Financial Accounting Classification of Cryptocurrency

Currently, a large range of opinions exists regarding the appropriate classification and regulation of cryptocurrency. From the legal perspective, some suggest that cryptocurrency investments are too speculative. As a result of this, it is suggested that cryptocurrency should be more heavily regulated. This would be done to prevent speculators from losing vast wealth. Other legal analysts suggest that an increasing cryptocurrency regulation would have a detrimental effect on the state of cryptocurrency, and its use would cause long-term problems. From the accounting perspective, opinions vary. Some suggest an accounting classification that would make cryptocurrency cash equivalents; others suggest an accounting classification that would render cryptocurrency an intangible asset with an indefinite useful life. The “big 4” accounting firms that include Deloitte, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Ernst and Young, and KPMG recommend that cryptocurrency should be classified as an intangible asset with an indefinite useful life. However, other companies currently using cryptocurrency through the general operations of the business have decided to classify it differently. The legal perspectives and the accounting perspectives will be analyzed to determine appropriate regulations for cryptocurrency and an appropriate classification for cryptocurrency. The results will show that cryptocurrency should be classified as an intangible asset with an indefinite useful life for accounting purposes and as property for tax purposes

Cryptocurrency: History, Advantages, Disadvantages, and the Future

Cryptocurrency is a digital asset that has seen a large amount of attention within the past five years. Its origin is intriguing to some based upon its newness, yet it has invoked mysticism and skepticism in others. Bitcoin is the most recognizable currency, receiving heavy media attention. There are several other cryptocurrencies as well, less in the spotlight. Most appealing to cryptocurrency could include lack of government oversight, and increased privacy available to the consumer(s) (Bunjaku, Gjorgieva-Trajkovska, and Miteva-Kacarski, 2017, p. 37). Additional advantages include the simplicity in the start-up process, the ease of transferability, and the opportunity to have a seamless process in investing and/or exchanging monies. Cryptocurrency creates the ability to invest for some people groups that could never invest before and diversify investment portfolios (Theron and van Vuure, 2018, p. 2). While the newness of cryptocurrency certainly has been appealing for some, it also has been perceived oppositional by others. There has been concerns identified with regard to the level of trust required, an obvious and significant drawback if valid. Another identified disadvantage to cryptocurrency is its low amount of oversight and liquidity hurt for investing future. The ability for cryptocurrency to be used for illegal and/or evil activity is an ethical drawback (Nian and Chuen, 2015, p. 15). Lastly, the uncertainty of the future is a significant drawback. The future of cryptocurrency requires much economic forecasting. The new changes that cryptocurrency will bring to traditional economic institutes is an area which cryptocurrency needs to explored more. Lastly, is cryptocurrency a fad or an economic bubble

Free Money, But Not Tax-Free: A Proposal for the Tax Treatment of Cryptocurrency Hard Forks

Cryptocurrency has attracted extraordinary attention as one of the greatest financial innovations in recent years. Equally noticeable are the increasingly frequent cryptocurrency events, such as hard forks. Put simply, a cryptocurrency hard fork happens when a single cryptocurrency splits in two, which results in original coin owners receiving free forked coins. Such hard forks have resulted in billions of dollars distributed to U.S. taxpayers. Despite ongoing regulatory efforts, to date, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has yet to take a clear position on the tax treatment of cryptocurrency hard forks. The lack of useful guidance when filing tax returns has left taxpayers genuinely confused in the past few years. To fill this regulatory gap, this Note proposes a framework for cryptocurrency hard fork taxation. It explains the underlying technology of cryptocurrency hard forks, examines the recommended guidelines from the American Bar Association and the Association of International Certified Professional Accountants on cryptocurrency hard fork taxation, and references the current practices in Japan and the United Kingdom to lay a solid foundation for the proposed framework. Ultimately, this Note proposes a two-pronged tax on cryptocurrency hard forks. The first tax is levied on the profit made from the receipt of forked coins, and the second tax is levied on the profit made from the disposition of forked coins. A concrete proposal is provided for the applicable coin valuation, tax basis, holding period, and tax rate for the two prongs. Aiming to propose a tax treatment that is closest to the nature of cryptocurrency hard forks, this proposal considers various practical concerns, such as the inefficiency of the cryptocurrency market, the indirect possession of forked coins through third-party exchanges, and the fluctuating trading prices of forked coins when determining the valuation, tax basis, and holding period. This proposal not only provides clarity for taxpayers in filing tax returns and fulfilling tax obligations, but it also relieves the potential tax deferral and tax evasion problems that arise after a cryptocurrency hard fork