Activities of Ashley FOX related to 2016/2007(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Virtual currencies (A8-0168/2016 - Jakob von Weizsäcker)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on virtual currencies PDF (328 KB) DOC (127 KB)
Amendments (16)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Currencies as of June 2015,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas virtual currencies (VCs) are privately governed, which can be decentralised or governed models, are digital representations of value denominated in their own unit of account and referred to as private digital cash, most notably based on distributed ledger technology (DLT), the technological basis for more than 600 VC schemes18 , the most prominent of which to date is bitcoin, with a market share of almost 90 % and a market value of the outstanding bitcoins of around EUR 5 billion19 ; __________________ 18 http://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d137.pdf 19 http://coinmarketcap.com/
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas DLT describes shared decentralisedincludes databases with varying levels of trust and resilience, with the potential to process large numbers of transactions rapidly, and with transformational capacity not only in the area of VCs but also in fintech more broadly speaking, where clearing and settlement might be one obvious application, and, beyond finance, especially with regard to proof of identity and property;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) more generally reducing the cost of access to finance even without a traditional bank account, thereby potentially contributing to financial inclusion and the derailed G20 and G8 ‘5x5 objective’23 ; __________________ 23 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTE RNAL/TOPICS/EXTFINANCIALSECTO R/0,,contentMDK:22383199~pagePK:210 058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:282885,00.h tml
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
(c) enhancing the speed and resilience of payment systems and trade in goods and services thanks to the inherently decentralised architecture of DLT, which might continue to operate reliably even if parts of its network were to malfunction or to be hacked;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
(e) using such systems to develop secure online micropayment systems that could conceivably replace some of the present data-hungryexisting online business models which significantly challenge individual privacy;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b
Paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the absence of flexible and reliable governance structures, especially in some DLT applications such as bitcoin that create uncertainty and consumer protection problems, including the absence of a facility to refund a fraudulent or disrupted transaction, especially in case of challenges unforeseen by the original software designers;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point d
Paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the legal uncertainty surrounding new applications of DLT, which may in some instances be the subject of (sometimes ill- suited) existing legislation while in other instances appropriate regulation may still be lacking;either due to the constraints of existing legislation, or due to the absence of legislation altogether.
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Suggests that addressing these risks will require enhancing regulatory capacity and technical knowledge of the technological developments so that a timely and proportionate response will reliably be forthcoming if and when the use of some DLT applications were to grow rapidly to become systemically relevant;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Encourages government agencies to test DLT systems in order to improve the provision of services to citizens, while cautioning onithout preventing the outsourcing of public services to proprietary private DLT schemes;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recommends that government agencies and competent authorities which are tasked with analysing large quantities of data explore the use of real-time DLT based supervision and reporting tools as part of a RegTech agenda in the financial sector and beyond, including in order to reduce the sizeable VAT gap in the Union26 ; __________________ 26 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 15-5592_en.htm
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that key, as business models mature, some virtual currency or distributed ledger-based firms may also expand into markets and activities that fall under existing EU legislation, such as EMIR, CSDR, SFD, MiFID/MiFIR, UCITs and AIFMD, is likely to apply in line with the activities carried out, irrespective of the underlying technology;.
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the Commission’s suggestions for including VC exchange platforms in the AMLD; recommends further extending the scope to custodian wallet providers if and whencautions against extending the scope to custodian wallet providers due to the very low usage of VC currently in the mainstream economy and possible unintended consequences; considers instead that regulatory and law enforcement bodies should dedicate sufficient resources to monitoring VC use and growth in the sector to assess the level of risk and would therefore only support an extension of the scope of the directive to cover custodian wallet providers following a thorough impact assessment and if the use of the VC(s) in question were to become so prevalent that users would no longer routinely need to exchange their VCs into legal tender;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recommends a review of the EU legislation on payments, including PSD and EMD, in light ofHighlights the importance of a competitive framework for payments, which would provide VCs access to appropriate payment infrastructure and enhance confidence in VC; Stresses, however, that not all provisions of existing PSD legislation would be appropriate for VC and that VC does not meet the required definitions under the EMD; underlines the new possibilities afforded by new technological developments including VCs and DLT, with a view to further enhancing competition and lowering transaction costs, including by means of enhanced interoperability and possibly also via the promotion of a universal and non- proprietary electronic wallet;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for the creation of a horizontal Task Force DLT (TF DLT) under the leadership of the Commission, in order to bring together stakeholders and provide the necessary technical and regulatory expertise to monitor VC usage, foster an awareness and support the relevant public actors, at both EU and Member State level, in their efforts to ensure a timely and well- informed response to the new opportunities and challenges arising with the introduction of DLT applications in cases where there is widespread use; notes, furthermore, the importance of monitoring VC usage and policy responses in third countries with regard to VC; observes that the potential of DLT use and the present investment dynamics justify TF DLT being equipped with a pproper budget and being staffed withriate resources, regulators and external technical experts dedicated cross- sectorally to the monitoring of DLT-based applications, identifying standards for best practice, and, where appropriatonly in cases where there is widespread market presence, recommending regulatory measures and addressing potentially arising consumer protection issues and systemic challenges;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – introductory part
Paragraph 14 – introductory part
14. Asks the Commission, on the basis of the findings of TF DLT, to explore the need for a legislative proposalcarry out an impact assessment on the feasibility of requiring private VCs and other DLT scheme actors which do not yet have to comply with suitable standards based on existing regulation to demonstrate whether their scheme: