Why do people claim cryptocurrencies aren’t an asset?

[romero121]

It is all because of the governments that framework the law, and based on that people are informed that cryptocurrencies weren't an asset. Very few countries like Japan, Australia have legalized it as a currency, but most of the countries state it something similar to the stocks. It can't be considered as a legal tender/valuable asset which can be used in exchange of services. This can be used on trading, investment and other similar purposes.

[1715471572]

1715471572

[CarnagexD]

It is all because of the governments that framework the law, and based on that people are informed that cryptocurrencies weren't an asset.

Indeed, and because government is literally backed up with gold they want no competition with the  precious gold being an asset for ages. Cryptocurrencies on other hand is clearly misunderstood by many which made it very, very popular by now. Imagine naming it with 'currencies' and they made it as their asset lol

Very few countries like Japan, Australia have legalized it as a currency, but most of the countries state it something similar to the stocks. It can't be considered as a legal tender/valuable asset which can be used in exchange of services.

Well, I believe most of the countries are not against with it, most of them are just giving fair warnings about its volatility preventing people to lose their hard earned money, it's all about the concern anyway.

[hahay]

Even what happens in my country cryptocurrency is legal as an asset and not a currency and therefore, real use and / or using crypto as a means of payment in my country is something that is prohibited. I wonder, are countries claiming cryptocurrency not an asset, do they use bitcoin or other crypto as a means of payment? If so, I think the differences related to this issue are not things that should be equated in different countries, because most importantly cryptocurrency has become part of an economy that generates a profit.

[goldade]

It is noteworthy to know that just because they do not see cryptocurrencies as asset doesn't mean they are not one. I do believe that is needed just like OP said is mainstream attraction which will be achieved only in a matter of time.
Ever since bitcoin was made, it has been gaining attention in the mainstream world at a tremendous rate and going by this rate, just a few more years is needed before world governments begin to adopt bitcoin and other crypto. Once this happens, it wouldn't take very long before the legal backing these skeptics have been looking for is gotten.
We all know bitcoin will surely and eventually be adopted by everyone over time

[lixer]

It is noteworthy to know that just because they do not see cryptocurrencies as asset doesn't mean they are not one. I do believe that is needed just like OP said is mainstream attraction which will be achieved only in a matter of time.
Ever since bitcoin was made, it has been gaining attention in the mainstream world at a tremendous rate and going by this rate, just a few more years is needed before world governments begin to adopt bitcoin and other crypto. Once this happens, it wouldn't take very long before the legal backing these skeptics have been looking for is gotten.
We all know bitcoin will surely and eventually be adopted by everyone over time

To be honest with the transaction fees amounts right now it is really difficult to expect cryptocurrencies being the mainstream payments anytime soon because the biggest advantage when I started using crypto was there was no platform fees unlike paypal or other payment processors but now with time the transaction fees has actually become a serious issue and I do not see a proper solution unless we actually adopt payment processors in crypto itself like bitpay and similar services but that kills the basic aim of crypto payments as again we have a payment processor in between.

I think maybe a crypto like Tron can be successful because of the no fees transactions but it is not nearly as famous as it should and really if mass adoption is expected and bitcoins is to be seen as a mainstream payment method then something has to be done for the fees on transactions.

[mezzaluna]

For me, Cryptocurrencies can be both an asset and a liability. The potential capital that Cryptocurrency can bring is very big but before getting that capital, investments must be made and you have to get proper knowledge on how to properly utilize your Cryptocurrencies.

It would only act an liability IF you are losing so much even though you are not expecting it to occur that way. Maybe the value suddenly dropped and that would mean that you missed the chance to earn from it.

[naikturun]

I think the meaning of the word asset is different from the point of view of each person, if I think an asset is something that can make you money regularly, like you make a deposit in a bank and earn interest every year, own property and rent it out, own a retail business, and you get income. routine every day, week, month, year.
while crypto cannot give you a definite profit every day, but its value will increase if the price goes up.

Well, that idea isn't wrong, but the general idea of an asset is something you have in possession that actually has a value. May it be a monetary or sentimental value.
Bitcoin became an asset when it starts to acquire value, or shall we say, when it was used to purchase the pizza.
Bitcoin is money, because it has it's corresponding value comparable to USD. Do we consider USD as asset? Then the answer would be the same as Bitcoin.
IMO, an asset is something that has value, not only If it's generating profit or not.
Do you consider your car as an asset? Car's value are decreasing as time passes by.

That's what I mean because people's responses to assets are different.
I also considered anything that had value to be an asset at first, until some people came up with the ideas I mentioned earlier.
actually there is nothing to worry about just how you manage or handle your assets which is more important I think.

[Ayiranorea]

Governments that hasn't provided legal support for cryptocurrencies just consider it a technology solution for investment needs. Governments give importance to the technology and as a legal tender of value used for trading and similar to stocks. Cryptocurrencies aren't getting used as an alternate to fiat. Maybe when this scenario changes automatically people will consider it an asset.

[Xembin]

Those that said cryptocurrencies is not an asset are those countries that failed to legalized cryptocurrencies in their country because they have no idea on cryptocurrencies. Asset is anything that can give you income after the transaction.
In my country cryptocurrency is well legalized,many people is using cryptocurrencies as an asset for them to do business and  make a good profit from it.

[barbara44]

In my country cryptocurrency is well legalized,many people is using cryptocurrencies as an asset for them to do business and  make a good profit from it.

That must be a great news because as your government legalized bitcoins there can be new startups and more investment come in such projects. I am glad to know that bitcoins are being legalized or allowed in more and more countries.

I don't know why some people don't classify bitcoins as an asset because if you sell bitcoins you get money, as simple as that and that's how asset is defined. Maybe people are confused between asset and currency and because bitcoins is used so much for transactions online that is appears as a currency at times indeed.

Asset is anything that can give you income after the transaction.

In simple words, anything that has value in market for someone or everyone which can be defined into "asset" category.

[bitzizzix]

In my opinion, Cryptocurrency is considered as the most attractive alternative asset to be an investment choice, and investing with a relatively small capital will have enormous returns in the long run so that this crypto asset can be promising for the future.
and people who claim Cryptocurrency is not an asset because they don't understand and don't know about Cryptocurrency and its advantages, although Cryptocurrency is risky but will always give good returns in the long run.

[worldofcoins]

It is all because of the governments that framework the law, and based on that people are informed that cryptocurrencies weren't an asset. Very few countries like Japan, Australia have legalized it as a currency, but most of the countries state it something similar to the stocks. It can't be considered as a legal tender/valuable asset which can be used in exchange of services. This can be used on trading, investment and other similar purposes.

There are two types of people in bitcoin's field. One who knows about the bitcoin and contain well knowledge of all crypto market they when to buy and when to sell, on the other side some people think bitcoin can make them rich in nights and they'll spend good life. Things never work like this. Nothing is possible until you show your highly patient and hard working.
People who claim cryptocurrencies aren’t an asset are belongs to this category. They just put their money in bitcoin and start expecting for high profit.

[wheelz1200]

I have had this debate with may different people from different walks of life. In many parts of the world, cryptocurrencies are considered an asset and most of us might be well aware of this too. However, there are many reasons it is still not considered an asset, many( especially regulators ) believe it to be mainly due to the lack of legal rights. This can probably change completely in the future when serious regulated players like Banks get involved. Governments surely see value in it, but they are still skeptical. I think this will change over the due course of time once crypto starts gaining more mainstream traction.

Another interesting approach I came across is trying to introduce a layer by leveraging Blockchains like Concordium which claim to have regulatory compliance and Identity verification at a protocol level. Attempts like this sure might give more confidence among banks to start cryptocurrency custodianship/ interaction. 

With the advent of such practices, cryptocurrency may start being viewed more seriously in the legal world and smart contracts can be legally enforced too. So cryptocurrencies can probably finally be seen as an asset even according to local laws of that particular country.

It isn't going to happen overnight, it sure will be a tough battle,but I see it as a sensible way forward. Is cryptocurrency legal in your country? What are your thoughts?

Yeah its definately legal and is definately an asset.  It is considered property in some countries.  I would choose to classify crypto as a financial instrument which would be considered an asset in all aspects of its current state.  Normally the people that don't claim its an asset is just uninformed as to what crypto really is and can offer.  I bet the same people that says its not an asset can not properly tell you what crypto even is, probably a high correlation.

[worldofcoins]

The government isn't tolerating bitcoin as an asset, and there are no lawful rights on it.
That is the fundamental motivation behind why individuals think bitcoin is a trick, and they're not accepting it.
I met numerous people groups and persuaded them to utilize bitcoin.
Still, they refused to put their resource on it when I ask them why they express a similar explanation that the legislature considers it a trick so they won't use it.

[Golftech]

Governments that hasn't provided legal support for cryptocurrencies just consider it a technology solution for investment needs. Governments give importance to the technology and as a legal tender of value used for trading and similar to stocks. Cryptocurrencies aren't getting used as an alternate to fiat. Maybe when this scenario changes automatically people will consider it an asset.

Government approvals bring weight to this arguments, with the approval or legal entities that government acknowledge cryptocurrencies it will jumped out more investors to this market, Right now there are still lots of doubts coming from greater numbers of investors as they are more on traditional, legal matters is part of their criteria before engaging in to this venue of investment.

[Gaaara]

Let's look at how "asset" is conventionally defined:

An asset is a resource with economic value that an individual, corporation, or country owns or controls with the expectation that it will provide a future benefit.

An economic resource is something that is scarce and has the ability to produce economic benefit by generating cash inflows or decreasing cash outflows.

Assets can be broadly categorized into short-term (or current) assets, fixed assets, financial investments, and intangible assets.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/asset.asp

Even if local laws don't recognize cryptocurrency as a financial investment, it should be recognized an intangible asset, since it can be liquidated for cash value despite having no physical presence or official legal recognition.

That doesn't necessarily mean BTC holders have adequate legal rights (equal to regulated security or bond holders, for example) everywhere, but common sense tells me that is the direction things are headed. It just may take a decade or two for common sense regulation to take hold.

In other countries cryptocurrencies is at a weird spot because its either illegal or not being recognized by government, and as indicated for cryptocurrencies to be called an asset it has to produce economic benefit and currently I don't see that coming, first of all the law prevents cryptocurrencies from being legal since there is no way of taxing it and if it ever happen that there would be a way to tax it, it would require personal information to be given which will eliminate the feature of cryptocurrencies such as Transparency and Anonymity. In addition cryptocurrencies are unlike any other assets since as long as there are projects being created there would be an unlimited supply.

[Cnut237]

The problem is that governments are trying to define something new in terms of something old. Of course this creates conflict and uncertainty.

Cryptocurrencies are a new class of 'thing'. Lets not say asset, because that suggests conventionally-defined assets. Governments see that cryptocurrencies are becoming more popular, are increasing in value, and that their populations are being exposed to them and are interacting with them, this bringing with it exposure to scams and theft, as well as huge untaxed gains... all in a climate of quasi-anonymity and borderless transactions.

So governments want to legislate, and they want to do so quickly. Unfortunately, because crypto is new, there is no established framework, and no consensus on what crypto even is, and because governments are national but crypto is global, there are wild inconsistencies from country to country in how any solution is implemented.

I would view current legal definitions and frameworks as temporary sticking-plaster solutions, a set of emergency fixes put in place until proper definitions and regulatory frameworks can be agreed.

[so98nn]

If we start talking about this topic then it would forfeit the nature of traditional currencies as well. Most of the countries are on the verge of adopting the digital forms of their currency. I mean making their local currencies to be used in digital form. But this doesn’t mean it will become non-asset after it.

I’m pretty sure we can always show up this comparison to those who thinks crypto is not real asset. Moreover you can always trade crypto for real money and vice versa is also true. So there is no possible way one can not define crypto as assets. They are and they are in the verge of perfection.

[slapper]

Those that said cryptocurrencies is not an asset are those countries that failed to legalized cryptocurrencies in their country because they have no idea on cryptocurrencies. Asset is anything that can give you income after the transaction.
In my country cryptocurrency is well legalized,many people is using cryptocurrencies as an asset for them to do business and  make a good profit from it.

I think you misunderstand what assets are. They are not regularly generating income. They are just something belongs to somebody. Governments have the right to make a decision on bitcoin or any cryptocurrency. Laws are laws. If you are a citizen of a country, you have to accept the laws unless you can make a protest and succeed. However, I doubt that possibility can work.

In my opinion, having no regulation makes stronger to us since governments can not claim any tax from us. On the other hand, we can easily be harmed by digital thieves and cops will not resolve any issue relating. Therefore, every circumstances have their own threats and benefits. You can not have all the goodness 

[Swopon]

Cryptocurrency is an asset. Because it is an investment and you are doing it for making some profit. You need to convert the fiat money to cryptocurrency. So obviously it can be considered as an asset.

Some people claimed because of having or losing their money by hackers or they lost their private key or something like that. So it can be a logic behind this.