Regulatory ambiguity in the market for bitcoin

William Luther

The Review of Austrian Economics, 2022, vol. 35, issue 1, No 1, 14 pages

Abstract: Abstract The standard economic approach to considering the effects of a policy tends to neglect the prospect of regulatory ambiguity. I describe four sources of regulatory ambiguity and survey the literature considering the effects of ambiguity on entrepreneurial activity. I also explain how jurisdictional redundancy, where multiple agencies regulate the same action or industry, increases the likelihood of regulatory ambiguity. I offer a brief description of the regulatory environment of bitcoin in the United States in order to provide specific examples of the sources of regulatory ambiguity identified herein.

Keywords: Ambiguity; Bitcoin; Cryptocurrency; Regulation; Political economy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: E40 E42 E58 G2 H1 K2 K4 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11138-019-00489-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:kap:revaec:v:35:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11138-019-00489-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... ce/journal/11138/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s11138-019-00489-2

Access Statistics for this article

The Review of Austrian Economics is currently edited by Peter Boettke and Christopher Coyne

More articles in The Review of Austrian Economics from Springer, Society for the Development of Austrian Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().