5. Elena N. Prokof’eva

Cryptocurrency as Debt Obligation

  • Contact details
  • Abstract
  • References

Elena N. Prokof’eva

Associate Professor of the Department of Ural State University of Economics, Ph.D. in Economics, Associate Professor

8 Marta Str. / Narodnoy Voli Str. 62/45, Ekaterinburg, Russian Federation, 620144

The presented study substantiates the inevitability of further development of electronic payment instruments, evaluates the role of cryptocurrencies in money circulation, and identifies the main features of the cryptocurrency market, emphasizing the need to consider the modern money, cryptocurrency in particular, regardless of emitter, as debt obligation. From this perspective, the authors examine the reaction of Central Banks to the prospects of using cryptocurrency.
Aim. The study aims to systematize factors that indicate the necessity and viability of viewing cryptocurrency as debt obligation by both the owners of these assets and the monetary authorities.
Tasks. The authors substantiate the economic viability of using electronic money as a whole and cryptocurrencies in particular in money circulation; define cryptocurrencies as debt obligation, assessing the specific aspects of its properties; assess the reaction of the monetary authorities and other government institutions to the development of the cryptocurrency market; identify major directions of cryptocurrency influence on the efficiency of monetary control in the economy.
Methods. This study uses such methods as comparison, analysis, systematization of information, and expert assessment.
Results. As a result of the study, the authors’ view of the trends in the development of the cryptocurrency market is substantiated. Interpretation of the economic nature of electronic money as a whole and cryptocurrencies in particular as debt obligation is proposed. Positive aspects and potential negative effects of the development of the cryptocurrency market are identified. The latter require the monetary authorities and other government institutions to come up with measures for minimizing them.
Conclusion. Examination of trends in the development of the electronic money market, systematization of foreign experience in the regulation of this sector of the financial market, and identification of historical patterns in the development of money circulation make it possible not only to minimize the risks of the cryptocurrency market participants, but also to enhance the efficiency of the regulatory measures of the monetary authorities.

Keywords: cryptocurrency, electronic money, digital cash, calculations, emission, debt obligation, monetary control

Citation:Prokof’eva E. N. Kriptovaluta kak dolgovoe obyazatel’stvo [Cryptocurrency as Debt Obligation]. Ekonomika i Upravlenie, 2018, no. 7 (153), pp. 30–34.


  1. Krasavina L.N. Aktual’nyye problemy deneg i denezhnogo obrashcheniya [Actual problems of moneyand money circulation]. Vestnik Finansovoy akademii,2002, no. 3-4, pp. 27–40.
  2. Maramygin M. S., Prokof’yeva E. N., Markova A. A. Sovremennyye podkhody k traktovke funktsiy deneg [Modern approaches to the interpretation of money functions]. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Ser.: Ekonomika, 2017, no. 2 (58), pp. 29–40.
  3. Rothbard M. N. What has government done to our money? Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2005. 119 p. (Russ. ed.: Rothbard M. Gosudarstvo i den’gi: kak gosudarstvo zavladelo denezhnoy sistemoy obshchestva. Chelyabinsk: Sotsium Publ., 2008. 207 p.).
  4. Hayek F. A. Denationalization of money: An analysis of the theory and practice of concurrent currencies. London: Institute of Economic Affairs, 1976. 108 p. (Russ. ed.: Hayek F. A. Chastnyye den’gi. The Institute of National Economy Model, 1996. 112 p.).
  5. Nikolaychuk O. A. Elektronnaya valyuta v svete sovremennykh pravovykh i ekonomicheskikh vyzovov [Electronic currency in the light of modern legal and economic challenges]. Journal of Economic Regulation, 2017, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 142-154. DOI: 10.17835/2078-5429.2017.8.1.142–154.
  6. Razhabbayev SH. R., Aminov F. F., Sakhavaliyev M. N. Riski i vyzovy kriptovalyut dlya monetarnoy politiki [Risks and challenges of crypto-currencies to monetary policy]. Ekonomika i sovremennyy menedzhment: teoriya i praktika, 2015, no. 48-1, pp. 12–25.
  7. Abdrakhmanov A. L., Abdrakhmanova L. V. Kriptovalyuta kak al’ternativnaya denezhnaya Sistema [Crypto currency as an alternative monetary system]. Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii, 2017, no. 3, pp. 7–9.
  8. Sidorenko E. L. Kriminologicheskiye riski oborota kriptovalyuty [Criminological risks of crypto currency turnover]. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo, 2017, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 147–154.
  9. Kantyshev P. The Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance have clarified the future of the crypto-currency in Russia. Vedomosti, September 08, 2017. Available at: https://www.vedomosti.ru/finance/articles/2017/09/08/733043-kriptovalyutah. (in Russ.).
  10. Ali R., Barrdear J., Clews R., Southgate J. The economics of digital currencies. Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin, 2014, vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 276–286.
  11. Stepanova D. I., Nikolayeva T. E., Ivolgina N. V. Osobennosti organizatsii i napravleniya razvitiya kriptovalyutnykh platezhnykh sistem [Features of the organization and direction of development of crypto-currency payment systems]. Finansy i kredit, 2016, no. 10 (682), pp. 33–45.
  12. Trubnikova E. I. Kriptovalyuta: instrument tenevykh skhem ili denezhnaya sistema svobodnogo obshchestva? [Cryptocurrency: Tool of shadow schemes, or monetary system of a free society]. Vestnik Samarskogo universiteta. Ekonomika I upravleniye, 2014, no. 6 (117), pp. 151–158.

Subscribe to electronic version of the article