Government’s Crypto Stance: Safety or Control?

Image © Adobe Images

The decentralised nature of cryptocurrency, plus high returns, has lured millions of investors into its fold.

But with each new, innovative technology, governments around the world struggle to work out how to handle this industry.

Government regulation of cryptocurrency is a very debated issue with many facets: on one hand, there is a very valid concern to protect consumers from fraud and scams; on the other, some argue it would stifle innovation and hurt the growth of the crypto industry. Some argue that the Government is just “addicted” to controlling anything and everything.

This article looks into government motivations behind the regulation of cryptocurrency and primarily attempts to answer if this is more consumer-protective or has a financial control element to it.

The Case for Regulation

Those in support say the regulation protects consumers from fraud and scams. They refer to many Ponzi schemes and other fraudulent activities that have been conducted in the crypto space. They argue further that such regulation is needed so that crypto exchanges and other platforms are doing fair and transparent business.

Another reason to place a regulation is simply to help prevent money laundering and other illegal activities from taking place. It is difficult to trace cryptocurrency, the same reason criminals might want to use it to launder money. Government regulation would make it much more complicated for criminals.

Some would argue that regulation is necessary to prevent the crypto industry from becoming a threat to financial stability. They refer to the potential of using cryptocurrencies with the ultimate intent of destabilising the system. By regulating the crypto industry, governments can mitigate these risks.

The Case Against Regulation

The opponents of government regulation believe that this will eventually kill innovation, hampering the growth of the crypto industry. They point out that the crypto industry is at an incipient stage of development. With too much regulation, it would be very hard for the industry to innovate and grow.

Another argument against the regulation is that it will result in the loss of some privileges relating to privacy. Cryptocurrency, for many out there, is viewed as one sure way through which privacy is well protected. With regulations on the crypto industry, governments could easily erode such privacy.

The final group constitutes those who believe that there is no need for regulation, as the crypto industry has already begun to self-regulate. They note that there are several self-regulating organizations within the crypto space. These organisations, they say, do a good job of protecting customers from fraud.

Government's Hunger to Control Anything and Everything

This is the most contending argument. The impulse and prime motivation behind any government regulation regarding cryptocurrency are rooted in the desire for control. For a long period, governments have sought to regulate financial systems so that they can function in a way that is in tandem with their general economic and political policies. Cryptocurrency, being autonomous and decentralised, challenges this pattern.

Governments are leery, for they are afraid the use of cryptocurrency may undermine their way of monitoring and regulating financial transactions. Anonymous transactions using blockchain technology make it almost impossible to track by the authorities in terms of the flow of funds. This could facilitate illicit activity such as money laundering, tax evasion, and terrorism financing.

Also, cryptocurrency's decentralised nature can intrinsically undermine the power and influence of a central bank. Central banks have conventionally been at the heart of monetary policy and maintaining financial stability. The wide dispersion of cryptocurrency, on the other hand, would bring down the demand for fiat currencies and thus central banks' power and authority.

In this respect, governments have pursued placing regulations that would, to some extent, subject cryptocurrency under their control. These include but are not limited to, requiring registration by cryptocurrency exchanges and similar platforms; requiring them to report suspicious activity, and adhering to several AML/KYC requirements.

While these measures may be intended to safeguard consumers against illicit activities, the same is conceptualized in a way to increase government oversight and control of the cryptocurrency industry. The sectors that will be impacted include crypto guides, exchange platforms, etc.

Factors Governments Should Consider When Formulating Their Stance

There are various factors in formulating a government stance regarding the regulation of cryptocurrency. They must be based on implications and the effect they might have on different aspects of their economies and societies. Some key areas include:

The Impact of Regulation on Economic Growth

Over-regulation stifles growth in the market, thus impeding job creation and economic activity stimulation. Responsible regulations can provide more stability within the same trustworthy environment, attracting more investment, and translating to increased growth.

The Impact of Regulation on Financial Stability

It can be used to alleviate risks in cryptocurrency, such as market volatility and fraud. In contrast, if regulations are too restrictive, they will push activities underground, driving them further from being easily monitored and controlled against risks.

The Impact of Regulation on Innovation

This can stifle innovation in the cryptocurrency market, restricting new technologies and applications from emerging. On the other side, well-crafted regulation can establish a framework for responsible innovation: making sure that novel developments will be oriented toward larger economic and social objectives.

The Impact of Regulation on International Competitiveness

The regulatory approach that a country assumes toward cryptocurrency significantly defines its level of international competitiveness. Overregulation may scare away vital foreign investment and innovation. Flexibility could lure businesses and human capital, therefore acting as a catalyst in rendering the nation internationally competitive.

Conclusion

One-dimensional and simplistic? The debate on government regulation of cryptocurrency is not. There is a valid concern about saving consumers from fraudsters and scams, but over-regulation will kill innovation and stunt the growth of the industry.

These governments will have to consider the possible implications of regulation on issues like economic growth, financial stability, innovation, privacy, and international competitiveness. The governments can strike a balance between consumer protection and promoting innovation to help the crypto industry continue to thrive. Not just to satisfy the hunger to control everything.