After the Introduction of the Law Regulating the Taxation of Crypto Capital Gains in Italy, One of the Major Doubts That Has Always Circulated Is Whether the Stablecoin DAI Is Fiscally Relevant or Not

Since the law regulating the taxation of crypto capital gains was introduced in Italy, one of the major doubts that has always circulated is whether the stablecoin DAI is fiscally relevant or not.

A recent statement by the Italian Minister of Economy and Finance has finally cleared up the ambiguity surrounding the tax implications of exchanging cryptocurrency for stablecoins other than e-money tokens.

The issue arose following the introduction of a new law in Italy regulating the taxation of capital gains derived from cryptocurrencies. While it was clear that an exchange between two e-money tokens, such as e-euro and e-dollar tokens, would be subject to taxation, the tax status of an exchange between an cryptocurrency and an asset-referenced token, such as BTC or ETH for stablecoins, remained unclear.

The ambiguity stemmed from the fact that the new European regulation, aiming to integrate cryptocurrencies into the traditional financial system, identifies a subcategory of e-money tokens within the broader category of stablecoins. E-money tokens are defined as "stablecoins issued by an e-money issuer in accordance with Directive 2019/904, granting the holder a claim at nominal value against the issuer." In contrast, asset-referenced tokens are defined as "stablecoins that are not e-money tokens and that reference the value of an asset, commodity, or basket of assets or commodities other than an e-currency, or a unit of account other than the euro or another currency, or a financial instrument."

The honorable Giulio Centemero, a member of the Italian Parliament, raised this question directly with the Minister of Economy and Finance, seeking explicit clarification.

In his written response, the Minister explicitly affirms that the exchange between cryptocurrencies and asset-referenced tokens "is not relevant for tax purposes."

This statement appears to definitively settle the matter, leaving no room for doubt.

The Minister further explains that the asset-referenced tokens in question are not classified as electronic money and, crucially, are not redeemable at nominal value. This distinction is the main discriminant.

In his words: "if the holder of the stablecoin does not have the right to claim at nominal value against the issuer, the eventual exchange of the same with a cryptocurrency does not constitute a relevant fact for the purposes of taxation."

This statement directly relates to Article 67, paragraph 1, letter c-sexies) of the TUIR (Testo Unico delle Imposte sui Redditi, or Italian Consolidated Law Code for Income Taxes), which states that "the exchange between crypto-assets with equal characteristics and functions does not constitute a case relevant for tax purposes."

While the issue of DAI (now USDS) is settled, another type of stablecoin, USDT (Tether), remains subject to debate.

USDT falls into the category of USD-collateralized stablecoins that do grant the holder a right to claim at face value against the issuer. For instance, anyone can return USDT to Tether, such as through the Bitfinex exchange which acts as the primary market, receiving USD in return at par.

However, European regulation MiCA does not include it in e-money tokens, as Tether is not registered in the EU as an e-money (electronic money) issuer.

In other words, as of today according to European regulations, USDT cannot be considered electronic money, even if it is directly redeemable in fiat at par.

On the other hand, the question from the honorable Centemero was specifically dedicated to asset-referenced tokens, and not to the fiscally relevant nature of USDT in Italy. At this point, it will presumably be necessary to wait for a further explicit pronouncement on the matter.