How Malta’s System Is Embracing The Crypto Revolution – Tax

This article was originally posted on Kluwer International Tax Blog.

“Bitcoin is now considered an investable asset”

– reads the first sentence of the interview with Mathew

McDermott, Global Head of Digital Assets at Goldman Sachs in the

newly-issued report by the bank. With the recent buzz in the news

about cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and Cardano we

wanted to discuss how Malta has for a long time now had an

open-door policy on this new class of assets.

Malta was at the forefront of regulating transactions involving

cryptocurrency. Besides providing for a sophisticated regulatory

regime for digital assets, in 2018 Malta also introduced tax

guidelines on transactions involving digital assets, including

cryptocurrencies.

Income Tax

The Malta Commissioner for Revenue has adopted quite a

straightforward approach to the treatment of cryptocurrencies for

income tax purposes. All the old principles and jurisprudence in

relation to income and capital is by analogy applicable to

transactions involving cryptocurrencies. Thus, the same questions

would be posed when analyzing a cryptocurrency transaction as would

be the case have the transaction involved “regular”

assets. Thus, questions as to the intention behind the transaction,

status of the parties, nature of the transaction, and so on are all

still relevant.

The tax guidelines differentiate between coins and tokens with

tokens being sub-divided into financial tokens and utility tokens.

“Coins” are defined by Maltese tax law to be similar to

regular fiat means of payment. To be a “coin” the

cryptocurrency must not have features which would make it

comparable to classic equity, bond or another type of financial

security. Its value should not be related to its redemption for a

service or a good (i.e. it should not be akin to a voucher). When

such a type of coin is involved in the transaction, the tax law

treats it identically to regular transaction involving a fiat

currency.

Thus, for example, any profits made from exchanging coins are

treated just like regular fiat exchange profits would be. When a

company holds coins as part of its trading stock, any gains or

profits are taxed as income. Any coins rewarded from mining

activities are treated as regular income as well.

If an individual realizes a capital gain from long-term holding

of a coin, and he is not doing so as part of his regular trading

activity, that should not attract income tax on capital gains.

In our opinion, staking coins in crypto pools or in proof of

stake algorithms or in liquidity swaps like the ones offered by

Binance, for instance, would also result in any rewards, whether in

the same coin or an alternative one, to be subject to the same

income tax treatment.

This approach is very favourable towards those that often trade

or stake their coins as it means that many business expenses that

these entrepreneurs incur in relation to the generation of income

associated with these coins are deductible for income tax

purposes.

Those tokens that are analogous to classic financial securities

like bonds, shares and so on are treated as such for income tax

purposes. This means that any returns from mere ownership of such

financial tokens which can be considered as an interest, or a

dividend and will be treated as such. This is important because it

means that all the exemptions in tax law found for regular dividend

and interest payments are also applicable to these kinds of

returns. So, for instance, a non-resident individual who receives

returns from merely owning certain coins will be able to benefit

from exemption applicable to non-residents who received dividends

in Malta.

Transactions involving tokens will depend on whether they are of

a trading nature or not. Thus, all the classic jurisprudence will

apply, namely, the “badges of trade” test. This test was

developed by long series of case law and revolves around a number

of questions to determine whether the proceeds from the transaction

are of a trading nature or of a capital one. The questions are:

  • Is it a “one-off” transaction or a transaction

    capable of being an adventure in the nature of trade?
  • Are there elements of repetition?
  • Is the transaction related to the ordinary trading activity of

    the taxpayer?
  • What is the subject matter of the transaction? Is the

    item/consideration something which is often subject to trade and

    speculation?
  • How was the transaction carried out?
  • How the was transaction financed?
  • Was the item resold, or worked on/improved? Were modifications

    made?
  • Was the item stacked, separated, bundled or somehow itemized or

    was it sold “as is”?
  • What was the intention of the purchaser?
  • Was there an element of personal enjoyment?

Even if the transaction is deemed to be of a capital nature, it

is still important to see whether the gains made are covered by a

special provision of the Maltese Income Tax Act, which levies

income tax on certain capital gains. One of the gains included are

gains made from transactions involving financial securities. If it

is apparent that the transaction involves a token that has

similarities to a traditional financial security like a share,

stock, bond or debenture, then it will still be liable to income

tax. If, however, the token has more similarities with a utility

token, then there is no income tax levied on capital gains made in

relation to that transaction, again, provided that it is not of a

trading nature.

Malta also has a rather favourable and straightforward treatment

of ICOs. ICOs are treated just like regular raising of capital by

regular companies– there are no tax liabilities for any of

the parties. However, if the ICO involved issuing utility tokens

which come with an obligation to provide certain services or supply

certain goods, gains or profits derived from the provision of the

said goods or services will be subject to regular income tax rules

and rates.

Value Added Tax

For the purposes of VAT, the Commissioner for Revenue also

differentiates between coins, financial and utility tokens. Those

transactions which involve cryptocurrencies as “coins” as

discussed above are exempt from VAT – Malta follows the

Skatterverket case of the Court of Justice of the European Union on

this matter, and thus transactions involving cryptocurrencies as a

means of payment are generally exempt from VAT.

In the case of crypto wallet providers’ fees for

transactions involving “coins”, those would be exempt

without credit. We also are of the opinion that for this reason,

certain “gas” fees involving regular coins may also be

exempt without credit for VAT purposes, but only where the other

party to whom the gas fees are paid is identifiable.

As for wallet providers, where the fees charged by them are not

directly related to the coin transaction but are for other taxable

services like, for instance, privacy features, then the transaction

would be taxable.

Mining and staking transactions may or may not be subject to

VAT. Usually, mining activities will be considered to be outside

the scope of VAT altogether in the classic mining operations.

However, if coins are received as consideration for the provision

of services such as validation of transactions, whereby it is

possible to clearly identify the recipient of such service, then

the VAT will be due to be paid by the miner.

For crypto exchanges, transactions or fees for the transactions

involving cryptocurrencies that would classify as regular

currencies or a financial security for VAT purposes would be exempt

from VAT. Thus brokerage, exchange, intermediation and negotiation

in these assets would be exempt from VAT. Crypto exchanges which

merely provide a platform for traders to transact and the exchange

is not of itself buying and selling digital assets, would be

considered as providing a platform service, and therefore its

services will be subject to VAT.

Utility tokens are treated differently depending on whether they

are what the guidelines call “single-purpose vouchers” or

“multi-purpose vouchers”. If a utility token is issued

and the token represents an underlining service or good that can

clearly be identified, then that creates a tax point for VAT

purposes, depending on whether the underlining service or good is

taxable or exempt. Multi-purposes vouchers are, on the other hand,

those tokens for which the underlining good or service and its

place of supply is not yet known. No VAT tax point arises when such

a multi-purpose voucher is issued, and the tax point will only come

into question once the supply in exchange for the voucher is

actually made.

For ICOs that involve coins or financial tokens, and these coins

or financial tokens are used for the purpose of raising the

company’s capital, no VAT should arise. If the tokens issued

are utility tokens, then it would be important to see what

underlining goods or services are behind those tokens.

The guidelines on tax and transactions of digital assets are

continuously reviewed to keep up with technological changes.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general

guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought

about your specific circumstances.

FAQ not present/live