Conceptual framework in the area of digital assets: issues and areas of development

Abstract

Introduction. In recent years, the digital economy has become the main driver of economic growth both at the global and national levels. Within this paradigm, a number of socio-economic challenges are being overcome: creating new jobs, ensuring digital inclusion of people around the world. Problem Statement. The national institutional environment in the field of the digital economy is currently under development, in particular in terms of consistency of conceptual apparatus. The purpose of the article is to analyze the conceptual and categorical apparatus used in the regulatory and legal framework for accounting and taxation of objects arising from the activities of business entities in the digital economy, and to determine the directions of its development. Methods: institutional approach; comparative analysis; synthesis; hierarchical classification method. Results. A bibliographic analysis of scientific and professional publications showed that all categories of “non-fungible token”, “virtual asset”, “cryptoasset” are inherently digital assets, i.e. assets that are stored or transmitted in digital format and have economic or cultural value. The global nature of digital assets has led to the need for international coordination on their legal status and resolution mechanisms. Such digital assets as virtual assets, cryptoassets and their subtypes are regulated at different levels: international (FATF, OECD); regional (EU); national (UK, Ukraine). The presented review of the documents defining the concepts of “digital asset”, “cryptoasset” and “virtual asset” at the international and regional levels, as well as in individual countries, demonstrates that there is currently no generally accepted definition of these terms. Conclusions. The conducted study of the features in forming the conceptual and terminological apparatus of accounting and taxation of objects, the appearance of which is determined by the activities of economic entities under the digital economy, in regulatory documents at various levels showed that when developing institutional support for the regulation of the circulation of digital assets and operations with them in Ukraine the approach used by the FATF was chosen. In terms of its content, the category of “virtual assets” corresponds to the interpretation of the category of “cryptoassets” laid down by European legislation. The author identifies terminological inconsistencies in the Ukrainian legal framework that require further resolution through a cross-analysis of legislation to unify approaches to the interpretation of digital economy objects.