The evolution of the debt—equity doctrine in the light of financial instruments’ digitalization

Author:

Krinichansky K. V.1ORCID,Ponamorenko V. E.2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation

2. Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation; HSE University

Abstract

The article outlines the basics for using the debt—equity dichotomy in the financial instruments typology and analyzes the contradictions and short-comings of the existing approach to classification. It is shown that the “trap” of the debt—equity dichotomy comes from the path dependence process, mainly formed by the inertia of the tax system. It is noted that the applying of the debt—equity dichotomy entails a formalist approach to classification, which does not bring closer to the clarity of the delimitation of contracts according to the criteria of risk and reward distribution, and restrictions on post-contractual opportunism. Arguments are given to explain why the foundations of the debt— equity doctrine may be weakened in relation to crypto assets. This is supported by the fact that the genesis of digital assets occurs in a specific technological context, which determines its own criteria and framework for the typology of instruments. Another set of arguments comes from the fact that the world of crypto assets appears to be coherent with the specific environment of venture capital investment. This environment, in turn, arouses the demand for overcoming the debt—equity dichotomy to implement the tasks of risky investors and structuring the relations of the parties involved in projects. This demand has now led to the emergence of a number of instruments that cannot be classified as either debt or equity, including those using the construct of tokens or contractual agreements used by crowdfunding platforms. Overall, the intellectual effort that previously satisfactorily explained companies’ choices of financing styles and modes is now insufficient to reconcile capital structure theories with the practice of digital asset financing.

Publisher

NP Voprosy Ekonomiki

Reference40 articles.

1. Bank of Russia (2020). A digital ruble. Consultation paper. Moscow.

2. Bank of Russia (2022). Evolution of digital asset market in Russia. Сonsultation paper. Moscow. (In Russian).

3. Girich M. G., Ermokhin I. S., Levashenko A. D. (2022). Comparative analysis of the legal regulation of digital financial assets in Russia and other countries. International Organisations Research Journal, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 176—192. https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2022-04-07

4. Krinichansky K. V. (2009). Evolution and functions of securities market institutions. Moscow: Teis. (In Russian).

5. Libman A. V. (2005). Theoretical aspects of agency problem in corporation. Vestnik SPbSU, Series 8, No. 1, pp. 123—140. (In Russian).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3