。2021年1月,布莱恩·布鲁克斯称银行可以使用区块链和稳定币进行支付,这意味着美国监管认可并鼓励稳定币的使用推广。实际上,上述稳定币的政策不只是货币监理署的立场,而且也是美国总统金融市场工作小组的立场(由财政部长、美联储主席、美国证券交易委员会主席和美国商品期货交易委员会主席以及其指定人员组成)。因此,美国货币监理署颁布的稳定币政策实际上是包括美联储在内的美国金融监管在稳定币方面的基本立场。这一声明表明他们鼓励稳定币在美国金融市场中的创新应用。

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has basically adopted a regulatory path similar to that of other encrypted digital currencies. In spite of recent years’ competition for a global central bank over a central bank’s digital currency (CBDC), the United States Money Supervisory Authority’s acting director, Brian Brooks, said in January 2021 that banks could pay with regional chains and stable currencies, meaning that US regulation recognizes and encourages the expansion of the use of stable currencies.


(二)欧盟监管范式:基于风险控制的功能性监管

(ii) EU regulatory paradigm: functional regulation based on risk control


第一,由于稳定币技术基础的复杂性以及特定功能实现的多样性,稳定币可能被置于不同的监管框架之下,也可能处于监管框架的真空中。尽管欧盟对稳定币的监管与美国有许多异曲同工之处,在结合欧盟的宏观政策和法律传统的基础上,欧盟对稳定币的监管路径形成了以下几个鲜明的特点。欧盟在没有专门针对稳定币监管法律的情况下,综合运用现行支付系统、方案、金融工具以及反洗钱等管制法律,根据稳定币的技术建构和实现功能的不同,类型化规制稳定币在欧盟成员国的发行、流转、存储和兑换。在欧盟法律层面上对稳定币的监管主要分为三个层次:受监管的投资和金融工具监管;电子货币监管;反洗钱监管。

First, because of the complexity of stabilizing the technological base of the currency and the diversity of specific functions, stable currencies may be placed under different regulatory frameworks or in a vacuum of regulatory frameworks. While EU regulation of stable currencies has many similarities with the US, EU regulation of stable currencies, based on a combination of EU macro-policy and legal traditions, has several distinct features.


首先,根据2018年1月3日生效的《欧盟金融工具市场指令–二号令》(Markets in Financial In-struments Directive II – MiFID II),某些稳定币如果被认定为需要受到监管的金融工具,尤其是可转让证券(Transferable Securities),则需受到相关金融市场规则的监管。MiFID II将“可转让证券”界定为金融工具的一种,而这也是与稳定币在性质上最为相近的金融工具。被定性为“可转让证券”的稳定币应当符合以下两个特征:一是,该稳定币的实质是证券。和美国证券法相似,这里证券的涵义非常广泛,不仅包括公司股票和债券,资本市场中除支付工具和衍生金融工具以外的其他金融工具一般也被包括其中;二是,该稳定币可在资本市场流通。总的来说,如果稳定币被定性为可流通的权益/债权类证券、集合投资计划的份额或者衍生投资品(例如期货、期权和互换合约),稳定币将被认定为金融工具而受到监管。

First, according to the EU Financial Instruments Market Directive – II, which came into force on 3 January 2018 (Markets in Financial Institutions Direct II - MiFID II), certain stable currencies are subject to regulation by the relevant financial market rules if they are considered to be financial instruments subject to regulation, particularly negotiable securities. MiFID II defines “negotiable securities” as one of financial instruments, which is also the most closely related to stable currencies.


其次,依据2009年10月30日生效的《欧盟电子货币指令》(Electronic Money Directive, Directive 2009/110/EC),如果稳定币被认定为电子货币,稳定币的发行人则有义务注册或者申请特许权,以成为《欧盟电子货币指令》下电子货币的发行人。根据《欧盟电子货币指令》,电子货币是指以电子或者磁力方式存储的货币价值,代表持有人对发行人的货币价值请求权;发行电子货币需以拟持有方交付“资金”为条件;其旨在用于支付性交易,且被除发行方以外的自然人或法人接受。许多稳定币都会符合以上条件而被划分为电子货币。但是也确有一些稳定币的持有人对发行人没有请求权,或者其发行不涉及“资金”,因而不属于电子货币的范畴。根据《欧盟电子货币指令》,一旦被认定为电子货币,稳定币发行的收益必须存放在托管银行。相反,如果稳定币设计机制保证发行人可以按照面值赎回稳定币,同时也提供信贷服务,则此稳定币的发行人将被认为是存款机构,因此需要从欧洲央行获得银行牌照。需要特别指出的是,在欧盟法律框架下,作为支付工具的电子货币与作为金融市场工具的可转让证券是两种性质相互排斥的金融工具,两者只能居其一。此外,《欧盟支付服务指令—第2版》(Payments Services Directive II (2015/2366/EU)(PSD II))规制涉及支付“资金”的活动。“资金”包括银行票据、有形货币、无形货币或者电子货币。因此,被定性为电子货币的稳定币很可能要受到《欧盟支付服务指令——第2版》的规制。而其他不属于电子货币范畴的稳定币只要涉及支付“资金”,比如国际汇兑业务,也会受到《欧盟支付服务指令——第2版》的规制,稳定币的发行人也要取得相应牌照。

Second, according to the EU Electronic Currency Directive, which entered into force on 30 October 2009, the issuer of a stable currency is obliged to register or apply for a concession to become the issuer of an electronic currency under the EU Electronic Currency Directive. According to the EU Electronic Currency Directive, an electronic currency is the value of money stored in electronic or magnetic form, representing the right of the holder to request the monetary value of the issuer; the issuance of an electronic currency is conditional on the delivery of “money” by the intended holder; it is accepted by natural or legal persons other than the issuer of a stable currency.


最后,2011年7月21日生效的《欧盟另类投资基金管理人指令》(The Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive 2011/61/EU(“AIFMD”))将“另类投资基金”定义为:为了投资者的利益,从投资者处募集资金,根据已确定的投资策略进行投资,且该集合投资计划无需依据《欧盟可转让证券集合投资计划指令》(Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities–UCITS)而必须获得审批。因此,稳定币在欧盟还有可能被视为另类投资基金的份额。这样,如果稳定币的回赎价格与底层资产的价值表现挂钩(包括那些以法币作为抵押物的稳定币,例如Demo),在满足其他条件的前提下,这一类稳定币可能被归为另类投资基金。

Finally, the European Union Alternative Investment Fund Administrator Directive (“AIFMD”), which came into force on 21 July 2011, defines “an alternative investment fund” as a share of an alternative investment fund that, for the benefit of investors, collects funds from investors, invests in accordance with an established investment strategy, and the pooled investment plan does not need to be approved in accordance with the EU Portfolio Pool Investment Plan Directive (Undertas for Secure Investments in Transportable Technologies-UCITS). As such, a stable currency may also be considered as an alternative investment fund in the European Union.


其四,稳定币还有可能被视为虚拟货币(Virtual Currencies)。根据2018年7月9日生效的《欧盟反洗钱指令第5版》(5th Anti-Money Laundering Directive of the EU -- AMLD5),虚拟货币是指由非中央银行或者非官方发行机构发行,也并非须与法定货币挂钩,不拥有货币或者钞票的法定地位,但是被使用者接受作为交换媒介,可以电子转移、存储和交易的一种数字化的价值表示。由此可见,虚拟货币定义涵盖非常广泛,不由中央银行或者官方发行或者保证的数字形式的价值物,既不和法定货币挂钩也不拥有货币的法定地位,均属于虚拟货币。电子货币和虚拟货币的关系与电子货币和可转让证券的关系非常相似,也是彼此对立、泾渭分明。因为一旦某种稳定币被认定为电子货币,其必然会与法定货币挂钩,这样被认定为电子货币的稳定币就不可能依据AMLD5被定性为虚拟货币。

Fourth, a stable currency may also be regarded as a virtual currency (Virtual Currences). According to the 5th edition of the EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive (5th Anti-Money Laundering Direct of the EU-AMLD5), which entered into force on 9 July 2018, virtual currency means that it is issued by a non-central bank or an unofficial issuer and does not have the legal status of a non-official issuer. The relationship between electronic currency and virtual currency is very similar to that between electronic currency and negotiable securities, and it is clear to each other that, once a stable currency is recognized as an electronic currency, it can be electronically transferred, stored and traded as a digital value expression.


第二,与欧盟指令的双层适用结构相适应,欧盟各国对稳定币的监管表现出统一监管原则下的国别差异性。因为欧盟指令对于接受指令的成员国具有约束力,指令指向的成员国需将指令通过国内程序转化成本国法律或法令。例如,英国就通过《受监管活动法令》(Regulated Activities Order-the RAO)将《欧盟金融工具市场指令——二号令》转化为《英国2000年金融服务与市场法》(Financial Services and Markets Act 2000)这一国内法。德国则是通过《第二次金融市场法律修正案》(The Second Financial Markets Amendment Act (Zweites Finanzmarktnovellierungsgesetz, 2. FiMaNoG))将《欧盟金融工具市场指令——二号令》转化为国内法。由于成员国“采取何种形式和方法以便达到指令所要求的结果,则由接受指令的成员国机构行使管辖权”,因此即使英、德两国所遵循的欧盟指令相同,但在稳定币监管的操作层面有可能带来对欧盟指令不同的解读和实施方案。实际上,德国确实对各项欧盟指令遵循严格解释原则,而以法国为代表的国家则往往偏向宽松的自由解释。

Second, the regulation of stable currencies in the EU countries reflects country-specific differences under uniform regulatory principles, in line with the dual-tier application structure of the EU Directives. Since the EU Directives are binding on the member countries to which they are directed, they need to be translated into domestic law or ordinances. For example, in the United Kingdom, the EU Financial Instruments Market Directive-II has been translated into the UK Financial Instruments Market Directive-II (Financial Services and Markets Act 2000). Germany, by means of the Second Financial Markets Law Amendment (the Second Financial Markets Act Amendment Act) (Zweites Finanzmarknolliersgesetz, 2. FiMaNoG) has translated the EU Financial Instruments Market Directive-Act II into domestic law.


第三,欧盟对稳定币的监管已经开始采取以集中、主动、渐进和收益/风险相承为特征的监管策略。欧盟当前对稳定币的监管框架呈现分散、非专门化和双层化的特点。这在稳定币发展的初期也许可以作为权宜之计,但随着稳定币快速切入主流支付和金融体系,其技术设计和实现功能也日益复杂化,稳定币已经越来越有溢出欧盟现有的监管框架之外的趋势,这意味着对某些稳定币可能存在监管漏洞。欧洲监管机构也非常清醒地认识到了这一点。2020年5月5日,欧洲中央银行(European Central Bank)发布了一篇全球稳定币的研究报告——《监管和金融稳定视角下的全球稳定币》(A Regulatory and Financial Stability Perspective on Global Stablecoins)。欧洲中央银行认为“为了获得全球稳定币的潜在利益,需要构建一个强有力的监管框架,以便在允许稳定币正式运作之前应对相关风险。”首先,研究报告认为稳定币持有者是否对发行人或支持稳定币的资产具有请求权是稳定币定性的重要标准。其次,欧洲中央银行认为需要深挖稳定币潜力,同时也要控制相关风险。欧洲中央银行在报告中列出了全球稳定币的若干优势,如交易速度、便捷性等,这些方面目前也都得到了公众认可。另一方面欧洲中央银行并没有回避稳定币可能带来的各种风险和困难。欧洲中央银行指出稳定币有可能被持有者视为安全的银行存款(虽然没有利息),但由于稳定币的价值其实是由其“治理和风险管理以及基础资产或基金投资组合的价值”而决定的。一旦稳定币基础资产或者投资组合失去固定价值,或是锚定支持的资产价值偏离预期水平,用户将无法用确切的“稳定价值”进行兑现。此外,稳定币可能出现的系统性故障等也是稳定币的固有风险。因此,稳定币并非完全“稳定”和安全。

Third, the EU regulation of stable currencies has begun to adopt a regulatory strategy characterized by concentration, initiative, graduality, and income/risk. The EU regulatory framework for stable currencies is currently characterized by fragmentation, de-specialization, and double-tieredization. This may be convenient in the early stages of currency stabilization, but, as stable currencies quickly enter the mainstream payment and financial system, their technical design and functioning are increasingly complicated, the stabilization currency has become increasingly out of the EU regulatory framework, which means that there may be regulatory gaps in some stable currencies. European regulators are also keenly aware of this.


欧盟敏锐地意识到对稳定币和其他加密数字货币的监管和指引对维护欧盟的独立自主和竞争力具有特别的意义。欧盟政策制定者认为2020年肇始的全球性公共健康危机暴露了过于依赖非欧洲供货商而引发的连锁反应,因此提出在信息技术、云服务提供商、支付体系和营运商方面都要特别注意培养欧洲本土力量。在全球范围内,欧洲已经在金融科技和加密资产产业处于有利地位。欧洲金融科技是风险投资最大的受益者:欧洲的全部风险投资资金中有20%投资于金融科技,这一比例高于亚洲和美国。欧盟也有着良好的监管基础。欧盟引以为豪的《欧盟支付服务指令——第2版》旨在强化竞争,被公认为是监管和促进开放式支付创新的全球领导者。

The EU is keenly aware of the particular importance of regulation and guidance for stabilizing the currency and other encrypted digital currencies in preserving the EU’s autonomy and competitiveness. EU policymakers believe that the global public-health crisis that started in 2020 exposed a chain reaction caused by over-reliance on non-European suppliers, and therefore suggested that special attention should be paid to building European endogenous capacity in information technology, cloud service providers, payment systems, and operators.


四、我国对稳定币监管范式的选择

IV. Our choice of a regulatory paradigm for stable currency


世界各国对稳定币的宏观监管主要有金融政策监管和法律合规监管两个方面。强化稳定币项目审计,提高透明性,增强合规性对稳定币发展至为重要。当前,越来越多的稳定币项目主动拥抱监管,尽管在一定程度上牺牲了自由度和便利性,但可防止稳定币项目由于风险控制不足或合规缺位而直接导致的信用坍塌和法律诉讼,换来的是监管机关的背书和更为广阔的发展空间。这也在一定程度上为我国的立法和执法机构监管稳定币创造了重要的现实条件,进而为我国提供了稳定币监管的原则框架和基本路径。

At present, a growing number of stabilization projects have taken the initiative to embrace regulation, albeit at the expense of freedom and convenience to some extent, to prevent credit collapses and legal proceedings directly caused by inadequate risk control or lack of compliance, in return for endorsement by regulatory bodies and wider development space. This has also created important practical conditions for our legislation and law enforcement agencies to regulate currency stabilization, thereby providing the country with a framework of principles and a basic path to stable currency regulation.


(一)我国稳定币监管的内外部环境

(i) Stabilization of the internal and external environment of our currency regulations


从稳定币在我国的使用范围来看,在对外贸易、国际贸易结算,跨国投资、国际支付、跨国资本流动等方面,稳定币优势明显。一方面,稳定币的点对点交易模式转账省去了传统银行跨境支付清算的高昂费用、繁琐步骤与缓慢流程,使结算效率和效益大幅提升,而支付成本大大降低;另一方面,稳定币汇率相对稳定,且价值全球基本一致,可以提供安全有保障的计价单位和结算媒介,有利于缩小双边汇率风险,避免汇率波动带来的风险及不确定因素。此外,稳定币也可以实现与我国央行数字货币(Digital Currency Electronic Payment-DC/EP)的无缝对接,能够扩大和丰富央行数字货币的应用场景,进一步加强加密数字货币生态圈与法币的双向流通与互认,在维护和实现我国金融稳定方面意义深远。

In terms of the scope of the use of stable currency in our country, the advantage of stable currency is evident in foreign trade, international trade settlements, cross-border investment, international payments, and cross-border capital flows. On the one hand, the point-to-point mode of money stabilization transfers have eliminated the high costs, cumbersome steps and slow processes of cross-border settlement payments by traditional banks, which have resulted in significant increases in the efficiency and effectiveness of the settlement and a significant reduction in the cost of payment; on the other hand, the relative stability of the exchange rate and global convergence of values, which can provide a safe and secure unit of valuing and clearing media that can help to reduce the risk of bilateral exchange rates and avoid the risks and uncertainties associated with exchange rate fluctuations.


从国际金融形势来看,稳定币有可能使中国在复杂的国际金融局势下赢得突围的机会乃至获得发展的良机。2020年初,美联储和澳大利亚、巴西、丹麦、韩国、墨西哥、挪威、新西兰、新加坡、瑞典等国央行建立了临时美元互换机制,但将中国排斥在外。这种以确保美元的流动性为目标,但将世界第二大经济体排除在外的美元互换机制实际是地缘政治的延伸,也给人民币国际化带来了相当的不确定性。人民币国际化速度也比较缓慢。尽管2020年7月23日,根据环球银行金融电信协会(SWIFT)发布的数据,2020年6月在基于金额统计的全球支付货币排名中,人民币回升至第五位,市场份额占比为1.76%,但美元、欧元、英镑依旧牢牢占据全球支付体系的重要位置,市场份额分别为40.33%、34.10%、7.08%。尤其值得一提的是美元的权重从2018年6月份的39.35%升至2020年6月的40.33%,其全球支付货币主导地位进一步稳固。因此,人民币国际化任重道远。而稳定币的出现,不仅给我国打破针对中国的封闭式美元兑换机制提供了良机,而且也非常有助于实现人民币的国际化。

At the beginning of 2020, the Fed and the central banks of Australia, Brazil, Denmark, Korea, Mexico, Norway, New Zealand, Singapore, and Sweden established a temporary dollar swap mechanism, but excluded China. This aimed to ensure the liquidity of the dollar, but the dollar swap mechanism, which excluded the world’s second largest economies, was actually a geopolitical extension and created considerable uncertainty about the internationalization of the renminbi.


我国也可以通过发行以人民币为基础的稳定币,吸引更多的市场化机构开展以此为基础的跨境支付和商业生态系统创新,在维护自身金融主权的同时,提升人民币的国际地位。在2020年5月22日的全国政协十三届三次会议上,有政协委员就提出了《关于开展香港地区跨境数字稳定币的提案》,建议将人民币、日元、韩元和港元组成一篮子数字稳定币,先行在可控场景下应用于跨境贸易支付,同时也为与我国央行即将推行的央行数字货币衔接做准备。提案中的数字稳定币是由中、日、韩、港四个经济体的货币组成的区域性稳定币,适宜由民间发起和推动,在可控场景下先行先试。在政策利好的背景下,我国可以依托并改革港澳地区现行的资管体系和信托制度,首先探索区域性稳定币托管制度,确保资金安全。同时稳定币还可以与我国的央行数字货币无缝对接,为央行数字货币在香港地区推行乃至国际化落地做出尝试,提前发现并解决央行数字货币跨境支付应用中可能出现的问题和风险。可以预见,中、日、韩、港数字稳定币如能实施,将提高区域性贸易在国际环境影响下的抗风险能力,香港也可为国家数字经济的发展做出新的贡献。

At the 13th meeting of the National Political Consultative Council, held on 22 May 2020, a proposal was put forward for the development of cross-border digital currency stability in Hong Kong. In the context of good policy, we could build and reform the existing banking and trust systems in Hong Kong and Australia, first exploring a regional currency stabilization system to ensure financial security. At the same time, the proposal for a stable currency is made up of a regional currency composed of currencies from the four economies of China, Japan, Korea, and Hong Kong, which is suitable to be initiated and promoted by the people.


从Libra/Diem项目和中国央行法定数字货币(DC/EP)的态势来看,稳定币在我国的存在和发展仍有其特殊的意义,并可以和诸如Libra/Diem项目以及我国央行法定数字货币相互借力,共同发展。2019年5月,由Facebook主导的Libra/Diem项目旨在“创建一个服务于亿万人的,简单、无国界的货币体系和金融基础架构”。我国目前仍处于研究测试中的央行法定数字货币作为M0的替代,是由国家发行的法定数字货币,是以国家信用背书的数字化法币。因此从这个意义上来说,央行法定数字货币并非本文中所讨论的,不具备法偿性和法定性的“私人”稳定币。央行法定数字货币采用双层运营架构,支持收支双方“双离线支付”。但央行法定数字货币的运作和发行并非完全基于区块链技术,因为“区块链的去中心化性特性与中央银行的集中管理要求存在冲突”。但央行法定数字货币借鉴应用了区块链部分组成技术,例如,利用智能合约实现资金的定向流通,利用非对称加密认证身份。稳定币几乎是天然地可以和央行法定数字货币实现相互融通、共同发展,这不仅可以为数字经济与实体经济的深度融合打下关键基础,也为方兴未艾的去中心化金融提供了丰富的想象空间。

In May 2019, the Libra/Diem project, led by Facebook, was designed to “create a simple, borderless monetary system and financial infrastructure for hundreds of millions of people.” The central bank's statutory digital currency, which is still under research testing as a replacement for the M0, is a national legal digital currency issued as a digital currency with a national credit endorsement that can be developed in tandem with the legal digital currency of our central bank. In this sense, the central bank's legal digital currency is not a legal and statutory “private” stabilizer, as discussed here. The central bank's legal digital currency uses a two-tier operating structure that supports “two-tier payments” on both sides of the balance. However, the operation and distribution of the central bank's legal digital currency, which is not based solely on sector-based technology, is a conflict between the centralized character of the regional chain and the centralization of the central bank's economy.


(二)根据稳定币的性质合理规划监管机构

(ii) Rationalization of the regulatory body according to the nature of the stable currency


稳定币的定性与分类对法律监管路径的选择意义重大。出于对稳定币的性质认识的不同,例如将稳定币认定为货币、证券或者电子货币,监管机构会根据不同的监管框架规范性质各异的稳定币。法币资产抵押型稳定币和加密数字资产抵押型稳定币经常被定性为货币市场基金,因为它们原则上投资于以它们所支持的货币计价的低风险、短期资产,目的是保持稳定的价值。被归结为货币市场基金的稳定币需要每个发行的单位都可以即使在以一篮子法币或者加密数字资产为抵押物的情况下,也被同化为货币市场基金单位。值得注意的是加密数字资产抵押型稳定币有时还会被定性为证券,从而受到证券法的规制。中央银行型稳定币则经常被视为电子货币。因为此类稳定币旨在用作支付工具,并且中央银行型稳定币的发行人承诺按面值随时赎回这些稳定币。与货币市场基金相比,电子货币对发行人的监管限制要严格得多,例如根据2009年《欧盟电子货币指令》(Electronic Money Directive, Directive 2009/110/EC),稳定币的发行人需要满足资本充足要求,并且发行人负有随时按面值赎回持有人稳定币的义务。

The characterization and classification of stable currencies are important for the choice of a legal regulatory path. Depending on the perception of the nature of a stable currency, such as a currency, securities or electronic currency, regulators can be equated to a monetary market fund unit under different regulatory frameworks. It is worth noting that an encrypted digital asset-based stable currency is sometimes characterized as a security, and thus is often regarded as an electronic currency because it invests in low-risk, short-term assets denominated in the currencies they support, with the aim of maintaining a stable value. A stable currency that is classified as a monetary market fund requires that each issuing unit be repossessed at any time at the face value of a basket of sub-currencys or encrypted digital assets as collateral.


与金融监管体制改革相适应,我国应当修改法律明确监管部门的职能,提高监管部门的独立性和专业性,逐步实现金融混业监管下的稳定币监管落地。当前,我国对稳定币监管机构存在事实上监管主体的缺位。与前述欧美对稳定币的监管机构已经逐渐成型、各司其职不同,我国稳定币处于金融监管的盲区。由国务院金融稳定发展委员会牵头的“一委一行二会一局”分业金融监管体系在一段时期内不失为一种进步和突破。但是面对性质各异的稳定币,分业监管下人民银行、证监会、银保监会和外管局之间职能划分和协调成本都颇高,导致对稳定币等金融科技产品监管混乱,监管效率下降,并出现监管真空。稳定币作为一种横跨货币政策、证券、银行和外汇管理的金融科技现象,单凭“一委一行二会一局”之力恐怕难以实现有效监管。

In line with the reform of the financial regulatory system, the country should amend its laws to clarify the functions of the regulatory sector, improve the independence and professionalism of the regulatory sector, and move gradually towards stable currency regulation under the supervision of the mixed financial sector. At present, we have a de facto regulatory deficit in the regulatory bodies for stable currency.


监管部门缺位也导致我国经济生活和司法实践中大量存在的稳定币却陷入了监管真空之中。中国作为世界第二大经济体、国际金融中心之所在,同时事实上也是加密数字生态和稳定币快速发展的地区,分业监管的低效削弱了稳定币的发展和规范水平,也影响了我国金融科技的国际竞争力。当前,随着我国金融混合业务的快速发展,我国的金融监管模式逐渐向兼顾金融系统稳定和市场行为规范监管模式过渡。与之相适应,我国应当逐步在此基础上建立专门的稳定币监管机构。当前,中国人民银行和银保监会应当发挥其作为一线监管机关,对稳定币在发行和流通环节加强研究、监督与指导作用,共同承担对稳定币的监管职责,为下一阶段的稳定币监管提供经验积累和理论支持。

China, the second largest economy in the world, an international financial centre, and, in fact, a fast-growing area of encryption digital ecology and currency stabilization, the inefficient regulation of branches undermines the development and regulation of stable currencies and the international competitiveness of our financial science and technology. With the rapid development of our combined financial operations, our financial regulatory model is gradually moving toward a regulatory model that takes into account the stability of the financial system and the norms of market behaviour.


(三)欧美监管模式扬弃借鉴:我国稳定币监管路径初探

(iii) The Euro-American model of regulation has been abandoned: an initial exploration of the country's currency stabilization regulatory path


首先,借鉴美国和欧洲稳定币的全球治理经验,我国改革和加强对稳定币的法律规制与监管路径需要做好以下几方面工作。我国需要建立和完善稳定币法律监管框架和制度。尽管稳定币已经在我国的社会经济生活中崭露头角甚至有大行其道之势,司法实践和法院判决中也经常涉及稳定币,但我国尚未建立针对稳定币的法律规制体系,司法实践中各自为政现象较为突出。在民事法律方面,我国应当在民法典的基础上进一步明确稳定币的虚拟财产地位。在行政法方面,在借鉴欧美经验的基础上,我国可以利用后发优势,制定一部针对稳定币的跨货币、证券、银行、保险、信托、贸易金融、外汇管理和风险管理的综合性金融监管法规。在刑事法律方面,以反洗钱为抓手,明确要求稳定币的跨国发行、兑换、使用和赎回,需要符合我国有关反洗钱、外汇管理和支付结算等金融法律法规。发行方和交易所应当严格履行数字资产交易审慎核查义务,做好反洗钱和恐怖融资的合规审查以及风险防范工作。

First of all, building on the experience of the United States and Europe in global governance of currency stabilization, our reform and strengthening of legal regulation and regulation of currency stabilization need to be done in the following areas. We need to establish and improve legal regulatory frameworks and systems for currency stabilization.


其次,我国在对稳定币的监管手段上应当灵活运用监管研究报告、窗口指导、行业监管对话、监管沙盒、区域试点等多种监管手段实现对稳定币渐进、审慎和多样化的监管。当前,尽管我国在监管政策方面的基调是严格禁止加密数字货币和法币场内交易,但由于稳定币与生俱来的无国界性,稳定币生态事实上在我国金融体系中一直在不断发展。因此,我国对稳定币过于简单粗暴的监管范式实际上漠视了稳定币在我国经济生活中客观存在这一事实。改善对稳定币的监管手段,首先要把研究稳定币监管从“隐学”变为“显学”开始,大力支持和发展对稳定币在货币、金融、科技和法律上的研究。在此基础上有步骤、有计划地开始稳定币归口监管指导,不失时机地与稳定币发行方、分销商、交易撮合方、技术解决方、使用者展开对话,增强监管层与稳定币参与方的沟通理解与增强互信。此外,监管层应考虑推行沙盒监管或在基础设施比较好、金融生态比较活跃健康的区域内,如粤港澳大湾区,试验稳定币生态运作体系并及时总结监管效果。粤港澳大湾区呈现“一国两制三种货币”的特征,既在中央政府的统一管辖之内,又包含跨境和自治的区域;既为新型跨境支付提供了真实应用场景,又可以安全、有效地避免国际势力干预,是我国稳定币生态体系最理想的试点地区。

Secondly, we should use regulatory studies, window guidance, industry regulatory dialogue, trade box regulation, regional piloting, and many other regulatory instruments to achieve progressive, prudential and diversified regulation of the stable currency. At present, although the regulatory policy is based on a strict ban on trade in encrypted digital currency and French currency fields, the stabilization of the monetary ecology has in fact continued to evolve in our financial system because of the unfavorable nature of the stable currency. Therefore, the country's overly simplistic regulatory paradigm of the stable currency effectively ignores the objective presence of the stable currency in the economic life of the country.


最后,我国应当积极主导稳定币的行业标准和监管政策并参与稳定币监管的全球合作。当前,数字经济正迎来新的发展契机。通过新冠疫情,世界各国更加充分认识到发展数字经济的重要性和紧迫性,纷纷加大技术、资金和研究投入。未来数字经济和数字金融的竞争势必更加激烈。在金融领域,我国一直具有善于利用后发优势的优良传统,中国证券市场的无纸化建构在几年时间内就走完了成熟市场几十年才完成的无纸化过程。在世界加密数字货币生态的快速形成中,我国同时也是世界稳定币的重要市场之一。因此,我国有技术条件和市场基础参与制定世界稳定币的行业标准和监管框架。

In the area of finance, we have always had a good tradition of taking advantage of post-escalation advantages, and the paperless construction of China’s securities market has been completed decades after the completion of the paperless process of mature markets. In the rapid formation of the world’s crypto-digital monetary ecology, our country is also one of the world’s major markets for currency stability.


美国和欧洲对稳定币的执法行动和监管框架,意义已经不限于金融监管。其背后更深刻动因在于,许多国家已经认识到稳定币会影响国际货币金融秩序,对稳定币的监管事关国家的货币政策和金融稳定。现阶段锚定美元发行稳定币主要借用了美元作为世界货币的优势地位,而反过来与美元挂钩的稳定币又进一步提升了美元的世界影响力,这意味在全球范围内不同国家的居民都可以通过持有稳定币间接持有美元。随着这种情况的持续蔓延,美元在全球货币体系内的地位将得以进一步提升,美国也会进一步增强对全球经济系统的掌控程度。作为回应和应对措施,我国应当鼓励民营企业参与稳定币市场竞争,按照监管要求批准锚定人民币发行的稳定币,从而积极参与稳定币市场竞争,提升人民币在国际支付市场中的地位。

The US and Europe’s regulatory and regulatory framework for stabilizing the currency is no longer limited to financial regulation. The underlying motivation is that many countries have recognized that stabilizing the currency affects the international monetary and financial order, and that regulation of stabilizing the currency is a matter of national monetary policy and financial stability.


我们也必须充分认识稳定币的竞争、发展和监管都是在全球层面展开的。稳定币的出现正是为了解决跨境支付与跨法币和数字货币支付问题而生的,稳定币流动性也是全球化规模。“相同的业务、相同的风险、相同的规则”以及各国家之间一致的监管方法构成了七国集团(G7)全球稳定币工作组提出的监管指南。面对稳定币天然的跨国界流动性以及随之而来对世界金融稳定带来的巨大影响,二十国集团(G20)于2019年6月授权金融稳定委员会(FSB)检视全球各国对稳定币的法律监管框架,并就多边应对措施提供建议。因此,我国应当积极参与稳定币监管的国际合作以避免监管套利。

“The same business, the same risks, the same rules,” and a coherent regulatory approach among countries constitute the regulatory guidelines proposed by the G-7 Working Group on Global Stability Currency. Faced with the enormous impact of stabilizing the currency’s natural cross-border liquidity on world financial stability, the Group of Twenty (G20) mandated the Financial Stability Committee (FSB) in June 2019 to review the legal regulatory framework of countries around the globe for currency stabilization and to advise on multilateral responses.


结 论

Conclusion


中国应继续在推动数字资产创新的同时维护我国在金融安全领域的国家利益。为维护金融体系安全,我国立法机关和监管机构应当继续完善监管规定。虽然针对加密数字资产和稳定币建立完整的监管框架是长期目标,但考虑到稳定币的发展态势以及国际监管形势,短期内我国可能无法对稳定币做出事无巨细的全面规范,从而应当针对比较迫切的风险出台监管措施,以促进金融创新活动有序开展。为维护金融主权安全,中国应当加紧参与建立全球稳定币的全面监管框架,并推进在我国可控的稳定币监管解决方案。此外,我国应当适时修正和调整对加密数字货币以及稳定币全面禁止的政策,建立专业、系统、完整的监管框架,将全球稳定币活动置于监管范围内。我国应当继续推动央行数字货币项目,并不断总结经验。同时,国家应当鼓励非国有企业积极参与稳定币实践,加强国有金融部门与非国有金融创新企业合作的稳定币“全球支付系统”,在增强支付自主权的前提下联合世界各国大力推进稳定币等金融科技探索。在与金融手段相关的其他安全维度下,中国人民银行和中国银行保险监督管理委员会以及金融、法律智库应该持续关注世界各国金融监管机构的最新研究进展,并向立法机关提交不断完善的稳定币立法建议。
美化布局示例

欧易(OKX)最新版本

【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   全球官网 大陆官网

币安(Binance)最新版本

币安交易所app【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址

火币HTX最新版本

火币老牌交易所【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址
文字格式和图片示例

注册有任何问题请添加 微信:MVIP619 拉你进入群

弹窗与图片大小一致 文章转载注明

分享:

扫一扫在手机阅读、分享本文

发表评论
平台列表
美化布局示例

欧易(OKX)

  全球官网 大陆官网

币安(Binance)

  官网

火币(HTX)

  官网

Gate.io

  官网

Bitget

  官网

deepcoin

  官网
热门文章
  • 0.00006694个比特币等于多少人民币/美金

    0.00006694个比特币等于多少人民币/美金
    0.00006694比特币等于多少人民币?根据比特币对人民币的最新汇率,0.00006694比特币等于4.53424784美元/32.5436 16人民币。比特币(BTC)美元(USDT)人民币(CNY)0.000066944.53424784【比特币密码】32.82795436 16比特币对人民币的最新汇率为:490408.64 CNY(1比特币=490408.64人民币)(1美元=7.24人民币)(0.00006694USDT=0.0004846456 CNY)汇率更新时...
  • 0.00003374个比特币等于多少人民币/美金

    0.00003374个比特币等于多少人民币/美金
    0.00003374比特币等于多少人民币?根据比特币对人民币的最新汇率,0.00003374比特币等于2.2826 1222美元/16.5261124728人民币。比特币(BTC)美元(USDT)人民币(CNY)0.00003374克洛克-0/22216.5261124728比特币对人民币的最新汇率为:489807.72 CNY(1比特币=489807.72人民币)(1美元=7.24人民币)(0.00003374USDT=0.0002442776 CNY)。汇率更新于2024...
  • 1983年,山西老人致信央行:人民币上的“中国人民银行”是我写的

    1983年,山西老人致信央行:人民币上的“中国人民银行”是我写的
    阅读本文前,请点击红色“关注”按钮,方便大家讨论和分享,给您带来不一样的参与感。谢谢大家的支持!1983年,山西日报发表了一篇异常简短的文章,主要内容是:“人民币的字体作者是纪。“不久后,上海《新民晚报》也发表了一篇报道,主要内容与《山西日报》基本相同。二人转文章的排版只占一小部分,但不妨碍大家关注此事。一位家住山西的老人看完文章后显得有些不解:“不是啊,人民币上的字明明是我写的。我怎么能把它戴在别人头上呢?”本着尊重历史的原则,老人的女儿给报社写了两封“澄清信”,分别寄给了...
  • 1929经济大萧条或许即将重演?

    1929经济大萧条或许即将重演?
    人类似乎陷入了一个历史悖论,即我们总是重复同样的错误,无法真正从过去的错误中吸取教训。近年来,我们对世界各地接连不断的挑战和危机深感不安。20 19年突如其来的疫情,乌克兰的战火硝烟,欧洲的天然气供应危机以及全球少数国家的饥荒,所有这些问题都像洪水一样,一个接一个地涌来。如果你今天感到心情沉重,不要失去希望,因为明天可能会带来更严峻的挑战。首先,让我们深入讨论名为1929大萧条的时期。这场大萧条实际上是指从1929到1933的一场影响深远的经济危机。这场危机首先起源于美国,然...
  • 2000年美国GDP占世界的304%,中国GDP仅占35%,现在呢?

    2000年美国GDP占世界的304%,中国GDP仅占35%,现在呢?
    GDP作为全球公认的实力基准,就像是一个大国实力的代言人,它是布雷顿森林体系下全球团结的声音。它不仅仅是数字的累积,更是大国综合实力的人格化,默默诉说着每个国家的辉煌与荣耀。虽然GDP不是衡量一个国家综合实力的唯一标准,但无疑是最关键的指标之一。作为一面镜子,它反映了国家的经济实力和发展水平,是国家综合实力的重要体现,不容忽视。2000年,中国GDP迈过/克洛克-0/万亿美元的重要门槛,达到/克洛克-0/。2/克洛克-0/万亿美元(折合人民币7。7万亿元)。然而,在全球经济的...
标签列表