IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v14y2021i12p599-d700771.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Initial Coin Offering (ICO) Process: Regulation and Risks

Author

Listed:
  • Oksana A. Karpenko

    (Finance and Credit Department, Peoples Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), 6 Miklukho-Maklaya St., 117198 Moscow, Russia)

  • Tatiana K. Blokhina

    (Finance and Credit Department, Peoples Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), 6 Miklukho-Maklaya St., 117198 Moscow, Russia)

  • Lali V. Chebukhanova

    (Law Institute, Peoples Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), 6 Miklukho-Maklaya St., 117198 Moscow, Russia)

Abstract

ICOs are very attractive for investors and issuers. ICOs allow funding raising in exchange for cryptographically secure tokens, which are a means of paying for future projects or services. However, there is insignificant regulation of this process all over the world. Some countries have banned crypto assets; others have allowed the free use of tokens but do not give them official status. In this paper, the authors present an overview of the legal regulation of ICOs in different countries, dividing them into three groups: in the first group are the countries with developed legal norms and rules for conducting ICO, they have the subsequent circulation of tokens on their territory; in the second group are the countries that are most friendly to ICOs; the third group of countries has a wait-and-see attitude. The author connect the insufficient law regulation and risks of ICOs in different countries. The types of ICO risks are divided into three main categories: financial, technical, and analytical. The main ways to reduce these risks, depending on their types, are highlighted in this study. They are connected with the improvement of the legal regulation of the publication of a White Paper, the KYC procedure, and the involvement of escrow agents.

Suggested Citation

  • Oksana A. Karpenko & Tatiana K. Blokhina & Lali V. Chebukhanova, 2021. "The Initial Coin Offering (ICO) Process: Regulation and Risks," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-7, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:14:y:2021:i:12:p:599-:d:700771
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/14/12/599/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/14/12/599/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lennart Ante & Philipp Sandner & Ingo Fiedler, 2018. "Blockchain-Based ICOs: Pure Hype or the Dawn of a New Era of Startup Financing?," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Lin William Cong & Ye Li & Neng Wang, 2021. "Tokenomics: Dynamic Adoption and Valuation [The demand of liquid assets with uncertain lumpy expenditures]," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(3), pages 1105-1155.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nir Kshetri, 2023. "The nature and sources of international variation in formal institutions related to initial coin offerings: preliminary findings and a research agenda," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-38, December.
    2. Koray Caliskan, 2022. "The Elephant in the Dark: A New Framework for Cryptocurrency Taxation and Exchange Platform Regulation in the US," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Ahmed Gomaa & Yibai Li, 2022. "An Entrepreneurial Definition of the Blockchain Technology and a Stacked Layer Model of the ICO Marketplace Using the Text Mining Approach," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-21, November.
    4. Danai Likitratcharoen & Pan Chudasring & Chakrin Pinmanee & Karawan Wiwattanalamphong, 2023. "The Efficiency of Value-at-Risk Models during Extreme Market Stress in Cryptocurrencies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anton Miglo, 2022. "Choice between IEO and ICO: Speed vs. Liquidity vs. Risk," FinTech, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Dulani Jayasuriya Daluwathumullagamage & Alexandra Sims, 2020. "Blockchain-Enabled Corporate Governance and Regulation," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-41, June.
    3. Anton Miglo, 2021. "STO vs. ICO: A Theory of Token Issues under Moral Hazard and Demand Uncertainty," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-35, May.
    4. Romi Kher & Siri Terjesen & Chen Liu, 2021. "Blockchain, Bitcoin, and ICOs: a review and research agenda," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1699-1720, April.
    5. Shih‐Chu Chou & Zhe‐An Li & Tawei Wang & Ju‐Chun Yen, 2023. "How the quality of initial coin offering white papers influences fundraising: Using security token offerings white papers as a benchmark," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 3-18, January.
    6. Huang, Guan-Ying & Gau, Yin-Feng & Wu, Zhen-Xing, 2022. "Price discovery in fiat currency and cryptocurrency markets," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(PA).
    7. Lin William Cong & Zhiguo He & Jiasun Li & Wei Jiang, 2021. "Decentralized Mining in Centralized Pools [Concentrating on the fall of the labor share]," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(3), pages 1191-1235.
    8. Gadzinski, Gregory & Castello, Alessio & Mazzorana, Florie, 2023. "Stablecoins: Does design affect stability?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    9. Yannis Bakos & Hanna Halaburda, 2022. "Overcoming the Coordination Problem in New Marketplaces via Cryptographic Tokens," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1368-1385, December.
    10. Xiaotong Sun & Charalampos Stasinakis & Georigios Sermpinis, 2022. "Decentralization illusion in Decentralized Finance: Evidence from tokenized voting in MakerDAO polls," Papers 2203.16612, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    11. Cahill, Daniel & G. Baur, Dirk & (Frank) Liu, Zhangxin & W. Yang, Joey, 2020. "I am a blockchain too: How does the market respond to companies’ interest in blockchain?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    12. Zimmerman, Peter, 2020. "Blockchain structure and cryptocurrency prices," Bank of England working papers 855, Bank of England.
    13. Jongsub Lee & Tao Li & Donghwa Shin, 2022. "The Wisdom of Crowds in FinTech: Evidence from Initial Coin Offerings," The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 11(1), pages 1-46.
    14. Laurens Swinkels, 2023. "Empirical evidence on the ownership and liquidity of real estate tokens," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-29, December.
    15. Saengchote, Kanis, 2023. "Decentralized lending and its users: Insights from compound," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    16. Kirimhan, Destan, 2023. "Importance of anti-money laundering regulations among prosumers for a cybersecure decentralized finance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    17. Yukun Liu & Aleh Tsyvinski, 2018. "Risks and Returns of Cryptocurrency," NBER Working Papers 24877, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Reuter, Marco, 2022. "The value of decentralization using the blockchain," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-056, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Paola Cerchiello & Anca Mirela Toma & Marco Caluzzi, 2021. "ICOs White Papers: identity card or lark mirror?," DEM Working Papers Series 197, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    20. Brunnermeier, Markus & Abadi, Joseph, 2018. "Blockchain Economics," CEPR Discussion Papers 13420, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:14:y:2021:i:12:p:599-:d:700771. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.