November 09, 2021
What FATF’s Latest Guidance Means for DeFi, Stablecoins and Self-Hosted Wallets
The Financial Action Task Force (FATF)’s long-awaited update to its guidance on virtual assets lays out a comprehensive set of guidelines to regulate the quickly evolving cryptocurrency space. With this update released, digital assets firms in the coming years are likely to encounter more clarity on anti-money-laundering and combatting the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regulations around the globe, even if some jurisdictions do opt for more restrictive policies than others.
The intergovernmental body’s updated guidance should not surprise anyone who has been tracking regulator discussion on crypto illicit finance, but it does address topics that have faced great regulatory uncertainty, such as decentralized finance (DeFi), stablecoins and “travel rule” compliance.
CBDCs will likely be regulated as fiat currencies and including them under the guidance for permissionless virtual assets may complicate matters.
What it offers is not one way of dealing with these issues, but it unpacks and defines the risks that jurisdictions must address, often providing a diversity of approaches to keep emerging digital asset developments within a solid regulatory perimeter.
Here are some key takeaways for regulators, along with practical implications for the digital asset industry.
DeFi usually isn’t decentralized—FATF warns regulators to not blindly accept the crypto industry marketing that loosely calls various platforms “decentralized.” In function, these platforms typically have a natural, if not legal, person somewhere who controls or influences their activities. The term “controls or influences” is key and offers a framework to analyze who should be the entity obliged to follow AML/CFT regulations. In FATF’s view, almost all DeFi platforms are still Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASP). FATF offers a broad playbook for bringing DeFi platforms under regulatory oversight, including one suggestion that if a DeFi platform truly has no entity running it, a jurisdiction could order that a VASP be put in place as its obliged entity.
Read the full article from Coindesk.
More from CNAS
-
Could There Be a Way to Make Economic Sanctions More Mission Oriented?
Podcast
One of the main tools foreign policy leaders have to exert pressure on other governments is through the use of economic tools. Sanctions, export controls, investment restricti...
By Lt Col Mary Hossier
-
Boosting Economic Security Collaboration Among G7 Economies and like-Minded Allies
Commentary
Emily Kilcrease, senior fellow and director of the CNAS energy, economics, and security program, and Geoff Gertz, senior fellow, participated in the T7, the official engagemen...
By Emily Kilcrease & Geoffrey Gertz
-
Ducking Climate Science Is a Danger to the U.S. Military. Congress Must Help.
Commentary
This article was originally published in Breaking Defense. The Trump Administration’s recent decision to revoke the EPA “endangerment finding” is emblematic of a trend in Amer...
By Will Rogers
-
CNAS Insights | Trump's Plan B for Tariffs
Commentary
The administration is already pivoting to a new tariff architecture that will mostly, though not entirely, recreate his previous tariffs....
By Geoffrey Gertz
