Startseite Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues

  • Sandeep Thomas Chandy EMAIL logo und Prakhar Bhardwaj
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 26. Juli 2020

Abstract

Taking Venezuela’s complaint against the United States at the World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) as the inflection point, this Article will explore whether a characterisation of cryptocurrencies as a ‘currency’ (similar to a fiat currency) would ensure that cryptocurrencies are not covered by WTO disciplines on goods and services. Despite customary international law principles such as ius cudendae monetae and the persuasive argument that a ‘currency’ is neither a good or service – the Article answers this question in the negative. It will divide issues that can arise during such a WTO dispute into three categories: threshold, substantive and compliance issues. Threshold issues would involve interpretative challenges to determine whether the General Agreement on Trade in Services (“GATS”) and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (“GATT”) regulate cryptocurrencies. Since the GATS Schedule of Commitments has historically been interpreted in a technologically neutral manner, identifying cryptocurrencies as a ‘service’ may not prove to be insurmountable. However, the claim that cryptocurrencies are barter goods that will be subject to disciplines of the GATT deserves critical scrutiny – more so because the GATT regulates tangible products and contains specific provisions relating to balance-of-payments. The Article also undertakes a theoretical analysis of the heterodoxical nature of the cryptocurrency to evaluate whether it can be classified as a ‘security’ within the meaning of the GATS’ Annex on Financial Services. These threshold issues are, however, the tip of the iceberg. Once a WTO Panel commences its analysis, the substantive issues for consideration would involve determining whether a unique product such as cryptocurrencies has a ‘like product’ in the respondent Member’s market. Further, the Panel’s analysis would involve a consideration relating to ‘general exceptions’ under Article XIV, GATS or Article XX, GATT which would entail an examination of whether the measure was necessary to achieve, amongst other regulatory objectives, either compliance with domestic regulations or the maintenance of public order. If the measure adversely impacting cryptocurrencies is determined to be WTO-inconsistent, issues of compliance and suspension of concessions are imminent. WTO Panels have historically estimated the . quantum of suspensions of concessions by determining the trade volumes affected by the WTO-inconsistent measure and factoring it for a future time period. The decentralised nature of the distributed ledger technology underlying cryptocurrencies complicates any country-specific quantification of the impact on trade volumes of cryptocurrencies affected by the WTO inconsistent measure. Accordingly, determining suspensions of concessions in relation to cryptocurrencies would require significant judicial innovation by the arbitrator. Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues.


Corresponding author: Sandeep Thomas Chandy, Research Fellow, Centre for Trade and Investment Law, New Delhi, India, E-mail:

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all participants of the Workshop on International Economic Law in the Era of Distributed Ledger Technology on 9 April 2019 held at the University of Turin, Department of Law for their views on this Article. The authors are particularly grateful for the intellectual support provided by Dr. James Nedumpara, Aditya Laddha and Sparsha Janardhan; without their assistance, this article would not have been possible. All views expressed herein are personal.

References

Chandy, S. 2019. Guest Post: Venezuela Challenges US’ Blockade of its National Cryptocurrency at the WTO. International Economic Law and Policy Blog. https://worldtradelaw.typepad.com/ielpblog/2019/01/guest-post-venezuela-challenges-us-blockade-of-its-national-cryptocurrency-at-the-wto.html (accessed January 15, 2019).Suche in Google Scholar

Gao, H. 2014. “108th Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of American Society of International Law: Can WTO Law Keep up with the Internet?.” The Effectiveness of International Law 108 (2014): 469–494. https://doi.org/10.5305/procannmeetasil.108.0350.Suche in Google Scholar

Baker, S. A., P. Lichtenbaum, M. D. Shenk, and M. S. Yeo. 2001. “E-Products at the WTO: Symposium on Borderless E-Commerce.” Int’l Lawyer 35 (1): 5–21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40707591.Suche in Google Scholar

Bossche, P., and W. Zdouc. 2017. The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organisation: Text, Cases and Materials, 4th ed. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316662496Suche in Google Scholar

Bradfield, J. 2007. Introduction to the Economics of Financial Markets. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195310634.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Clarke, L. 2019. Elliptic Traces Bitcoin to Hunt Dark Web Criminals for the FBI. TechWorld. https://www.techworld.com/security/elliptic-traces-bitcoin-transactions-hunt-dark-web-criminals-for-fbi-3694935/ (Accessed April 10, 2019).Suche in Google Scholar

Cvetkova, I. 2018. “Cryptocurrencies Legal Regulation.” BRICS Law Journal V 2: 128–152, 131. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2018-5-2-128-153.Suche in Google Scholar

Delimatsis, P., and B. Hoekman. 2018. “National Tax Regulation, Voluntary International Standards, and the GATS: Argentina–Financial Services.” World Trade Review 17 (2): 265–290. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1474745617000635.Suche in Google Scholar

Ganne, E. 2018. Can Blockchain Revolutionize International Trade? World Trade Organisation. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/blockchainrev18_e.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar

Gianviti, F. 2004. Current Legal Aspects of Monetary Sovereignty. https://www.imf.org/external/np/leg/sem/2004/cdmfl/eng/gianvi.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar

Howden, E. 2014. “The Crypto-Currency Conundrum: Regulating an Uncertain Future.” Emory International Law Review 29 (742–798): 747–50.Suche in Google Scholar

Howse, R. 2010. “Beyond the Countertrade Taboo: Why the WTO Should Take Another Look at Barter and Countertrade.” University of Toronto Law Journal 60 (2): 289–314. https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj.60.2.289.Suche in Google Scholar

Lastra, R. M. 2006. Legal Foundations of International Monetary Stability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Marchetti, J. 2010. “The GATS Prudential Carve-Out.” In Financial Regulation at the Crossroads: Implications for Supervision, Institutional Design and Trade, edited by D, Panagiotis, H, Nils. Kluwer Law International.Suche in Google Scholar

Memoria, F. 2019. “Turns Out Venezuela’s Oil-Backed Petro Cryptocurrency is Real After All.” CNN. https://www.ccn.com/turns-out-venezuelas-oil-backed-petro-cryptocurrency-is-real-after-all (accessed January 28, 2019).Suche in Google Scholar

Parikh, V., J. Reddy, and A. Ravindranath. 2018. “India.” The Virtual Currency Regulation Review. https://thelawreviews.co.uk/digital_assets/e61360db-b49e-4d17-83f0-eba976d0804c/The-Virtual-Currency-Regulation-Review-Edition-1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2FmJE_wiR00icCX74ikohJaTBZBDF9n6x8GcHgKhZcz3nVXilSTTzpEUA.Suche in Google Scholar

Pauwelyn, J. 2003. Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511494550Suche in Google Scholar

Plassaras, N. A. 2013. “Regulating Digital Currencies: Bringing Bitcoin within the Reach of the IMF.” Chicago Journal of International Law 14 (1): 377–407. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cjil/vol14/iss1/12.Suche in Google Scholar

Proctor, C. 2012. Mann on the Legal Aspect of Money, 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Treves, T. 2000. “Monetary Sovereignty Today.” In International Monetary Law: Issues for the New Millennium, edited by M. Giovanoli. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198299233.003.0005Suche in Google Scholar

Zimmermann, C. D. 2013. A Contemporary Concept of Monetary Sovereignty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199680740.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-07-26

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 26.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/gj-2019-0046/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen