What Are Cryptocurrencies? Legal Definition and Key Differences from Digital Money Explained

·

In recent years, interest in cryptocurrencies—also known as crypto assets—has surged globally. Yet, despite growing attention, few people fully understand what these digital assets truly are. With technical terms like "blockchain" and "token" frequently used in crypto transactions, the subject may seem complex or inaccessible.

This article breaks down the legal definition of crypto assets, explores their core characteristics, and clarifies how they differ from traditional forms of digital money such as e-money or prepaid cards. By the end, you'll have a clear understanding of what sets cryptocurrencies apart—and why it matters.

👉 Discover how crypto regulations are shaping the future of finance—explore more here.

Understanding Cryptocurrencies: Beyond Digital Cash

Bitcoin, widely regarded as the first cryptocurrency, was originally designed as a decentralized electronic payment system that allows users to send money directly to one another without relying on banks or financial intermediaries.

At its core, a cryptocurrency functions similarly to fiat currencies like the Japanese yen or U.S. dollar—serving primarily as a means of payment for goods and services. However, unlike centralized monetary systems, cryptocurrencies operate on decentralized networks powered by blockchain technology, which ensures secure, transparent, and low-cost digital transactions.

While early crypto use focused on payments, today’s landscape is far more diverse. Ethereum (ETH), for example, enables smart contracts and decentralized applications (dApps). New tokens emerge daily with unique utilities—from governance rights to access to platforms.

Still, the foundational purpose remains: cryptocurrencies were initially built to serve as digital payment tools.

One defining trait of most cryptocurrencies is their high volatility.

What Is Volatility?

Volatility refers to how much an asset's value fluctuates over time and is commonly used to assess investment risk. Assets with high volatility experience rapid price swings—offering potential for high returns but also significant losses. This "high-risk, high-reward" nature is central to crypto markets.

You’ve likely heard stories of Bitcoin or other coins doubling in value overnight—only to crash shortly after. Because of this instability, cryptocurrencies have increasingly become investment vehicles, even though their original intent was transactional.

However, extreme volatility makes them impractical for everyday spending. Imagine receiving 10,000 yen worth of crypto today, only to see its value drop to 1,000 yen tomorrow. Neither buyers nor sellers can conduct reliable transactions under such conditions.

As a result, while legal frameworks often classify crypto as a payment method, market behavior treats it more like a financial instrument.

Legal Definition of Crypto Assets in Japan

The legal treatment of cryptocurrencies depends on their primary function:

Crucially, the term “crypto asset” is defined in the Payment Services Act—not the FIEA. This means that legally, crypto is recognized primarily as a medium of exchange, not an investment.

Here’s the official definition from Article 2, Paragraph 14 of Japan’s Payment Services Act:

“Crypto assets” refer to:

  1. Property value that can be used to pay for goods, services, or rentals to unspecified persons, exchangeable with unspecified persons for legal tender, recorded electronically, and transferable via information processing systems—excluding Japanese or foreign fiat currencies and monetary claims;
  2. Property value that can be exchanged with unspecified persons for items listed in (1), meeting the same electronic recording and transfer criteria.

Notably, the law explicitly excludes financial instruments regulated under FIEA—such as securities or electronic rights transfers—from the definition of crypto assets. This reinforces that only non-security digital assets used for payments qualify as crypto under Japanese law.

From “Virtual Currency” to “Crypto Asset”

Japan previously used the term virtual currency (virtual currency), but this was changed to crypto asset in 2019 (Reiwa 1). Why?

Because “currency” implies stability and official status similar to yen or dollars—misleading given crypto’s volatile nature. The shift aligns with global terminology and emphasizes that these are speculative digital assets, not true currencies.

Additionally, the 2019 amendment expanded regulatory scope by including custody services under licensing requirements for crypto exchange operators.

What Is E-Money? How It Differs Legally

The term “e-money” broadly refers to digital payment methods like transit IC cards (e.g., Suica) or QR code-based services. However, there is no single legal definition of e-money in Japan. Instead, different types fall under various regulatory categories:

👉 See how crypto platforms are integrating with modern payment ecosystems.

Key Differences: Crypto Assets vs. Digital Payment Methods

To understand how crypto differs from e-money, we must examine their treatment under Japanese law—especially within the Payment Services Act.

Crypto Assets vs. Prepaid Payment Instruments

Examples: Suica, PASMO (transit cards)

Both crypto and prepaid cards allow digital payments. But there are key differences:

Crypto AssetPrepaid Payment Instrument
Can be used and traded among unspecified personsUsable only with the issuer or designated merchants
Must be recorded and transferred electronicallyValue must be trackable and recordable
Cannot be denominated in fiat currencyOften tied directly to yen or other currencies

The critical distinction lies in universality: crypto can be used peer-to-peer across open networks; e-money is restricted to closed-loop systems controlled by issuers.

Moreover, prepaid instruments may qualify as monetary claims—a category excluded from the definition of crypto assets—making them legally distinct.

Crypto Assets vs. Funds Transfer Services

Examples: QUICPay™, iD (real-time payment systems)

These services allow instant transfers from bank accounts without pre-loading funds. Under Japanese law, they fall under funds transfer services, requiring operators to register as licensed money transfer businesses.

The key legal question: Can crypto be considered “funds”?

Generally, “funds” refer to cash or easily convertible assets (e.g., deposits). Due to high volatility and liquidity risks, most cryptocurrencies do not meet this standard.

However, if a crypto transaction enables immediate conversion back to yen—functioning like a wire transfer—it may trigger obligations under funds transfer regulations. Regulatory guidance warns that businesses facilitating such conversions could require additional licensing.

Crypto Assets vs. Electronic Payment Instruments (Stablecoins)

In 2022 (Reiwa 4), Japan introduced a new category: electronic payment instruments, targeting fiat-backed stablecoins.

Stablecoins are digital assets pegged to real-world assets (like USD or JPY) to minimize price fluctuations. They come in several types:

Under the updated law, only fiat-backed stablecoins qualify as electronic payment instruments. Operators handling them must register as Electronic Payment Instrument Providers.

Meanwhile, algorithmic or crypto-backed stablecoins remain classified as crypto assets.

Here’s how they compare:

Crypto AssetElectronic Payment Instrument
Not denominated in fiatMust be denominated in fiat
High volatility acceptedDesigned for price stability
Excludes monetary claimsLimited to monetary claims

Because electronic payment instruments are treated as stable-value assets, they can qualify as “funds” under transfer laws—requiring dual compliance in some cases.

Core Characteristics of Cryptocurrencies

Based on legal and functional analysis, two defining traits stand out:

1. Universality (Use Among Unspecified Persons)

Crypto assets can be used freely between any parties without issuer permission. This open accessibility supports innovation and global reach—but lacks legal tender status. Acceptance depends entirely on mutual agreement between buyer and seller.

2. High Volatility

Without a central authority controlling supply or value, cryptocurrency prices are driven by market demand and speculation. This leads to sharp price movements—making them unsuitable for stable pricing but attractive for investment.

Despite this market reality, Japan’s legal framework deliberately separates crypto-as-payment from crypto-as-investment by excluding securities-like tokens from the definition.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: Are all cryptocurrencies considered legal tender in Japan?
A: No. Cryptocurrencies are not legal tender. They are private digital assets recognized as valid payment methods only when accepted by merchants.

Q: Is Bitcoin regulated differently than stablecoins in Japan?
A: Yes. Bitcoin is classified as a crypto asset under the Payment Services Act. Fiat-backed stablecoins are now regulated separately as electronic payment instruments.

Q: Do I need a license to operate a crypto exchange in Japan?
A: Yes. All crypto asset exchange businesses must register with Japan’s Financial Services Agency (FSA).

Q: Can I use crypto to pay taxes in Japan?
A: No. Taxes must be paid in yen. Any crypto-to-yen conversion for tax purposes is treated as a taxable disposal event.

Q: Are NFTs considered crypto assets under Japanese law?
A: Generally not—if they don’t meet the criteria for payment or exchangeability with unspecified persons. Most NFTs fall outside current regulations unless they function like securities.

👉 Stay ahead of global crypto regulations with trusted insights—learn more now.

Final Thoughts: Seek Legal Guidance for Crypto Projects

As demonstrated, whether a digital asset qualifies as a crypto asset, e-money, or security has major legal implications. Regulatory boundaries are nuanced—and still evolving.

Businesses exploring blockchain solutions, token issuance, or payment integration should consult legal experts familiar with both technology and financial regulation.

Japan continues refining its framework to balance innovation with consumer protection. Staying compliant isn’t optional—it’s essential for sustainable growth.


Core Keywords: