Economist Alexei Kush expressed the opinion that it is profitable for Ukraine to keep the cryptocurrency outlawed, as it allows you to control and monopolize the market, creating obstacles to competitors and the ability to avoid transparent financial checks.
Who is advantageous for the circulation of cryptocurrency in Ukraine to be outlawed and what will have the consequences?
Last week, the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) published a draft provision, which, at first glance, aims to regulate unicensive activities in the field of financial and payment services. However, a more detailed analysis of the document indicates potential problems that arise due to the lack of a clear strategy for regulating cryptocurrencies and virtual assets in Ukraine.
The position and its opacity
The National Bank states that the new provision aims to identify and regulate unicensive activities in the non -bank financial services and payment market. But is it really that? As it turned out, this provision that tries to regulate cryptocurrency activities is controversial due to its lack of specifics and the real possibility of application.
What is it about?
The NBU seeks to take control of unicensive activity, even in cases where the corresponding license does not exist in Ukrainian legislation at all, as is the case with cryptocurrencies. The Law of Ukraine “On Virtual Assets” has not yet entered into force, and the cryptocurrency market in Ukraine, which is already ranked fifth in the world, remains uncontrollable. So - creates a field for "manual" regulation of the activities of its participants.
European experience and Ukrainian realities
While the European Union is introducing Mica (Market in Crypto-Assets Regulation), which regulates cryptocurrency market and provides consumer protection, Ukraine has not yet solved this problem. I suspect that someone in the higher echelons of power is interested in this condition. Therefore, against the background of other cryptocurrencies, we look like a wild tribe, while the closest neighbors - EU countries have become an example of transparent and adequate regulation, which allows the market to develop and bring revenues to the budget.
In Ukraine, due to the lack of a clear legislative framework, the cryptocurrency market is forced to function under legal uncertainty. Legislative initiatives, such as new digital things and services, are introducing a certain order, but do not ensure the proper protection of consumers and do not regulate the issue of cryptocurrency circulation.
Against the background of the growing popularity of cryptocurrencies in Ukraine, there is a significant widespread financial transactions, in particular from drug dealers who use cryptocurrency without proper licenses. This creates numerous problems for financial regulation and control, since these entities usually operate in the shadow sector of the economy. The lack of license control allows them to avoid official checks and tax liabilities, which undermines the legality of financial markets and can lead to significant financial risks for investors and consumers.
The danger of lack of clarity
The NBU currently has limited opportunities to influence the activities of cryptocurrency market entities, especially when it comes to foreign companies or those that are not subject to direct supervision by the National Bank. As stated in the Regulation, the NBU intends to use "professional judgment" to evaluate and classify the activities of players in this market. And this opens up opportunities for abuse and corruption.
There are also questions about the qualification of NBU employees, because in order to effectively regulate cryptocurrencies, you need to have specialized knowledge and experience, which, unfortunately, is often lacking in government officials.
Professional judgment and its consequences
One of the biggest problems is that the NBU can use its professional judgment to determine the compliance of activities for certain types of services. This creates a situation where a decision is legal or not may depend on the interpretation of a particular official, which increases the risk of abuse.
We summarize.
In its current form, the project aims to suppress the cryptocurrency assets in Ukraine or eliminate "not their" players. The provision does not comply with EU law and may cause European companies to exit the Ukrainian market by quarreling us with partners. The document also contains inefficient control mechanisms that will inevitably lead to abuse of the regulator by their powers, strengthen corruption and illegal enrichment in the NBU.
It is frightened by the pre -trial investigation body for illegal release or use of electronic money, a defined economic security bureau (Bab), which has repeatedly compromised itself with a biased attitude to business.
Do the country that stands on the threshold of the EU should strive for this? In my opinion, it is extremely dangerous and unacceptable to introduce such a position. Any regulatory document has an initiator. Interestingly, who is the initiator of this provision and what is its private interest in the crypt market in Ukraine?
