Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I thank the committee for undertaking a study on the current state and potential applications of blockchain technology, as well as for inviting us to comment in this context.
As Mr. Chair mentioned, I am a partner at the law firm of Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, which has created a team specializing in digital assets and blockchain.
I will make my presentation in French,
but I will be happy to take and answer any questions in English if needed.
The existence of this team, which does not correspond to an area of law, but rather to a type of asset and technology, leads me to make a first observation about the scope of what needs to be covered when blockchain is studied.
We have a team of 50 lawyers covering multiple areas of law. It's not just me and Mr. Burgoyne, who have our own areas of law. Similarly, blockchain challenges our country's jurisdiction over commerce, currency exchange, coinage and paper money, as well as banking and criminal law, and I'm probably forgetting some.
In this context, in order to provide some food for thought, I propose to review the technology, the type of assets involved, and the various people involved.
First, let's talk about the technology. First and foremost, blockchain is the technology behind virtual currencies. In fact, the creation of virtual currencies, bitcoin being the first of those, required the development of blockchain technology. Over time, other applications have emerged and other digital assets have been created.
Then there are the assets involved. Digital assets using blockchain can be divided into three broad categories.
The first category is cryptocurrencies, which generally use their own blockchain.
The second category is cyber-indexed tokens, which include non-fungible tokens—in other words, digital assets that represent real objects such as art, music and videos—tokens that refer to currency or currencies, commodities or other digital assets, and the so-called tokens representing rights, such as investors' rights in a joint venture, which are then securities.
The third category is utility tokens, which have a specific purpose. For example, they may be used in the future on a platform in exchange for a special service or to receive preferential treatment for certain services on that platform.
As we have seen, there are assets that are tied to this technology. The people involved are issuers, holders and intermediaries of digital assets, or digital asset service “providers”, as the European Union has decided to call them.
In Canada, FINTRAC and the securities regulators were the first to publish their views on the application of the laws and regulations under their purview in order to establish their jurisdiction over certain digital assets. It is worth noting that, in doing so, securities regulators have used some interpretive capacity in securities legislation.
They have introduced a novel concept of a cryptoasset contract, which is based on the idea of the immediate non-transfer of ownership, which they believe makes the agreement an investment contract and, therefore, a security. Thus, certain issuers, intermediaries or holders of certain digital assets are now subject to securities distribution regulation. Later, my colleague Mr. Burgoyne will elaborate on the resulting problems. Based on our observations, players in this market could benefit from more legal clarity, consultation and cooperation.
We are fortunate to be able to observe what is being done in other countries. Within the European Union, countries have chosen to have specific regulations for each category of cryptoassets, which I described earlier. These countries wanted to pay particular attention to stable cryptocurrency backed by the euro. They decided to exclude non-fungible tokens from this regulation and regulate them differently, and to create a regime for cryptoasset service “providers”. Certainly, in doing so, they have provided some legal clarity, but it brings with it a lot of issues worth considering, given what is happening right now in the European Union.
In contrast, in the U.S., we are seeing a multitude of projects and initiatives being taken in a competitive climate as to the relevant jurisdiction, and there is a great deal of uncertainty among market players. This fosters the emergence of mega-competitors for our Canadian players.
As a final word, I would like to point out that, when looking at a blockchain, attention should be paid to the governance structure of the blockchain in question. This aspect is too rarely discussed and it would be relevant to pay attention to it.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this with you. I hope my presentation has been helpful to you.
I am now available for questions.