Legal Regulation of Smart Contracts in China and the United States: A Comparative Legal Analysis

2025

Закрытый доступ Метаданные (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.31489/2025l4/122-128
Достоверность данных 70 средняя
Как считается эта оценка

Складывается из проверяемых признаков самой записи: есть ли у статьи DOI, сколько независимых источников подтвердили её данные, заполнены ли обязательные поля и насколько свежо последнее подтверждение. Снижают оценку расхождения между источниками и отсутствие идентификатора. Значение от 80 означает, что запись опубликована без дополнительной проверки; от 60 до 79 — что она опубликована с пониженной достоверностью и ручная проверка желательна. Запись, выверенную редактором вручную, пересчёт не опускает ниже 90. Это оценка наших данных о статье, а не оценка самой статьи.

Аннотация

This paper presents a comprehensive comparative study of the legal regulation of smart contracts in the United States and the People’s Republic of China, taking into account both theoretical frameworks and practical applications. Smart contracts are examined as both technological and legal instruments that facilitate the automation of contractual obligations, enhance transactional transparency, and streamline the management of digital assets within the digital economy. The relevance of this research arises from the rapid integration of blockchain technology into the financial sector, public services, international trade, logistics, and insurance. Nevertheless, despite the widespread use of the technology, the legal status of smart contracts and their recognition by national and international courts remain subjects of academic and professional debate. The methodological basis of this study combines comparative legal analysis, a systematic review of regulatory acts and judicial practice, an examination of academic literature, and the synthesis of information from diverse sources. This research highlights the key features of the Chinese and American regulatory models. The Chinese model is characterized by centralized control, where smart contracts are integrated into state-backed digital platforms, including the Blockchain-based Service Network (BSN) and the digital yuan. This approach ensures standardization and security, however constrains the pace of innovative adoption. By contrast, the American model demonstrates flexibility and fosters innovation by recognizing program code as a legally significant instrument under digital transactions and contract law (e.g., the E-SIGN Act of 2000 and various state laws). However, it lacks clear standards and uniform security protocols.