Understanding Cryptocurrency Lending: Tax Implications and Scenarios

In the ever-evolving landscape where digital assets play a vital role in corporate, commercial, and financial spheres, cryptocurrency transactions have become routine. This includes situations where digital assets are used as collateral for loans or transferred through crypto lending agreements.

Scenario 1: Collateral for Loans

Many borrowers are eager to use their substantial digital asset holdings to secure fiat currency loans. Pledging crypto assets as collateral can unfold in various ways.

When borrowing, the terms may require the individual to sign a custodial agreement. This agreement appoints a custodian who assumes possession and control of the pledged digital assets.

The terms of the custodial agreement are critical. According to the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”), a disposition of assets may occur, leading to potential gains or losses for the person pledging the assets.

In these agreements, custodians typically assume legal interest in the collateral. A key question arises: has a disposition occurred? This often hinges on whether the custodian has also obtained beneficial ownership.

Tax Implications of Custodial Agreements

Subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) defines “disposition.” Under paragraph (c), it includes “any transfer of the property to a trust or, where the property is property of a trust, any transfer of the property to any beneficiary under the trust, except as provided by paragraph (f) or (k).” Here, provisions (f) and (k) offer exceptions where there is merely a change in legal ownership without any change in beneficial ownership.

Generally, custodial arrangements are viewed as trust relationships. In these cases, legal title moves to the custodian while beneficial ownership remains with the borrower.[*1]* If digital assets are pledged in this manner, there may be no disposition, since only legal ownership changes and not beneficial ownership. However, if the agreement alters beneficial ownership, it can trigger a disposition under the Act.

Non-Custodial Loan Scenarios

Digital assets can also serve as collateral without a custodial agreement or trust relationship. In such traditional arrangements, the pledge of securities may not count as a disposition under the Act. Per subsection 248(1), a “disposition” does not include, under paragraph (j), “any transfer of the property for the purpose only of securing a debt or a loan.” Thus, in non-custodial loan transactions, there should be no taxable disposition if beneficial ownership remains unchanged.

The CRA closely examines whether transferring digital assets—under either custodial or non-custodial agreements—constitutes a tax disposition, raising significant tax questions.

Scenario 2: Lending Agreements

In a recent CRA roundtable, a hypothetical case was presented. A taxpayer transfers bitcoin to a centralized crypto-asset exchange and lending platform in exchange for a variable return.[2] Here, the platform, owning the bitcoin in its name, could pledge, sell, lend, or otherwise use the bitcoin as it sees fit without notifying the taxpayer.[3]

As the bitcoin was not held under a custodial agreement or in trust for the taxpayer, the beneficial interest of the deposited bitcoin transferred to the exchange.

Based on the facts provided, the CRA noted that a disposition likely occurred in this context.[4] The CRA did not reference a specific part of the Act but pointed to the general definition of “disposition” in subsection 248(1).

This roundtable discussion may have unexpected tax implications for the taxpayer involved in the bitcoin transfer agreement.

Implications of Dispositions in Crypto Lending

The definition of “disposition” in subsection 248(1) complicates understanding the tax consequences of digital asset transactions. The CRA emphasized that analyzing a crypto disposition requires examining events, transactions, and all relevant contractual details.[5]

The potential unintended tax consequences illustrated in these scenarios highlight the importance of thoroughly understanding lending terms. Careful record-keeping is essential in the fast-moving world of digital asset transactions.

Best Practices for Navigating Crypto Lending

Importance of Record-Keeping

As the crypto landscape evolves, participants must track their assets carefully. Maintaining detailed records provides clarity and can protect against unanticipated tax liabilities. This diligence is not only prudent; it is increasingly necessary for compliance with emerging regulations.

Evaluating Lending Arrangements

Potential borrowers should scrutinize lending terms closely. Understanding the terms of any custodial agreement and assessing potential tax implications can prevent misunderstandings. Investors and borrowers should consider consulting with tax professionals specializing in cryptocurrency.

The Future of Cryptocurrency Lending

Schemes for utilizing digital assets in borrowing and lending are likely to grow. As regulations evolve, so will the complexity of crypto financial transactions. Staying informed about regulatory changes will be vital for participants in the digital asset space.

Conclusion

Unexpected consequences often accompany crypto transfers. Participants must be vigilant and exercise due diligence. The challenge of tracking crypto asset movements underlines the necessity of thorough record-keeping. In the rapidly changing market, prompt and informed decisions are critical when engaging in alternative arrangements with digital assets.

---wix--{"type":"DIVIDER","id":"ncrb58782","nodes":[],"dividerData":{"containerData":{"width":{},"alignment":"CENTER","spoiler":{},"height":{},"textWrap":false},"lineStyle":"SINGLE","width":"LARGE","alignment":"CENTER"}}--wix--

References:

[1] Although not defined in the Act, the CRA describes a bare trust for income tax purposes as a trust arrangement under which the trustee can reasonably be considered to act as agent for all the beneficiaries under the trust with respect to all dealings with all of the trust’s property. A trustee can reasonably be considered to act as agent for a beneficiary when the trustee has no significant powers or responsibilities, can take no action without instructions, and only holds legal title.

[2] Association de Planification Fiscale et Financière, “2 November 2023 APFF Roundtable, – Q. 10 Disposition on bitcoin transfer to platform” (November 2, 2023).

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.