THEORETICAL AND LEGAL APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE CIRCULATION OF VIRTUAL ASSETS

Abstract

The article provides a critical analysis of theoretical and legal approaches to forming a legal regulation system for virtual assets circulation in the context of digital economic transformation and Ukraine's European integration imperatives. Employing systemic-structural, comparative-legal, and dialectical research methods, the authors problematize the limitations of existing regulatory models and substantiate the necessity of a conceptually novel approach to virtual asset regulation.

The FATF approaches, limited primarily by the anti-money laundering paradigm, and the European MiCA Regulation, which despite its comprehensiveness leaves unresolved questions of regulatory adaptability to technological innovations, are critically assessed. Structural limitations of institutional, functional, risk-based, and experimental approaches are identified, which in the absence of their synergetic combination generate either excessive regulatory rigidity or legal uncertainty.

The central scientific result of the research is the conceptualization of an adaptive hybrid regulation model for virtual assets, which integrates the principle of technological neutrality with differentiated regulatory impact depending on the asset's functional purpose, level of systemic risks, and state institutional capacity. The model envisages a three-tier regulatory architecture: baseline level (general principles and AML/CFT requirements), functional level (differentiated regulation based on economic function), and adaptive level (regulatory sandbox mechanisms and continuous review of regulatory standards).

The specifics of the Ukrainian regulatory environment are analyzed, particularly the problem of competence distribution between the National Bank of Ukraine and the National Securities and Stock Market Commission, the deficit of institutional capacity for implementing complex European standards, and the necessity of considering regulatory features under martial law and post-war reconstruction. It is substantiated that mechanical borrowing of the European model without adaptation to the national context risks creating a formally legitimate but functionally ineffective regulation system.

The system of adaptive hybrid model principles is defined: contextual adaptability, gradational proportionality, institutional consistency, technological neutrality, and innovation openness. The scientific novelty lies in synthesizing functional and risk-based approaches with adaptive regulation mechanisms, allowing preservation of regulatory flexibility without losing legal certainty.