<p>2026 年 2 月 6 日，原本被認為是春節前的普通一天，比特幣在早晨暴跌，跌至接近 60,000 美元的低點。當天晚上，包括中國人民銀行、國家發展和改革委員會、工業和信息化部、公安部、市場監管總局、國家金融監管總局、中國證券監督管理委員會和國家外匯管理局在內的八個部門聯合發佈了《進一步防範和處置虛擬貨幣相關風險的通知》（銀髮〔2026〕42 號，以下簡稱 “2.6 通知”）。&#34;2.6&#34;註定將載入虛擬貨幣的歷史，似乎為此次劇烈下跌提供了理由。1. 與之前的監管文件如 94 公告和 924 通知不同，2.6 通知在最後增加了一條條款：本通知自發布之日起生效。中國人民銀行及其他十個部門發佈的《進一步防範和處置虛擬貨幣交易和投機風險的通知》（銀髮〔2021〕237 號）在此被廢止。這是虛擬貨幣監管歷史上首次廢止之前的監管文件。在去年年底的金融街論壇上，中國人民銀行行長潘功勝特別提到穩定幣和 RWA，並強調自 2017 年以來的監管政策仍然有效。現在，隨着八個部門聯合發佈文件廢止 “924 通知”，早期的監管文件 “94 公告” 自然也應當被廢止。從標題來看，924 通知的標題為《進一步防範和處置虛擬貨幣交易和投機風險的通知》，強調交易和投機的風險。而 2.6 通知則簡單總結為 “與虛擬貨幣相關的風險”，範圍顯著更廣。此外，關於發佈機構，與涉及十個部門的 924 通知相比，2.6 通知缺少了最高人民檢察院和最高人民法院，這讓人頗感意外。自 2024 年以來，最高人民檢察院和最高人民法院相繼介入，以調查處理虛擬貨幣案件為切入點，開展了大量工作。在我看來，關於處理虛擬貨幣案件的法律政策可能是最早出台的。中央政法委員會的工作會議明確表示需要對虛擬貨幣進行前瞻性研究和立法，使得最高人民法院和最高人民檢察院缺席此次會議更顯得令人驚訝。然而，2 月 6 日的通知也明確指出，“在與中國網絡空間管理局、最高人民法院和最高人民檢察院達成一致，並經國務院批准後”，這一表述在以往的虛擬貨幣監管文件中並未出現。具體原因和意圖目前難以解讀和分析。我的理解是，雖然相關內容原則上達成一致，但具體措辭可能尚未最終確定。3. 與以往聲明相比，2.6 通知最大的突破在於首次明確指出 “與法定貨幣掛鈎的穩定幣有效地履行了法定貨幣在流通中的某些功能。未經相關部門依法批准，任何國內外實體或個人不得在境外發行與人民幣掛鈎的穩定幣。” 這句話的後半部分不難理解，字面意思清晰。最關鍵的部分是前半部分，“有效履行了法定貨幣的某些功能”。作為一名刑事辯護律師，我最擔心的是，在司法實踐中，這是否會被用作將法定貨幣與穩定幣之間的交換視為 “變相外匯交易” 的依據。需要理解的是，變相外匯交易構成非法經營罪，可處以一至五倍的非法所得罰款，且非法所得必須上繳國庫。該條款針對的是場外交易（OTC）。關鍵在於實施是否會被扭曲、偏離或過度解讀。如果措施過於強硬，整個 OTC 行業的風險將激增。眾所周知，OTC 是虛擬貨幣領域不可或缺的行業。關於 RWA（實時擔保），簡而言之，在中國境內是嚴格禁止的，國內實體被嚴格禁止參與。外國公司和個人也被禁止參與或為國內實體提供服務。然而，留有一個在海外參與的漏洞。中國證券監督管理委員會（CSRC）發佈了《境內資產在境外發行資產支持證券代幣的監管指引》，後續將進行解讀。5. 與以往的監管文件相比，2.6 通知在規範和完善工作機制、加強風險監測、預防和處置方面投入了更多的篇幅。首先，遵循 “8+3” 原則，由中央政府對地方進行監督。八個部門與中國網絡空間管理局、最高人民檢察院和最高人民法院共同為各地區開展與虛擬貨幣相關的非法金融活動的風險防範和處置工作提供總體指導。其次，加強地方實施，形成中央與地方協調、縱向與橫向結合的工作模式，積極防範和妥善處理問題，維護經濟金融秩序和社會穩定。第三，加強風險監測，持續改善監測技術和系統支持，增強跨部門數據分析和共享，建立和完善信息共享和交叉驗證機制，確保省級政府充分利用地方監測和預警機制。地方金融管理部門應與國務院金融管理部門的分支機構和機構，以及網絡空間管理和公安等部門有效協調線上監測、線下調查和資金監測，建立快速響應機制，以高效準確地識別、調查和處理問題。科技公司可能會迎來業務的繁榮。第四，加強對金融、中介和技術服務機構的管理，禁止將虛擬貨幣及相關金融產品納入抵押範圍。加強對互聯網信息內容和訪問的管理，為相關調查和偵查工作提供技術支持和協助。加強對商業實體的註冊和廣告管理。繼續整治虛擬貨幣 “挖礦” 活動，關閉現有的並嚴格禁止新的。嚴厲打擊相關非法金融活動，並將涉嫌犯罪的移交司法機關依法處理。嚴厲打擊與虛擬貨幣及真實世界資產代幣化相關的非法和犯罪活動，如詐騙、洗錢、非法經營、傳銷和非法募資，以及以虛擬貨幣和真實世界資產代幣化為幌子的相關非法和犯罪活動。6. 在海外開展相關業務的國內實體本質上受到一定限制。首先，他們不能發行虛擬貨幣，即使是在海外。其次，參與 RWA（實時擔保）的國內實體應根據 “同業、同風險、同規則” 的原則接受監管。第三，提供 RWA 服務的國內金融機構的海外子公司和分支機構必須遵守某些要求；這是一個漏洞，但必須明確的是，這個漏洞是為金融機構保留的。7. 與以往的監管政策相比，2.6 通知的格式增加了 “法律責任”，字面意思並不複雜，不會詳細解讀。</p>

<p>2026 年 2 月 6 日，比特幣大幅下跌，恰逢八個中國監管機構發佈《進一步防範和處置虛擬貨幣相關風險的通知》。該通知立即生效，廢除了之前的規定，並擴大了對虛擬貨幣的風險管理範圍。值得注意的是，通知中指出，與法定貨幣掛鈎的穩定幣可以履行法定貨幣的某些功能，這引發了對交易潛在法律影響的擔憂。通知中缺少最高人民法院和檢察院的身影也頗具意義，暗示着關於虛擬貨幣監管的持續討論</p>

<p>On February 6, 2026, what was initially thought to be an ordinary day before the Lunar New Year saw Bitcoin plummet in the morning, reaching a low near the $60,000 mark. That evening, eight departments, including the People's Bank of China, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Public Security, the State Administration for Market Regulation, the State Financial Regulatory Commission, the China Securities Regulatory Commission, and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange, jointly issued the &#34;Notice on Further Preventing and Handling Risks Related to Virtual Currencies&#34; (Yinfa [2026] No. 42, hereinafter referred to as the &#34;2.6 Notice&#34;). &#34;2.6&#34; is destined to be recorded in the history of virtual currencies, and it seems to have provided the reason for this sharp drop. 1. Unlike previous regulatory documents such as the 94 Announcement and the 924 Notice, the 2.6 Notice added a clause at the end: This notice shall take effect from the date of its issuance. The &#34;Notice on Further Preventing and Handling Risks of Virtual Currency Trading and Speculation&#34; (Yinfa [2021] No. 237) issued by the People's Bank of China and ten other departments is hereby repealed. This is the first time in the history of virtual currency regulation that a previous regulatory document has been repealed. At the Financial Street Forum at the end of last year, Pan Gongsheng, Governor of the People's Bank of China, specifically mentioned stablecoins and RWA, and emphasized that the regulatory policies since 2017 remain effective. Now, with eight departments jointly issuing a document repealing the &#34;924 Notice,&#34; the earlier regulatory document, the &#34;94 Announcement,&#34; should naturally also be repealed. Judging from the titles, the 924 Notice is titled &#34;Notice on Further Preventing and Handling Risks of Virtual Currency Trading and Speculation,&#34; emphasizing the risks of trading and speculation. The 2.6 Notice, on the other hand, is simply summarized as &#34;Risks Related to Virtual Currencies,&#34; with a significantly broader scope. Furthermore, regarding the issuing authorities, compared to the 924 Notice involving ten departments, the 2.6 Notice lacks the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Supreme People's Court, which was quite unexpected. Since 2024, the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Supreme People's Court have successively intervened, using the investigation of the handling of virtual currency cases as a starting point, and have carried out a great deal of work. In my view, the legal policies regarding the handling of virtual currency cases are likely to be among the earliest to be promulgated. The Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission's working conference explicitly stated the need for forward-looking research and legislation on virtual currencies, making the absence of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate from this meeting all the more surprising. However, the February 6th notice also explicitly states, &#34;After reaching an agreement with the Cyberspace Administration of China, the Supreme People's Court, and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and with the approval of the State Council,&#34; a statement not seen in previous virtual currency regulatory documents. The specific reasons and intentions are currently difficult to interpret and analyze. My understanding is that while the relevant content is agreed upon in principle, the specific wording may not have been finalized yet. 3. Compared to previous statements, the biggest breakthrough in Notice 2.6 is that it explicitly states for the first time that &#34;stablecoins pegged to legal tender effectively fulfill some of the functions of legal tender in circulation. Without the consent of relevant departments in accordance with laws and regulations, no domestic or foreign entity or individual may issue stablecoins pegged to RMB overseas.&#34; The second half of this sentence is not difficult to understand; the literal meaning is clear. The most crucial part is the first half, &#34;effectively fulfilling some of the functions of legal tender.&#34; As a criminal defense lawyer, my biggest concern is whether, in judicial practice, this will be used as a basis to consider the exchange between legal tender and stablecoins as &#34;disguised foreign exchange trading.&#34; It's important to understand that disguised foreign exchange trading constitutes the crime of illegal business operations, which can be punished with a fine of one to five times the illegal gains, and the illegal gains must be turned over to the national treasury. This provision targets OTC (over-the-counter) trading. The key is whether the implementation will be distorted, deviate from, or overstretched. If the measures are too forceful, the risks to the entire OTC industry will surge. As we all know, OTC is an indispensable industry in the virtual currency field. Regarding RWA (Real-Time Exchange), in short, it is strictly prohibited within China, and domestic entities are strictly prohibited from engaging in it. Foreign companies and individuals are also prohibited from engaging in or providing services to domestic entities. However, a loophole has been left for engaging in it overseas. The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has issued the &#34;Regulatory Guidelines on the Issuance of Asset-Backed Securities Tokens Overseas by Domestic Assets,&#34; which will be interpreted later. 5. Compared to previous regulatory documents, Notice 2.6 devotes more space to standardizing and improving working mechanisms, strengthening risk monitoring, prevention, and handling. Firstly, it follows the &#34;8+3&#34; principle, with the central government overseeing local authorities. Eight departments, together with the Cyberspace Administration of China, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Supreme People's Court, are providing overall guidance to various regions in carrying out risk prevention and handling work related to illegal financial activities involving virtual currencies. Second, strengthen local implementation, forming a working pattern of central-local coordination and combined vertical and horizontal approaches to actively prevent and properly handle issues, and maintain economic and financial order and social stability. Third, strengthen risk monitoring, continuously improve monitoring technologies and system support, enhance cross-departmental data analysis and sharing, establish and improve information sharing and cross-verification mechanisms, and ensure that provincial governments fully utilize local monitoring and early warning mechanisms. Local financial management departments, together with branches and agencies of the State Council's financial management departments, as well as departments such as cyberspace administration and public security, should effectively coordinate online monitoring, offline investigation, and fund monitoring to establish a rapid response mechanism for efficient and accurate identification, investigation, and handling. Technology companies may be poised for a boom in business. Fourthly, strengthen the management of financial, intermediary, and technology service institutions, and prohibit the inclusion of virtual currencies and related financial products in the scope of collateral. Strengthen the management of internet information content and access, and provide technical support and assistance for related investigations and investigative work. Strengthen the registration and advertising management of business entities. Continue to rectify virtual currency &#34;mining&#34; activities. Close existing ones and strictly prohibit new ones. Severely crack down on related illegal financial activities, and transfer those suspected of crimes to judicial organs for handling according to law. Severely crack down on illegal and criminal activities related to virtual currencies and the tokenization of real-world assets, such as fraud, money laundering, illegal business operations, pyramid schemes, and illegal fundraising, as well as related illegal and criminal activities carried out under the guise of virtual currencies and the tokenization of real-world assets. 6. Domestic entities conducting related business overseas are inherently subject to certain restrictions. First, they cannot issue virtual currencies, even overseas. Second, domestic entities engaging in RWA (Real-Time Warranty) should be subject to regulation according to the principle of &#34;same business, same risk, same rules.&#34; Third, overseas subsidiaries and branches of domestic financial institutions providing RWA services overseas must comply with certain requirements; this is a loophole, but it must be clear that this loophole is reserved for financial institutions. 7. Compared to previous regulatory policies, the format of Notice 2.6 adds &#34;legal liability,&#34; the literal meaning of which is not complicated and will not be interpreted in detail.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>2026 年 2 月 6 日，原本被認為是春節前的普通一天，比特幣在早晨暴跌，跌至接近 60,000 美元的低點。當天晚上，包括中國人民銀行、國家發展和改革委員會、工業和信息化部、公安部、市場監管總局、國家金融監管總局、中國證券監督管理委員會和國家外匯管理局在內的八個部門聯合發佈了《進一步防範和處置虛擬貨幣相關風險的通知》（銀髮〔2026〕42 號，以下簡稱 “2.6 通知”）。&#34;2.6&#34;註定將載入虛擬貨幣的歷史，似乎為此次劇烈下跌提供了理由。1. 與之前的監管文件如 94 公告和 924 通知不同，2.6 通知在最後增加了一條條款：本通知自發布之日起生效。中國人民銀行及其他十個部門發佈的《進一步防範和處置虛擬貨幣交易和投機風險的通知》（銀髮〔2021〕237 號）在此被廢止。這是虛擬貨幣監管歷史上首次廢止之前的監管文件。在去年年底的金融街論壇上，中國人民銀行行長潘功勝特別提到穩定幣和 RWA，並強調自 2017 年以來的監管政策仍然有效。現在，隨着八個部門聯合發佈文件廢止 “924 通知”，早期的監管文件 “94 公告” 自然也應當被廢止。從標題來看，924 通知的標題為《進一步防範和處置虛擬貨幣交易和投機風險的通知》，強調交易和投機的風險。而 2.6 通知則簡單總結為 “與虛擬貨幣相關的風險”，範圍顯著更廣。此外，關於發佈機構，與涉及十個部門的 924 通知相比，2.6 通知缺少了最高人民檢察院和最高人民法院，這讓人頗感意外。自 2024 年以來，最高人民檢察院和最高人民法院相繼介入，以調查處理虛擬貨幣案件為切入點，開展了大量工作。在我看來，關於處理虛擬貨幣案件的法律政策可能是最早出台的。中央政法委員會的工作會議明確表示需要對虛擬貨幣進行前瞻性研究和立法，使得最高人民法院和最高人民檢察院缺席此次會議更顯得令人驚訝。然而，2 月 6 日的通知也明確指出，“在與中國網絡空間管理局、最高人民法院和最高人民檢察院達成一致，並經國務院批准後”，這一表述在以往的虛擬貨幣監管文件中並未出現。具體原因和意圖目前難以解讀和分析。我的理解是，雖然相關內容原則上達成一致，但具體措辭可能尚未最終確定。3. 與以往聲明相比，2.6 通知最大的突破在於首次明確指出 “與法定貨幣掛鈎的穩定幣有效地履行了法定貨幣在流通中的某些功能。未經相關部門依法批准，任何國內外實體或個人不得在境外發行與人民幣掛鈎的穩定幣。” 這句話的後半部分不難理解，字面意思清晰。最關鍵的部分是前半部分，“有效履行了法定貨幣的某些功能”。作為一名刑事辯護律師，我最擔心的是，在司法實踐中，這是否會被用作將法定貨幣與穩定幣之間的交換視為 “變相外匯交易” 的依據。需要理解的是，變相外匯交易構成非法經營罪，可處以一至五倍的非法所得罰款，且非法所得必須上繳國庫。該條款針對的是場外交易（OTC）。關鍵在於實施是否會被扭曲、偏離或過度解讀。如果措施過於強硬，整個 OTC 行業的風險將激增。眾所周知，OTC 是虛擬貨幣領域不可或缺的行業。關於 RWA（實時擔保），簡而言之，在中國境內是嚴格禁止的，國內實體被嚴格禁止參與。外國公司和個人也被禁止參與或為國內實體提供服務。然而，留有一個在海外參與的漏洞。中國證券監督管理委員會（CSRC）發佈了《境內資產在境外發行資產支持證券代幣的監管指引》，後續將進行解讀。5. 與以往的監管文件相比，2.6 通知在規範和完善工作機制、加強風險監測、預防和處置方面投入了更多的篇幅。首先，遵循 “8+3” 原則，由中央政府對地方進行監督。八個部門與中國網絡空間管理局、最高人民檢察院和最高人民法院共同為各地區開展與虛擬貨幣相關的非法金融活動的風險防範和處置工作提供總體指導。其次，加強地方實施，形成中央與地方協調、縱向與橫向結合的工作模式，積極防範和妥善處理問題，維護經濟金融秩序和社會穩定。第三，加強風險監測，持續改善監測技術和系統支持，增強跨部門數據分析和共享，建立和完善信息共享和交叉驗證機制，確保省級政府充分利用地方監測和預警機制。地方金融管理部門應與國務院金融管理部門的分支機構和機構，以及網絡空間管理和公安等部門有效協調線上監測、線下調查和資金監測，建立快速響應機制，以高效準確地識別、調查和處理問題。科技公司可能會迎來業務的繁榮。第四，加強對金融、中介和技術服務機構的管理，禁止將虛擬貨幣及相關金融產品納入抵押範圍。加強對互聯網信息內容和訪問的管理，為相關調查和偵查工作提供技術支持和協助。加強對商業實體的註冊和廣告管理。繼續整治虛擬貨幣 “挖礦” 活動，關閉現有的並嚴格禁止新的。嚴厲打擊相關非法金融活動，並將涉嫌犯罪的移交司法機關依法處理。嚴厲打擊與虛擬貨幣及真實世界資產代幣化相關的非法和犯罪活動，如詐騙、洗錢、非法經營、傳銷和非法募資，以及以虛擬貨幣和真實世界資產代幣化為幌子的相關非法和犯罪活動。6. 在海外開展相關業務的國內實體本質上受到一定限制。首先，他們不能發行虛擬貨幣，即使是在海外。其次，參與 RWA（實時擔保）的國內實體應根據 “同業、同風險、同規則” 的原則接受監管。第三，提供 RWA 服務的國內金融機構的海外子公司和分支機構必須遵守某些要求；這是一個漏洞，但必須明確的是，這個漏洞是為金融機構保留的。7. 與以往的監管政策相比，2.6 通知的格式增加了 “法律責任”，字面意思並不複雜，不會詳細解讀。</p>
</div>

Detailed Explanation of the "Notice on Further Preventing and Handling Risks Related to Virtual Currencies"

- 2026 年 2 月 6 日，比特幣大跌至 60,000 美元。  
- 八個部門聯合發佈《2.6 通知》，廢止此前的監管文件。  
- 新政策對虛擬貨幣風險防控及非法金融活動管理進行了強化。

關於進一步防範和處理虛擬貨幣相關風險的通知的詳細解釋