Sekėjai

Ieškoti šiame dienoraštyje

2025 m. balandžio 22 d., antradienis

Noor advertisement: Cryptoasset declaration: rules are still emerging, but obligations already exist


"Although cryptoassets are still considered a new phenomenon, from a tax perspective, the same rules apply to them as to other types of assets. Dainius Daugirda, a partner at the law firm NOOR, tells how the practice of declaring cryptoassets is taking shape, and why, in order to avoid the tax administrator's displeasure, it is necessary for those investing in digital currencies to do their homework.

 

According to the lawyer, until there are established rules, taxpayers and tax administrators understand them differently. In order to avoid misunderstandings, it is important to delve into how the state perceives cryptoassets.

 

"First of all, you need to assess the amounts at your disposal and determine the business model.

 

If a person, investing in cryptoassets, earns up to 2,500 euros per year, he does not need to worry - this is not considered a significant amount, and if there is no other income from the sale of assets, there is no need to pay taxes," the lawyer explains.

 

Exchanges need to be recorded

 

According to D. Daugirda, people acquire and value crypto assets differently – some are active, others simply buy and wait for the investment to “shoot”.

 

“The infrastructure of crypto assets is completely transparent – ​​you can find and check every transaction.

 

The problem is that the means by which transactions are carried out or information about them (e.g., a crypto wallet address) must be preserved, because it is impossible to remember this information”, – he says.

 

The interviewee says that sometimes it happens that after acquiring crypto assets, a person forgets about it or loses access data.

 

“It also happens that a person accidentally discovers information they had and realizes that the value of the forgotten asset has increased. Then the question naturally arises: what to do with that asset – do you need to pay taxes”, – the interviewee draws a hypothetical situation.

 

D. Daugirda explains that tax administrators have a clear answer: if a person purchased a crypto asset and later sold it for euros or dollars, i.e., for the so-called “fiat” currency, such a transaction is considered completed and gives rise to a tax liability. In other words, you have suffered a loss or earned a profit, and this must be recorded for tax purposes.

 

The lawyer clarifies that any case where one crypto asset is exchanged for another crypto asset is also considered a transaction for tax purposes – an exchange that must be recorded, the financial result calculated, and, if a gain occurs, declared in accordance with the applicable procedure.

 

“The rule is as follows: if a person has crypto asset “A” and, when selling, exchanges it for crypto asset “B”, then the market price of crypto asset “B” at the moment it is exchanged is considered income. For example, if I purchased bitcoins 10 years ago and now use them to buy ether, the market price of ether is equal to my income, and the cost of acquiring ether will be considered the cost of the bitcoin purchased 10 years ago. Based on this, we record our profit or loss,” explains D. Daugirda.

 

According to him, the formula can be continued: if a person purchased bitcoin 10 years ago, bought ether instead of it 6 years ago, and now wants to sell it, he must record both the transaction that took place 6 years ago and the profit that was earned by exchanging bitcoin for ether.

 

“The transaction must be recorded because it is a source of income. Only in this case, it will not be necessary to file a declaration and pay taxes, because the statute of limitations has expired, and both the person and the tax administrator have missed the deadlines,” comments D. Daugirda.

 

It is important to note that the expenses related to the performance of transactions can reduce taxable profit.

 

“Information substantiating these costs can be obtained from the cryptocurrency exchange and presented as justification when calculating tax costs,” the interviewee advises.

 

A completely different situation arises when we are not talking about a single transaction, but about consistent trading: when the number of transactions grows, more operations appear, each of which generates a profit or loss.

 

“In such a case, we can already talk about signs of economic activity, and the activity must be assessed according to the individual activity taxation model. This means that the income received must be declared as income from individual activities. Of course, everything also depends on the scale of the activity, the number of transactions and the total volume,” the interviewee clarifies.

 

Shaping rules and practices

 

D. Daugirda says that uncertainties remain even after the decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, which attempt to form clearer practice regarding the signs of individual activity in the field of crypto assets. According to the lawyer, it is important to assess how the courts currently view the definition of individual activity in the context of cryptocurrencies.

 

“If a person buys a crypto asset, over time its value increases, and later it is sold in order for the person to purchase, for example, a car, real estate, etc. or other more expensive item, from the court's point of view, this is not considered economic or individual activity, although the cryptoasset is sold in several transactions. Such a one-time sale of assets can be compared to winning the lottery: the assets in question are simply exchanged for a more acceptable form (currency or other asset) in order to purchase the necessary item.

 

In this case, there is no constant activity, which is characteristic of business or economic activity,” the lawyer comments.

 

And vice versa: if a person actively invests, regularly trades cryptoassets and carries out many operations, his activities acquire the characteristics of individual activity.

 

“This means that the person carries out purposeful, constant and systematic activities, which are considered individual activities and must be taxed accordingly,” D. Daugirda points out the difference.

 

Speaking about individual activities, the lawyer emphasizes that there are cases when a person provides services for remuneration in cryptocurrency.

 

“This is considered an economic activity and means that when keeping accounts, income must be recorded at the exchange rate of the day the crypto asset was received and converted into euros. In Lithuania, taxes are paid in euros, therefore, regardless of the form in which income is received or expenses are incurred, everything must be recorded in euros in accounting,” he says.

 

If a person has performed a lot of operations and accounting for them is extremely difficult, the tax administrator offers the opportunity to calculate the annual result of the cryptocurrency held, i.e., compare its value on June 1 of that year and December 31. However, the lawyer clarifies that such a formed practice does not yet exist.

 

D. Daugirda reminds that when keeping accounts, it is possible to use the tables and accounting forms proposed by the State Tax Inspectorate, but, in the lawyer’s opinion, they are quite archaic.

 

“For example, the declaration system works on the principle of a wizard: a person enters data, and the system automatically provides the result, without revealing specific calculations. However, more flexible accounting solutions can also be used, the main thing is to record the data clearly and correctly,” he advises.

 

The lawyer emphasizes that the crypto-asset activity is new, the amount of information processed is huge, and the tool that provides the final result is not yet perfect.

 

“Therefore, we always suggest that clients do their homework and delve into how to get to the final result. The tax administrator may have questions, so it is better to prepare answers in advance, and not when they ask,” says D. Daugirda.

 

New rules of the jungle

 

The lawyer says that over the past decade, crypto-assets, which serious market players have long ignored, have gained recognition and, in a broad sense, have become an alternative to the traditional package of financial services.

 

“The situation is reminiscent of the changes in the energy sector – in the days when it was ruled by monopolies, no one imagined that consumers would be able to generate electricity on their balconies. Similar changes are taking place here too – the world needs to reorient itself,” believes D. Daugirda.

 

The change is clearly signaled by the MiCA regulation, which aims to recognize the crypto market and ensure the security of operations: to register crypto sector participants, establish clear rights and obligations for them, and require necessary information.

 

“The MiCA regulation is, first and foremost, a consumer protection act, which aims to reduce the risks associated with the crypto asset sector and protect the consumer from factors that he cannot control. This is a necessary condition for the development of a mature and reliable ecosystem,” emphasizes the NOOR lawyer.

 

According to D. Daugirda, until now the crypto asset sector has in many cases operated as if in a “jungle”: participants assumed full responsibility, had to assess the risks themselves, “vaccinate” themselves against possible threats, and be prepared for surprises.

 

"Now the situation is changing - MiCA, one could say, is starting to build a city in the jungle: standards, boundaries of responsibility and a clearer operating model are emerging. Those who want to continue to remain in an unregulated space can theoretically do so - for now there are alternatives. And for those who choose the "city" model, i.e. regulated environment, it will inevitably be necessary to adopt common rules,” says the interviewee.

 

More transparency

 

Although crypto-assets are often presented in the public space through success stories, this area requires a great deal of knowledge, responsibility and the ability to assess risks.

 

“The regulation does not apply to individual users, but to service providers – i.e. to those entities that create conditions for the exchange, storage or other related activities of crypto-assets. Clear requirements are set for them, including licensing procedures, information collection and the responsibility to transfer it to state institutions when necessary – for example, in order to combat money laundering, terrorist financing or ensure consumer protection,” reminds D. Daugirda.

 

The regulation creates a system for collecting information about customers, creating the prerequisites for government institutions to use this information for tax administration purposes.

 

“In this way, the digital financial ecosystem becomes more transparent, responsible and more focused on protecting public interests,” says the interviewee.

 

According to him, just as people naturally gravitate to cities, looking for more convenience and less risk, the regulated financial environment becomes more attractive to those who want transparency, security and clear rules of the game.

 

“It is important for the consumer not only to collect data, but also to understand its content. With clear records, it is possible to reasonably declare income or, conversely, to prove that there was none. It is important to be honest: sometimes only the person himself knows that his activities did not bring any real return. It is important to form a clear picture of the activities, assess the result and answer the question for yourself: did I earn money or not? Only in this way can you consciously and responsibly participate in this ecosystem,” emphasizes D. Daugirda.

 

However, he reminds that MiCA is valid only in the European Union. In addition, each member state implements it at the national level.

 

“This means that there may be some differences, depending on local regulatory practices. In Lithuania, the licensing transition period will end in the first half of this year, so service providers will have to adapt to the new operating conditions in the near future,” emphasizes D. Daugirda.”

 


Komentarų nėra: