Object Types and the Assessment of Value Equivalence in the Disposal of Criminal Virtual Currency

Abstract

Liquidation is indispensable to the recovery and restitution of virtual currency in criminal cases, yet no standard exists for assessing whether liquidation proceeds are equivalent to due value. Where disposal occurs at a low price, the loss dissipates in the disposal process; it becomes impossible to judge whether the disposal was proper, and the diminution sustained by the state treasury, the victims and the judgment debtor leaves no basis for attributing responsibility. The difficulty stems from the divided value structures of objects of disposal. Stablecoins derive value from the issuer's redemption commitment and can be valued independently of market transactions, whereas non-stablecoins can only realize value through market transactions. The assessment of value equivalence should therefore be layered. Redemption-based value lends itself to substantive comparison against the redemption ratio and the peg relationship, while market-based value should be assessed through a procedural review of the timing decision, the fee rate and the price source, drawing on public data from major international exchanges and cross-platform weighted averages.