研究 | 破与立：中国虚拟货币监管的制度重构与法律前瞻

Core Viewpoint - The issuance of Document No. 42 marks a significant shift in China's regulatory approach to virtual currencies, transitioning from fragmented responses to a systematic reconstruction of regulations, including the inclusion of stablecoins and RWA (Real World Asset tokenization) under regulatory oversight [2][3]. Regulatory Policy Evolution - The evolution of China's virtual currency regulation can be categorized into four distinct phases: 1. 2013: Initial classification of Bitcoin as a "specific virtual commodity" with a cautious observation approach [4]. 2. 2017: Introduction of the ICO ban and the requirement for existing ICO projects to arrange for refunds, marking a shift to strict limitations [5]. 3. 2021: Comprehensive crackdown on all virtual currency-related activities, defining them as "illegal financial activities" [6]. 4. 2026: Systematic reconstruction with Document No. 42, expanding regulatory scope to include stablecoins and RWA, and enhancing legal frameworks [7]. Innovations in Document No. 42 - Document No. 42 introduces three major innovations: 1. Stablecoins: Clearly defined and regulated, with restrictions on issuing stablecoins linked to the Renminbi without approval, emphasizing currency sovereignty [8][9]. 2. RWA: Introduced under a "principle of prohibition, with exceptions upon approval" framework, allowing for regulated activities under specific conditions [10]. 3. Overseas Operations Control: Extends regulatory oversight to the global activities of domestic entities, marking a shift from domestic to global regulatory logic [11]. Legal Responsibilities - The addition of a dedicated chapter on legal responsibilities in Document No. 42 establishes clear administrative and criminal liabilities for violations, addressing previous gaps in enforcement [12]. Legal Classification Dimensions - The legal classification of virtual currencies in China is complex, involving civil, administrative, criminal, and foreign exchange control dimensions: 1. Civil Aspect: The recognition of virtual currencies as property has evolved, but contract validity remains contentious [14][15]. 2. Administrative Aspect: Strengthened regulatory defenses against financial institutions and enhanced information control measures [16]. 3. Criminal Aspect: Expansion of criminal charges related to virtual currencies, including fraud and money laundering [17][18]. 4. Foreign Exchange Control: Concerns over the use of virtual currencies like USDT for circumventing foreign exchange regulations [19]. Judicial Practice Developments - Recent trends in judicial practice indicate a move towards nuanced rulings in virtual currency disputes, reflecting a shift from blanket prohibitions to more refined adjudications [20][21]. - The judicial system is exploring practical solutions for the disposal of seized virtual currencies, indicating a willingness to adapt within the regulatory framework [22]. International Comparison - China's regulatory approach contrasts with global paradigms, highlighting a unique stance characterized by comprehensive prohibitions while observing developments in regions like Hong Kong and Singapore [24][25]. - The regulatory landscape in Hong Kong, with its dual-track system, provides a potential model for balancing innovation and regulation in mainland China [26]. Future Trends - The implementation of supporting regulations for Document No. 42, the specific pathways for RWA registration, and the progression of dedicated virtual currency legislation are anticipated areas of focus [27].