Bilateral agreements are not the optimal solution to address modern challenges regarding the resolution of investment disputes. The time has come for multilateral agreements to define a clear procedure for resolving investment disputes and the formation of arbitration for these purposes. On November 15, 2020, ASEAN members and five regional partners signed the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), arguably the largest free trade agreement in history. Although the RCEP agreement defines the basic principles of legal protection of investments, it does not contain a procedure for settling disputes directly between investors and parties to the agreement, i.e., Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), but rather postpones the issue for future negotiations. Nevertheless, a majority of countries understand the importance of investment protection and have significant outward FDI that will support stronger ISDS protections within a multilateral framework. Therefore, it is recommended that in the near future member countries will come to an agreement and adopt appropriate amendments to the RCEP regarding ISDS.
There is no single approach in the world regarding the legal regulation of cryptocurrency. Most countries are wary of legalizing this payment instrument, fearing problems associated with tax evasion, terrorist financing, fraud and other illegal transactions. Nevertheless, the issue of legalization of cryptocurrencies has recently moved to a different level as the market capitalization of cryptocurrencies grew to over USD 237 billion 2020, with several leading cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin skyrocketing in value in 2021. The explosive growth has been lead in no small part by China, the world’s largest and most important market for cryptocurrency in terms of mining, investing and research. This article reviews the current trends in cryptocurrency regulation with a particular focus on China, including an analysis of current cryptocurrency laws in China, as well as the new Chinese Cryptography Law. Also, it explains recent developments in Chinese regulation and policy will continue to shape the development of the global cryptocurrency markets.
Many are crying foul over the Trump Administration’s use of steel and aluminum tariffs, claiming that imports are not a threat to the US national security. Rather, it has been argued that the tariffs are a pretext to gain strategic advantage in unrelated trade negotiations. Members of the Trump administration have hailed subsequent trade concessions as proof that the tariffs have been successful, which, if proven, could raise a credible question as to whether the President exceeded the scope of his authority. Domestic and international challenges have already begun with the US courts being a more effective forum to the challenge the legality of the tariffs than the WTO.
In response to the 2008 global financial crisis, many of the world’s largest central banks initiated unconventional monetary policies such as quantitative easing when standard open market operations became ineffective. The Bank of Japan, the US Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and the European Community Bank were among those that aggressively increased their respective monetary bases to purchase specified financial assets from commercial banks and financial institutions in order to lower interest rates interest rates for specific debt securities and stimulate their economies. Japan, which has long suffered from years of debilitating deflationary cycles, has targeted and committed to open-ended purchases until a stable two percent rate of consumer price inflation is achieved. Several of Japan’s chief exporting rivals, in particular China, have publicly criticized the Bank of Japan for using its current monetary policy to intentionally devalue its currency and thereby benefit from an unfair trade practice. This criticism is unwarranted and Japan’s policy complies with international law.