Much has been discussed in the legal world on the subject of the new “digital currencies” or virtual assets, i.e., crypto-currencies, the much-mentioned Bitcoins, as well as NFTs (Non-fungible Tokens) [the latter as a “token” or cryptographic symbol]. We will take the generic reference to “digital currencies” as a reference to “currency of exchange in commerce” – whether this asset represents a true digital currency (with an asset value) or another virtual token that also has an asset value.
In the contractual sphere, this type of challenge has already been posed for the purposes of civil law, e.g., when a service provider renders his work with a consideration, in full or in part, in crypto-currencies, or in exchange for an NFT. With the special information duties that may inform this provision, the intensity of which will vary, if not better understood, according to the sector in which the provision is made and the knowledge specific to the professional activity.
In the labor field, more doubts arise with regard to the worker’s remuneration. We begin by saying that the PCA has proven to be somewhat conservative in this regard, by dismissing these “means of payment” as remuneration (and even as remuneration in kind).
In theory, we can accept the payment of remuneration as digital currency, in a parceled manner. Let us reflect as follows, for future discussion:
- A limited admission (partial payment in digital currency), safeguarding an RMMG (the one corresponding to the guaranteed minimum monthly remuneration should be guaranteed to the worker, as “normal currency”);
- Being paid as remuneration in kind.
Articles 259 and 276, both of the CT, cannot “escape” the present discussion. It should be noted that there seems to be little doubt that payments may occur immaterially (or digitally). And that, regarding personal needs, there doesn’t seem to be much doubt when a worker can, in the abstract, have his own market or business in the meta-verse, or if he engages in international auctions operated online. And if the worker transacts on the international market, can he not always convert this money? What if the worker, aware of the risks, risks saving and betting for a future market (to be regulated) domestically?
It is also true that the tax and contributory implications (or, rather, the absence of abuse or fraud against the law) should not be overlooked in the present scolium. We will wait for future developments.
We will be watching closely.
Tiago Sequeira Mousinho @ DCM Littler
