從比較法觀點探討我國《虛擬資產服務法草案》之監理體系與制度挑戰

Exploring the Regulatory Framework and Institutional Challenges of Taiwan’s Virtual Asset Service Act Draft: A Comparative Law Perspective

本文從比較法觀點出發，探討我國《虛擬資產服務法草案》之監理架構與制度設計，並以防制洗錢金融行動工作組織（FATF）相關指引為基礎，對照美國與歐盟近年虛擬資產監理立法之發展趨勢。比較分析顯示，美國透過實質法判準與專法立法逐步釐清虛擬資產及穩定幣之法律性質，歐盟則藉由《MiCA》建立高度法律明確性與市場准入制度；相較之下，我國草案雖採專法模式並引入分類許可與自律機制，惟於業者分類、行政授權界限及穩定幣規範密度等面向，仍呈現行政裁量導向之立法特色。本文指出，虛擬資產監理之關鍵在於法律明確性、可預期性與風險導向原則之落實，並提出差別化許可、授權界限明確化及強化穩定幣規範等建議，以供我國法制完善之參考。

This article adopts a comparative law approach to examine the regulatory framework and institutional design of Taiwan’s Draft Virtual Asset Service Act, drawing on relevant guidance issued by FATF and comparing recent legislative developments in the United States and the European Union. The analysis shows that the United States has gradually clarified the legal nature of virtual assets and stablecoins through substantive legal tests and sector-specific legislation, while the European Union has established a high level of legal certainty and a unified market-access regime under the Markets in MiCA. By contrast, although Taiwan’s draft adopts a special-purpose statute and introduces a classification-based licensing system together with self-regulatory mechanisms, it remains characterized by a comparatively high degree of administrative discretion, particularly with respect to service provider classification, the scope of delegated authority, and the regulatory density applicable to stablecoins.This article argues that the core of virtual asset regulation lies not in the intensity of supervision, but in the realization of legal certainty, regulatory predictability, and a risk-based approach. Accordingly, it proposes differentiated licensing based on risk, clearer statutory limits on administrative delegation, and a more explicit regulatory framework for stablecoins, with a view to contributing to the further refinement of Taiwan’s virtual asset regulatory regime.