Studies have shown that corrupt governments are more inclined to call bit currency illegal


nnnThe author is a lawyer in Wyoming, who specializes in the regulation and legitimacy of digital money. She collects information and data on bitmember supervision in 62 countries, sets out the coin regulatory index and correlates it with the government’s corruption index , The government governance and bit currency supervision of the situation were analyzed. Although this study relies on limited data, she argues that it does reflect the advantages of corrupt countries in fearing digital money and block-chain technology, and prefer to see it as illegal.n
nnTranslated by: Inan
nMany governments have strict control over Bitcoin on the grounds that Bitcoin can and has been used to aid in illegal activities. But the government did not tell people that Bitcoin was an exchange medium that was not under its control.n
nIn view of this situation, it is time to investigate other motivations / agendas that could trigger digital currency regulation such as block chains. I have developed a Bitcoin Regulatory Index for 62 countries and associated them with the 2016 government corruption index in these countries.n
nThis analysis found that corrupt governments are more inclined to call Bitcoin illegal, while well-governed countries are more friendly. Autocratic governments do not trust Bitcoin may be because they are afraid of Bitcoin to trust the center of the transparent trading network.n
nn
nBitcoin Regulatory Index (BRI)n
nBitcoin regulations are growing rapidly in different countries. The United States and other countries, has been in the state government law to add the relevant laws and regulations.n
nIt is difficult to classify these regulations, but some sites collect and summarize the relevant information. Wikipedia summarizes and cites the progress of royal currency and other digital money nowadays in law.n
nAlthough the data were limited, I used them to develop the Bitcoin Regulatory Index (BRI) for 62 countries. The system uses 0-100 to indicate the acceptance of Bitcoin by each country, 0 for Bitcoin is illegal, 100 for Bitcoin is not subject to government control and the government has decided not to control it.n
nIn this system, 25 indicates that the bitcores are legal, but banks and other financial institutions are prohibited from using them; 50 means that the bitcores are legal, but the government is strongly opposed to their use; 75 means that the bitcores are legal and the government is To regulate its use in some way; 90 means that Bitcoin is legal but is not regulated by lack of government oversight. The second column of Table 1 shows the respective BRIs of the 62 countries in 2016.n
nn
nCorruption Cognitive Index (CPI)n
nGovernance is essential for the overall performance of any economy and its components.n
nFor example, the World Bank thinks:n
nn”Governance is defined as the way in which public institutions perform their functions in a country, and the disadvantages of governance are closely related to the lack of development, which can lead to corruption, government budget mistakes, unfair growth, social exclusion, and lack of trust in the authorities. The inefficiency of governance institutions can lead to the formation of informal institutions that replace the functions of these institutions.n
nnTransparency International has developed a standard for measuring the governance of corruption (CPI). CPI has been a measure of the annual governance situation in many countries since 1996.n
nCPI with [0,100] range of values ‚Äč‚Äčthat a country’s governance, 100 on behalf of the governance situation is very good. The following chart also shows the respective CPI of the 62 countries in 2016.n
nn
nRelevance analysisn
nThe correlation coefficient is a measure of the strength and direction of the linear relationship between the two variables, and the value is within the range [-1,1]. The correlation coefficient between BRI and CPI in 2016 was 0.31.n
nn”This relationship shows that in the global perspective, good governance is positively related to the friendly regulatory environment of Bitcoin, whereas corruption systems tend to seek more stringent regulation of Bitcoin and other digital currencies.n
nnGiven that the data used is limited and qualitative, this relevance is not so accurate, but does reflect the hostility of the corrupt country against Bitcoin.n
nAnother way to study this data is to combine the BRI and CPI scores of each country. Well-treated and well-regulated countries have a maximum of 200 points, while those with poor governance and legal delinquency are considered to have a minimum of 0 points.n
n

n
nThe information graph shows the ranking of these countries. Interestingly, according to the CPI, some systems of corruption in the country seem more inclined to claim that Bitcoin and even other digital currencies are illegal.n
nIn contrast, countries that are recognized as governance models accept Bitcoin.n
nn
nWill corruption affect Bitcoin regulation?n
nThe limited data available to these shows that the bit-currency-friendly regulatory environment is positively correlated with good governance.n
nIt also shows that digital money and block-chain technology may pose a threat to lower-ranked countries on the list of corruption stocks, which often abuse public power for private interests.n
nOf course, it can also be explained from another point of view, that is, countries with high scores are high-income countries, while countries with low overall scores are very poor countries. Some less developed countries may simply not understand digital money and block chains, so they are reluctant to accept these technologies.n
nIf the corrupt government does tend to restrict or completely prohibit the special currency, why should they do so?n
nAuthoritarian governments tend to control or prohibit certain products or ideas that pose a threat to their power. Bitcoin, in view of its nature to the center, will not be corrupt to buy the books. The corrupt government may be aware that this more transparent letter of trust would hinder its abuse of authority and therefore be scared.n
nBitcoin regulatory environment is changing, and our current conclusions may change. There are also some well-governed countries that are skeptical about Bitcoin.n
nBut this analysis does show that governments that abuse public rights for private interests may see bitmaps and block chains as a threat rather than a useful technique.n

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *