虛擬資產監理法制之研究

Legal Analysis on Virtual Assets

比特幣等應用區塊鏈技術之虛擬資產近年發展快速，許多人因投虛擬資產或從事相關業務而累積大量財富，因此業者競相推出各種型態虛擬資產及各種創新服務。區塊鏈之熱門應用多集中於具投資性質或投機性質之類金融活動，隨著虛擬資產相關活動日趨活躍，吸引各國監管部門的注意，監管介入程度也日益遽增。在國際監管政策發展背景下，我國面對虛擬資產所衍生之相關爭議，監管政策應如何考量，是本文所欲探討之重點。
本論文分為四大部分，第一部分探討區塊鏈技術特性及虛擬資產主要業務類型。區塊鏈技術具有去中間化、易於跨境應用、無須信任特定人及應用彈性等優點，但同時具有性能有限、錯誤資料修改困難、金鑰管理不易及耗費能源等缺點，為善用區塊鏈之優勢及避其缺點，區塊鏈技術應用集中於單位數據資料附加價值較高之類金融活動，即虛擬資產及分散式金融相關業務，虛擬資產多變且易於跨國之商業模式，也對既有金融監管體制帶來挑戰。
第二部分介紹各國監管法制發展。綜覽FATF及世界主要國家之監管政策變化，可以將虛擬資產監管政策區分為三個階段，第一階段是2017年之前，此階段虛擬資產應用有限，主要係集中於支付相關應用，業務規模也不大，因此各國多採較為寬鬆之監管態度；第二階段是在ICO熱潮發生後，ICO活動衍生之糾紛引起金融監管部門注意，雖修改既有監管制度之國家仍屬少數，但各國對於虛擬資產定性或用語從過往「虛擬貨幣」或「加密貨幣」等，逐漸趨向「虛擬資產」、「加密資產」或「數位資產」，以符合虛擬資產其非屬貨幣之特質，在此階段，各國對於虛擬貨幣多係針對洗錢防制層面進行控管，並以既有證券法規處理相關爭議議題；第三階段是在穩定幣及分散式金融興起後，虛擬資產價格屢創新高，雖在世界主要國家如美國、英國及日本少有民眾將虛擬資產當作支付工具使用，但因穩定幣提供明確之計價功能、便捷之交易情境並結合分散式金融應用，越來越多民眾將透過穩定幣進行虛擬資產之投資，相關爭議引起監管部門之高度注意，美國、英國及歐盟等世界主要國家均開始著手研擬具體監管法制，並將相關虛擬資產之廣告行銷納入控管，而許多國家將穩定幣納入監管列為重要政策目標。
第三部分介紹我國虛擬資產發展實務及政府部門之監管態度。在民眾可以輕易透過便利超商、虛擬資產業者之門市以及網路購買虛擬資產相關商品，而虛擬資產業者在我國從事之業務多元，包括ICO募資、類基金商品、短期借貸商品、自動化投資機器人等。我國政府監管部門對虛擬資產係採取不鼓勵但不禁止之態度，雖金融監管部門持續發布新聞稿警告投資人相關風險，但對於虛擬資產業者所推出之各種類金融商品並未採取強硬之監管態度，亦未限制虛擬資產相關業務之宣傳，而僅要求虛擬資產業者落實洗錢防制之控管。
第四部分探討監理政策發展時應考量之重點。在監管政策之強度部分，考量多數國家對虛擬資產並未採取完全禁絕之態度，即使我國禁止相關業務，民眾仍可使用境外業者所提供之服務，若糾紛發生時更難有效處理，或使相關產業地下化，因此採取嚴格禁絕態度未必能有效杜絕相關爭議事件之發生。因使用區塊鏈技術之虛擬資產相關業務未降低交易活動之主要風險，不宜予以較為寬鬆之監管標準。為降低虛擬資產活動之主要風險，應強化業者之客戶款項保管機制，並約束相關業務宣傳活動，避免業者使用誤導性敘述進行宣傳，且業者應確實揭露虛擬資產相關風險。在監管架構之選擇部分，考量民眾交易虛擬資產之主要原因為係為投資或投機目的，而虛擬資產之交易實務架構類似證券市場運作模式，若未來政府規劃將虛擬資產業務完整納入監管，宜採用證券商執照監管虛擬資產服務提供者，可兼顧客戶款項保管及市場交易秩序等層面，且有監管權責集中之優勢，係較為妥適之監管架構。

Bitcoin and other virtual assets (VA) which uses blockchain technology as the public transaction ledger have developed rapidly in recent years. Many people build wealth with virtual assets investment or involving in related industries. This kind of legend attracted more people to dedicate to the development of related asset and services. Needless to say, most of blockchain applications are considered as some kind of investment or speculative financial products. The popularity of virtual asset-related activities also gain the attention of regulatory authorities in various countries, and the regulatory intensity is increasing worldwide. Nowadays, the world is the middle of developing the related regulations. Since more and more transition disputes arise from virtual asset transition in Taiwan, we should actively consider the increasing of our regulatory intensity. In this article, I would focus on the development of appropriate regulations on virtual asset worldwide, so as to make some advices on Taiwan’s regulatory system.
This article can be divided into four parts; First, I would like to discuss the technical characteristics of blockchain, as well as the business models of virtual assets. Blockchain has the advantage of decentralization, easy to use in cross-border transition, no need to trust specific people, as well as flexibility in use. However, blockchain also has the disadvantage of limited performance, immutability of information, difficulty in managing private key, not to mention the energy waste problem. Due to its characteristics, most of the application of blockchain technology are related to high added value activities, such as virtual assets and decentralized financial services. Nowadays, the flexibility and easy to use in cross-border transaction has become a huge challenge to the existing financial regulatory system..
Secondly, I would introduce the regulatory system of virtual assets in major countries. Overview the history of regulatory system, its development could be divided into three phases. In the first stage, which is before 2017, t virtual assets had only limited application, mainly payment services. So as the business scale. At this point, the regulatory intensity in major was low. Heading into the second stage, the ICO boom and related transaction disputes attracted the attention of financial regulatory authorities worldwide, but do not increased the regulatory intensity.
However, these authorities did recognize the urgent need for an effective response to the anti-money laundering, and tried to deal related disputes with existing securities laws and regulations. Besides, most of the authorities rename the “virtual currency” or “cryptocurrency” as “virtual asset”, “crypto asset” or “digital asset”, so as to clarify the fact that virtual assets are not currencies. In the third stage, stablecoins and decentralized financial services get people’s attention, and the price of virtual assets skyrocket. Although in major countries, such as UK, US and Japan, only few people use virtual assets as payment tool, they still become popular investment targets due to their pricing function and potential in transaction. Financial regulatory authorities start to focus on the transaction dispute associated to virtual assets, authorities in major counties, such as US, UK and EU move on to the formulation of regulatory system, and set some restrictions on advertising and marketing activities of virtual assets. Besides, Regulation on stablecoins is an important policy objective in many countries..
Thirdly, I would focus on the development of virtual assets in Taiwan, as well as Taiwan government’s attitude toward virtual assets. In Taiwan, people could easily complete virtual assets transition in CVS, virtual asset providers’ store, or through internet. Besides, virtual asset providers engage in a variety of business, including ICO, semi-fund commodities, short-term loan commodities, automatic investment robots. Although the various types of business in Taiwan, our government stays neutral to virtual assets industry, which is to say the supervision authorities neither encourage nor prohibit the development of virtual assets in Taiwan. Until now, Taiwan supervision authorities only keep warning the public of related risks through press release, still neither increase the regulatory intensity of virtual assets, nor prohibit the propaganda. Virtual asset providers should only abide by anti-money laundering rules.
Finally, I would discuss on the key points that Taiwan government should consider when formulate the regulations regards to virtual assets. In terms of the regulatory intensity, Taiwan government should not completely prohibit business associated to virtual assets, since major counties do not ban these business. Besides, the public could still assess to these service form foreign services providers through internet, once transaction disputes happen, Taiwan government could not offer effective assistance. Form the technology aspect, bolckchain do not decrease the risks in virtual assets transactions, so that Taiwan government should not allow blockchain-related services apply to loose supervision standard. To support the development of virtual assets industry, as well as lower the transaction risks, Taiwan government should require service providers to establish customer money custody mechanism. Besides, Taiwan government should prohibit misleading advertisement, and require service providers to truly disclose risk-related information. In terms of regulatory model, Taiwan government should issue securities dealer license to the virtual assets providers, since most of the transactions are kind of investments or speculative activities. With the securities supervision model, custody of customer funds and the order of market transactions could be taken, and the government could take the advantage of centralized supervisory powers and responsibilities.