电子货币的发行主体与监管策略研究

文章分析了电子货币在不同发行条件下对货币体系产生的影响,发现其影响的程度与方式极大地取决于发行主体、发行机制的设置.进而提出了在目前电子货币占市场份额还很小,对货币体系、货币政策影响有限的情况下,央行等监管者的工作策略应重点放在发行主体的认定与监管、法制建设等方面.     

关于数字货币的发行与监管初探

随着科技的进步和网络的普遍使用,互联网金融和电子支付手段迅猛发展,以比特币为代表的数字货币大量涌现,对经济、金融的各个方面产生了一定影响.本文分析国外在研究数字货币方面的进展,对数字货币的定义、类型、特点及其与电子货币的区别进行了剖析,指出数字货币可能产生的潜在影响,提出在我国数字货币发行和监管的政策建议.     

基于状态空间模型的电子货币与银行信贷的实证研究

2014年3月14日,中国人民银行紧急叫停支付宝等虚拟信用卡支付服务,4月25日,曾经是全球最大的比特币交易平台Mr.Cox宣告破产,与此同时,央行再次发出了禁止比特币交易的最后通牒。这再一次凸显了电子货币作为互联网金融时代最主要的金融工具之一所蕴藏的内在风险不容小觑。电子货币从其诞生以来,就对传统货币政策、货币理论带来了挑战,对货币供给、货币乘数、货币流通速度、金融监管、银行信贷投放甚至整体宏观经济稳定发展都造成了很大的影响。本文在综合前人研究的基础上,运用状态空间计量经济模型实证分析了电子货币发行及其交易与银行信贷之间的长期动态发展关系,试图为金融监管当局通过加强电子货币监管引导银行信贷投放提供新的方向。     

电子货币对货币政策的影响

电子货币有效地降低了信息成本和交易费用,拓展了交易的时间和空间。同时电子货币的产生和发展也给社会经济带来了新的问题和挑战。电子货币的发行会减少流通中的现金,降低基础货币的规模,导致货币乘数趋于波动,从而影响央行货币政策。本文将通过分析电子货币对货币政策影响机制,探讨央行货币政策的应对措施。     

电子货币对货币及货币政策的影响

电子货币是信息、通讯技术及金融创新的必然结果,是纸币取代铸币以来货币形式的又一次根本性变革。电子货币具有提高流通速度、降低交易费用的显著优势,在世界范围内发展迅速并对传统货币形成替代趋势。电子货币的出现挑战了现有的以中央银行为核心的银行货币创造体系,并对货币发行、传统货币理论、货币政策等方面产生了深远影响。     

金融热词:比特币

比特币（Bitcoin,简写为BTC）是一种开源的、基于网络的、点对点的加密电子货币。与传统货币比较,比特币具有去中心化、全球流通、专属所有三个特点,即比特币的发行不依赖于中央银行、流通只需一台接入互联网的计算机、可以被隔离保存在任何存储介质中为个人排他性的所有。     

比特币：一种新型货币对金融体系的挑战

比特币（BitCoin,BTC）是一种开源的、基于网络的、点对点的匿名电子货币,由中本聪（Satoshi Nakamoto）于2008年设计开发,是世界上第一个分布式的匿名数字货币。比特币的发行和支付没有中央控制中心,货币转账是由网络节点进行集体管理,交易各方可以隐藏自己的真实身份。     

电子货币对传统金融理论的冲击

本文从电子货币与纸币的区别出发，分析了这种新型信用货币的发展对传统的金融理论产生的多方面的冲击：电子货币使货币性质发生了变化；动摇了货币的主权化发行；对货币的安全性提出质疑；改变了货币供应量计算的基数和乘数；对传统货币政策的操作构成了极大的挑战。     

解析新货币经济学

20世纪80年代以后,新货币经济学的观点逐渐被人们所重视。新货币经济学主张将传统的统一于一种货币中的记账职能和交易职能相分离,来解决传统的“二分法”问题,并提出了“精密的物物交换体系”为基础的经济分析方法。同时认为如果取消法律限制,传统的货币将消失。新货币经济学对货币本质的认识和电子货币的发展提供了新的理论思路。     

比特币崛起视角下的中国金融监管问题研究

2008年11月,一个自称中本聪的人在一个隐秘的密码学讨论组上贴出了一篇研究报告,阐述了对电子货币的新构想,比特币就此问世。作为一种由开源的对等网络(PeertoPeer,以下简称P2P)软件产生的电子、数字币,与大多数货币不同的是,它不依赖于特定的中央发行机构,而是使用遍布整个P2P网络节点的分布式数据库来记录货币的交易,并使用密码学的设计来确保货币流通各个环节安全性。可以说,比特币的出现是对现有货币和金融体系的颠覆,成为一种对我国金融体系构成潜在挑战的"新型货币"。如何对待比特币以及对其进行有效监管,是一个迫切需要解决的问题。     

Bitcoin – Its Economics for Financial Reporting

Despite its increasing popularity, no official guidance on the financial reporting of Bitcoin transactions has been provided by standard setters, although tax accounting guidance began to appear in 2014. Designed as a decentralised currency, Bitcoin is not intended to become a reporting currency and will instead complement fiat money. We argue that in the case of Bitcoin the accounting principle of faithful representation requires interpretation of the economic substance for financial reporting that varies with reporting entity: trading firms recognise Bitcoin like a foreign currency and measure the revenue, or expense, at the equivalent amount of the reporting currency and digital currency exchanges recognise Bitcoin as goods in line with tax accounting treatment. An Economica paper by Radford (1945), which describes the use of cigarettes as commodity money in a prisoner of war camp alludes to this economic basis. This paper applies accounting principles to a practical issue and contributes to the process by which standard setters may issue an interpretation.     

Money in the time of crypto

This paper investigates the evolution of cryptocurrencies. By nature and essence, Bitcoin challenged and implicitly threatened central bank money and its role in the monetary system. Meanwhile, central banks have been studying cryptocurrencies and launched pilot projects on their own digital currency, the Central Bank Digital Currency. Until recently, most economists considered Bitcoin merely as a speculative asset; however, the El Salvador decision in 2021 to establish it as a legal tender (through the Bitcoin Law) questions the status quo perception of Bitcoin. Given El Salvador’s legal obligation by law of their acceptance, allowing tax payments to the government and debts to be settled using Bitcoin, the Bitcoin Law challenges the boundaries of money. In light of the El Salvador experience, we consider different perspectives on the nature of money, allowing us to reject or include Bitcoin inside the money spectrum.     

Does Bitcoin behave as a currency?: A standard monetary model approach

We derive the Bitcoin exchange rate dynamics by solving the exchange rate equation of the standard flexible-price monetary model to investigate any characteristics of Bitcoin like a currency. The dynamics is driven by an asymmetric mean-reverting fundamental shock which can be attributed to a money demand shock. A crash occurs when the exchange rate with a weakened mean-reverting force breaches a lower boundary where a smooth-pasting condition is imposed. The empirical results show the exchange rate dynamics can be calibrated according to the model, in which the mean reversion of the dynamics is positively co-integrated with the Bitcoin transaction volume indicating demand for Bitcoin; and with the risk reversals of the commodity currencies (Australian dollar and Canadian dollar) in currency option markets. The analysis shows that the Bitcoin exchange rate shares some characteristics of commodity currencies with crash risk. This suggests that Bitcoin behaves as a currency between fiat money and a crypto-commodity used for trading and investment purposes.     

试论电子货币的界定

随着电子货币在经济活动中扮演着越来越重要的角色,人们对电子货币的研究也不断深入.但已有的研究都是基于多种不同的电子货币界定展开的,使得研究结论的可比性和一致性不高.本文参照传统货币的定义、职能等,扬弃现有研究对电子货币的界定,对电子货币给出明确界定,为进一步的研究打下基础.     

电子货币对存款准备金制度的冲击效应研究

本文以电子货币为视角,将电子货币引入存款准备金制度的理论分析框架,在理论分析及对传统货币模型修正的基础上,选择电子货币与存款准备金政策相关的变量,建立数量经济模型。通过统计检验发现：电子货币放大了货币乘数,并使货币乘数变得不稳定,从而加大了中央银行通过存款准备金政策影响货币乘数来调节商业银行信用创造能力的难度,削弱了存款准备金政策的效率。     

电子货币的发展对金融业影响透析

网络金融已成为本世纪金融业发展的主流,作为货币形态演变最新形式的电子货币逐步取代传统通货已经成为一种不可逆转的世界性发展趋势.电于货币的发展,使传统的货币理论和货币供求关系出现了新的变化,给中央银行货币发行权、独立性、货币政策有效性及传统监管机制都将提出挑战,使中央银行的金融调控与监管面临许多新的风险.     

Money,Bitcoin, and Monetary Policy

A search-theoretic model is constructed, where money and Bitcoin can be used as mediums of exchange. We investigate how each currency facilitates transactions and how they compete with each other. Quantitative analysis shows that welfare in an economy with both money and Bitcoin is lower than in a money-only economy due to congestions in the confirmation of Bitcoin transactions and that the welfare gap between the two economies expands as inflation rises. Moreover, an increase in transaction fees for Bitcoin can increase welfare by reducing inefficient Bitcoin transactions.     

The economics of Bitcoin and similar private digital currencies

Recent innovations have made it feasible to transfer private digital currency without the intervention of an organization such as a bank. Any currency must prevent users from spending their balances more than once, which is easier said than done with purely digital currencies. Current digital currencies such as Bitcoin use peer-to-peer networks and open source software to stop double spending and create finality of transactions. This paper explains how the use of these technologies and limitation of the quantity produced can create an equilibrium in which a digital currency has a positive value. This paper also summarizes the rise of 24/7 trading on computerized markets in Bitcoin in which there are no brokers or other agents. The average monthly volatility of returns on Bitcoin is higher than for gold or a set of foreign currencies in dollars, but the lowest monthly volatilities for Bitcoin are less than the highest monthly volatilities for gold and the foreign currencies.     

Countering money laundering and terrorist financing: A case for bitcoin regulation

Bitcoin was created in 2008 to serve as an alternative payment mechanism for both the under-banked and un-banked, or those in regions where the formal financial system suffers from broad corruption and efficient regulation. However, criminals and terrorists quickly exploited Bitcoin's unique properties, namely its peer-to-peer nature and pseudo-anonymity, to facilitate extensive terrorist financing and money laundering schemes. Government reactions to safeguard national security interests have been extremely varied, ranging from outright bans to passive tolerance. This inconsistency stems from how to effectively classify Bitcoin. On one side are those who argue Bitcoin is a currency, and on the other are those who claim it is a type of asset. In the US alone, these discrepancies have led to a bureaucratic turf war between different regulatory bodies, namely the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, the Commodity Futures Trading Association, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Internal Revenue Service. This study seeks to move beyond the existing legal frameworks, arguing that Bitcoin should be classified as a technology and regulation should rest with private sector technology companies.