Regulating Crypto and Cyberware in the EU

doi:10.1017/9781009364706.034

29 - Regulating Crypto and Cyberware in the EU

from Part IV - Financial Integration

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 September 2023

Karel Lannoo

Edited by

Dariusz Adamski ,

Fabian Amtenbrink and

Jakob de Haan

Show author details

Dariusz Adamski: Affiliation:
University of Wroclaw
Fabian Amtenbrink: Affiliation:
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Jakob de Haan: Affiliation:
University of Groningen

Book contents

Get access

Summary

As the EU is finalizing measures for the regulation of cryptocurrencies and the digital resilience of financial institutions, this chapter describes the pros and cons of the new approach for regulating crypto, and assesses the framework for ICT oversight. Both regulations, Markets in Crypto-Assets (MICA) and Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), introduce a host of new provisions, and fundamentally change the regulatory framework for digital operations in finance in the EU. Crypto providers will be subject to a new set of rules in MICA, outside the existing rules for investment providers that are governed by the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID). But the digital governance of all financial firms will be more strictly regulated under DORA, including the third-party ICT providers.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of European Monetary, Economic and Financial Integration , pp. 539 - 552

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009364706.034 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Amstad, M. (2019). Regulating FinTech: Objectives, principles, and practices. Working Paper, No. 1016, October, Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar

Atzori, M. (2021). Blockchain technology and decentralised governance: Is the state still necessary? Journal of Governance and Regulation 6(1), 45–62.Google Scholar

Biais, B., Bisière, C., Bouvard, M., and Casamatta, C. (2021). The blockchain folk theorem. Review of Financial Studies 32(5), 1662–1715.Google Scholar

BIS (2021a). Distrust or speculation? The socioeconomic drivers of US cryptocurrency investments by Raphael Auer and David Tercero-Lucas.Google Scholar

BIS Working Papers No. 951. www.bis.org/publ/work951.pdf Google Scholar

BIS (2021b). Central bank digital currencies for cross-border payments. Report to the G-20, July. www.bis.org/publ/othp38.pdf Google Scholar

BIS-SIX-SNB (2020). Project Helvetia: Settling tokenised assets in central bank money. Bank for International Settlements, SIX Group AG, and Swiss National Bank, December.Google Scholar

Bofinger, P., and Haas, T. (2021). Central bank digital currencies: Can central banks succeed in the marketplace for digital monies? ECMI Working Paper, December.Google Scholar

Bouyon, S., and Krause, S. (2018). Cybersecurity in finance: Getting the policy mix right. Report of a CEPS-ECRI Task Force, June, Centre for European Policy Studies and European Credit Research Institute.Google Scholar

Casey, M., Crane, J., Gensler, G., Johnson, S., and Narula, N. (2018). The impact of blockchain technology on finance: A catalyst for change. Geneva Reports on the World Economy No. 21.Google Scholar

Cong, L., and He, Z. (2019). Blockchain disruption and smart contracts. Review of Financial Studies 32(5), 1754–1797.Google Scholar

Deloitte (2022). The EU’s Digital Operational Resilience Act has been agreed: implications for the financial services sector for an assessment of the agreement and the implications for firms. July. www2.deloitte.com/lu/en/pages/risk/articles/eu-dora-agreed-implications-financial-services-sector.html?icid=wn_eu-dora-agreed-implications-financial-services-sector Google Scholar

Dolmans, M., Gilbert, P., Messent, J., Siragusa, M., and Subiotto, R. (2019). Payment services in the EU: Price regulation to protect a duopoly. Competition Law Journal 18(4), 175–189.Google Scholar

European Commission (2020a). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Markets in Crypto-Assets, and Amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937, (MiCA), COM(2020) 593 final, 24 September.Google Scholar

European Commission (2020b). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on digital operational resilience for the financial sector and amending Regulations (EC) No. 1060/2009, (EU) No. 648/2012, (EU) No. 600/2014 and (EU) No. 909/2014 (DORA), COM(2020) 595 final, 24 September.Google Scholar

European Commission (2021). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing the Authority for Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism and Amending Regulations (EU) No. 1093/2010, (EU) 1094/2010, (EU) 1095/2010, COM(2021) 421 final, 20 June.Google Scholar

European Union (2022), Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 on digital operational resilience for the financial sector (DORA), and amending Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009, (EU) No 648/2012, (EU) No 600/2014, (EU) No 909/2014 and (EU) 2016/1011Google Scholar

European Union (2023), Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023 on markets in crypto-assets (MiCA), and amending Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010 and Directives 2013/36/EU and (EU) 2019/1937. Official Journal, 9 June 2023.Google Scholar

ECB (2021). Opinion of the European Central Bank of 19 February 2021 on a proposal for a regulation on Markets in Crypto-assets, and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021AB0004 Google Scholar

EPRS (2021). Updating the Crypto Assets Regulation and establishing a pilot regime for distributed ledger technology, PE 612.617 – March.Google Scholar

Gallersdörfer, U., Klaaßen, L., and Stoll, C. (2020). Energy consumption of cryptocurrencies beyond bitcoin. Joule 4(9), 1843–1846.Google Scholar

Godschalk, H. (2021). Crypto-assets, fiat currency and Aa: Some notes on the MiCAR. 16 March. https://paytechlaw.com/en/crypto-assets-fiat-currency-micar/Google Scholar

Iansiti, M., and Lakhani, K. (2017). The truth about blockchain: It will take years to transform business, but the journey begins now. Harvard Business Review, January–February. https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-truth-about-blockchain Google Scholar

Lannoo, K. (2021). Cyberfinance challenges require a common response. CEPS Policy Insight, No. 2018/12, October. www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/cyber-finance-challenges-demand-unified-response/Google Scholar

Lannoo, K. (2022). The EU’s proposed crypto regulations are flawed. 16 May. www.ft.com/content/83ddff31-fb9a-4765-becf-82a52cc7291d Google Scholar

Lastra, R., and Allen, J. G. (2019). Towards a European governance framework for cryptoassets. SUERF Policy Note 110, November.Google Scholar

Lianos, I. (2019). Blockchain competition – gaining competitive advantage in the digital economy: Competition law implications. In Hacker, P., Lianos, I., Dimitropoulos, G., and Eich, S. (eds.), Regulating Blockchain: Techno-Social and Legal Challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 329.Google Scholar

Martin, K., and Nauman, B. (2021). Bitcoin’s growing energy problem: ‘It’s a dirty currency’. Financial Times, 20 May. www.ft.com/content/1aecb2db-8f61-427c-a413-3b929291c8ac Google Scholar

McKinsey (2018). Blockchain beyond the hype: What is the strategic business value? www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/mckinsey-digital/our-insights/blockchain-beyond-the-hype-what-is-the-strategic-business-value Google Scholar

Nabilou, H. (2019). How to regulate bitcoin? Decentralized regulation for a decentralized cryptocurrency. International Journal of Law and Information Technology 27(3), 266–291.Google Scholar

Nascimento, S., and Pólvora, A. (2019). Blockchain now and tomorrow: Assessing multidimensional impacts of distributed ledger technologies. Joint Research Centre, European Commission.Google Scholar

Pike, C., and Capobianco, A. (2020). Antitrust and the trust machine. OECD Blockchain Policy Series, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 4 November.Google Scholar

Pupillo, L., Ferreira, A., and Varisco, G. (2018). Software vulnerability disclosure in Europe: Technology, policies and legal challenges. Report of a CEPS Task Force, June, Centre for European Policy Studies.Google Scholar

Reid, F., and Harrigan, M. (2011). An analysis of anonymity in the bitcoin system. IIEEE International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk, and Trust, Boston, 9–11 October.Google Scholar

Thomadakis, A. (2021). How crisis-proof are financial market infrastructures? ECMI event report. www.ecmi.eu/sites/default/files/event_report_operational_resilience.docx.pdf Google Scholar

Villeroy de Galhau, F. (2021). Roads towards the future for CBDC and innovative payments. SUERF Policy Notes. www.suerf.org/policynotes/29965/roads-for-the-future-central-bank-digital-currency-cbdc-and-innovative-payments Google Scholar

The White House (2022). Executive Order on Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets. Presidential actions. 9 March.Google Scholar

Zetzsche, D., Annunziata, F., Arner, D., and Buckley, R. (2021). The Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) and the EU digital finance strategy. Capital Markets Law Journal 16(2), 203–225.Google Scholar