A parliamentary legislation committee leader has stated that there is a need to provide with legal status and legally binding definitions for crypto-related terms in Russia before proceeding with further tax-related lawmaking and regulation. The move potentially throws a spanner into the works of the government’s much-maligned crypto tax proposal, which has already passed its first reading in parliament this month.
Per Interfax, the Chairman of the Committee on State Building and Legislation, Pavel Krasheninnikov, spoke of the need to “legalize” cryptoassets – something that the country’s only piece of crypto-related legislation to date failed to do, instead making use of ambiguous language such as “digital assets,” which could refer to stablecoins, central bank digital currencies and security token offerings, as well as crytoassets like bitcoin (BTC).
The issue of legal status has become a sticking point for Moscow, which is seeking to modify the tax code so that crypto profits can be taxed in Russia beginning in 2022. A number of parties have pointed out (including a presidential advisory body), however, that it is impossible to ask courts to ensure taxes are placed on crypto when the very notion of crypto does not yet exist in the Russian legal framework.
The news agency quoted Krasheninnikov as stating, at a meeting of Yekaterinburg political leaders,
“On the one hand, [cryptoassets] are not recognized as an [asset class]. On the other hand, the government has introduced a bill that requires [cryptoassets] to be taxed. We have told them to decide: either you tax it, which means [cryptoassets] are an [asset class] or, if you say that [cryptoassets] are not an [asset class], do something about it.”
Krasheninnikov also pointed out another possible legal wrinkle: The fact that the aforementioned piece of already-promulgated legislation outlaws payments made in cryptoassets.
If the government wants to assert that crypto is an asset class, the committee chief said that it would then be “necessary to enable transactions,” make it “legal, not as is currently the case.”
It would also be necessary to allow the possibility of inheriting crypto and allow for the “joint ownership” of crypto funds.
– Lawyers Take Aim at Russia’s Crypto Legislation
– The G7 Taxman Is Coming for Your Crypto Profits
– Here Are the Ways Governments Could Attack Bitcoin – and None of them Sound Hot
– Can’t Beat Crypto Regulators? Educate Them
– Regulators Ponder Strategy As Bitcoin & Co Are Too Large to Ignore
– A Hint From Davos: Regulating Crypto Is ‘in the Public Interest’