Definition of Digital Shadow Economy †Free Samples to Students

Question: Discuss about the Definition of Digital Shadow Economy. Answer: Introduction: As a student of Finance, the topic was selected for the study as Bitcoin is the current digital currency that serves as decentralized financial open source software as well as providing an optimal combination of cryptography, peer-to-peer networking, digital encryption and online transactions (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). After taking Finance Stream, students are needed to carry out research that they find it interesting. To that, Bitcoin was a recent topic that was quite interesting and informative at the same time where Financial and technical knowledge is essential to understand the concept in a better way. It is for this reason why the topic on Bitcoin was selected to gain insights of information on how far newly digital currency helps the financial economy as a whole. Due to lack of financial resources, it was not possible to conduct the research for the entire economy on the usage of Bitcoin, so German economy had been selected to see how their economy thinks of Bitcoin as a digital currency in an effective way (Devine, Egger-Sider Rojas, 2015). To find out the perceptions of individuals on what they think about Bitcoin To determine the impact of Bitcoin on the German economy (Devine, Egger-Sider Rojas, 2015) The main aim of the research study is to explore the use of Bitcoin so that there is future technological advancement, free trade transactions as well as storing of monetary sums in a safe repository in a well-designed format (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). Literature Review As rightly put forward by Bhme et al., (2015), Bitcoin can be present at its nascent stage where study regarding the topic is quite limited by nature. This currency had been evolving over past decades in and across the globe based on the regulations as well as value that depends upon exchange rate fluctuations. According to Bouri et al., (2014), the architecture of Bitcoin has even margin of error where it lead to fraudulent activities as it is treated as an unavoidable and inevitable factor. This digital currency in real actually uses the concept of global digital single currency where it allows for cryptographic proof to solve any problem of over-printing of traditional money as it contributes towards inflation rates and other benefits. Bitcoin help in keeping record of transactions that is known as block chain that acts as a public ledger. There are mainly four types of variables that are identified in the ecosystem such as regulation, accessibility as well as security and acceptance (O'brien Williams, 2016). The present research study determines on the research of an economy and analyzing the impact of Bitcoin that best fit on it (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). The researcher had limited resources and that is the reason why economy of Germany had been selected for the present case study. Bitcoin is a virtual currency that had been recognized by the German Finance Ministry as a unit of account that is used for tax as well as trading activities in the country. Here, Bitcoin cannot be only treated as e-money or a foreign currency as the Finance Ministry is of the opinion that Bitcoin is a financial instrument that comes under German banking rules. It is private money that can be utilized in multilateral cleaning circles (Garcia et al., 2014). A member of the Finance Committee of German had some legal classification of bitcoins where he was of the opinion that competition should prevail in the production of money and there should be scheme present to denationalize money (Wonglimpiyarat, 2016). It is a known fact that Bitcoin is a digital currency that helps the users for exchanging online credits for goods as well as services. None of the central bank issue Bitcoin because this digital currency can only be created online by the help of computer for completing the tough tasks that is known as mining. 1 Bitcoin is worth of over $119 (Devine, Egger-Sider Rojas, 2015). According to new ruling, the German Authorities came with a strategy and prepared regulations on how to tax Bitcoin transactions. In one of the German newspaper (Die Welt), it was clearly highlighted on how government had stated regarding the legal classification of Bitcoin that directly reveals commercial profits being raised by use of currency that may be taxable. The research Director at Forex.com in one of the News channel shows (CNBC) said that classification by the German Government had given Bitcoin legitimacy to be treated as a settlement currency in this economy and this can be considered to be putting large step forward for the Bitcoin movement (Vigna Casey, 2016). It can be stated that the success of Bitcoin majorly lies on regulatory fair treatment as well as existence of other currencies (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). It can be classified as negative aspect if Bitcoin is treated to be a criminal tool that can be used for money laundering purpose or making any transactions possible that are not legal or authorized. The regulation of Bitcoin had been one of the interesting topics from past couple of years where it can be seen that several companies are getting engaged or associated with Bitcoin as part of an inquiry into the trade activities of the industry that involves Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Homeland Security for investigating the currency (Ruan, 2017). From the three types of research philosophy, it becomes essential for the researcher to select the best philosophy according to the research study (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). In this study, researcher will be using Positivism philosophy as the research collect quantitative data for the study. Interpretivism research philosophy cannot be used for the study as qualitative data are not collected in the study and does not deal with emotional side of human mankind. Same with the case with realism research philosophy as it cannot be used for the present research study because mixed collection method is not used in the study (Maddox et al., 2016). From the two types research approach, it becomes essential for the researcher to select the best approach according to the research study. In this particular study, researcher will be using deductive approach where data will be analyzed and drawn conclusions at the end. Inductive approach is not applicable in the study as innovative approach is not applied in the study as Bitcoin is a known concept and analysis had been done to highlight the importance of Bitcoin in financial economy (Remeikiene, Gaspareniene Schneider, 2017). Data collection methods and Data Analysis There are three ways by which data can be collected and these are quantitative data collection methods, qualitative data collection methods and mixed methods. Quantitative data collection methods mean use of questionnaire or survey analysis to collect the data from the respondents or participants (Hendrickson, Hogan Luther, 2016). Qualitative data collection mean use of interview and thematic analysis to collect the required data needed for the current study. The present research study uses exploratory research design by conducting questionnaire method that is based on purposive sampling technique where samples are divided into two broad groups of society (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). The first group is corporate or business participants or respondents and the second group is the individual respondents or participants. Based on the perception of Bitcoin, the total sample participants had been divided into parts such as person who are pro- Bitcoin, person who are anti- Bitcoin and person who are neural towards Bitcoin and lastly person who have no idea or unaware of Bitcoin (Gimigliano, 2016). The sample will be collected by the researcher by distributing detailed questionnaire to the respondents. The questionnaire are prepared to aware people about Bitcoin and designed as such to highlight the identified variables (Devine, Egger-Sider Rojas, 2015). The mode of survey that will be used by the researcher is email as well as telephonic discussions or it can be personal face-to-face meetings in order to collect data. This form of interaction help in reducing the overall cost of the research and require less time. This research instrument (survey) will be selected by the researcher for getting access to effective data as well as help in analyzing purpose (Franklin, 2016). The survey method will be adopted by the researcher for assessing the awareness of digital currencies such as Bitcoin in Germany and getting information about the opinion of professionals that operates in economic and financial fields on the impact of Bitcoin on the financial economy with respect to Germany as well as gauges with the responses of different variables used in the study such as accessibility, acceptance, regulations and security. It is important to gather information to understand the market requirements in Germany and compliance of Bitcoin to it (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). The sample size is 70 that will be divided equally between two groups (business groups and individual groups). The questions will be asked to the person who is economic professional, financial professional as well as multinational enthusiasts and executives of financial firms in Germany. It is even noted that some of the industries in Germany have already adopted use of Bitcoin by accepting the mode of currency as it is surveyed as well as assessed based on experience and judgment (Devine, Egger-Sider Rojas, 2015). In the first group of users (corporate or business users), questions are asked to top level Executives as well as managers of companies that are based in Germany. The second group of users (individual users) where the user forms the market base of Bitcoin. These users do not have proper understanding of Bitcoin. It is for this reason questions are designed in a way that starts with simple questions. The questions attempt to find the awareness among the people about Bitcoin first in terms of online transactions (Ciaian, Rajcaniova Kancs, 2016). The questionnaire had been divided into two broad sections that include Section A with recording time spent by the respondents on internet, purpose of it as well as frequency of using online transaction facilities. In section B, the questions attempts to find out level of awareness among the individual about Bitcoin. The questionnaires will be circulated by using communication channels such as Emails and other social networking sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn (Devine, Egger-Sider Rojas, 2015). Reference List Bhme, R., Christin, N., Edelman, B., Moore, T. (2015). Bitcoin: Economics, technology, and governance.The Journal of Economic Perspectives,29(2), 213-238. Bouri, E., Molnr, P., Azzi, G., Roubaud, D., Hagfors, L. I. (2017). On the hedge and safe haven properties of Bitcoin: Is it really more than a diversifier?.Finance Research Letters,20, 192-198. Ciaian, P., Rajcaniova, M., Kancs, D. A. (2016). The economics of BitCoin price formation.Applied Economics,48(19), 1799-1815. Devine, J., Egger-Sider, F., Rojas, A. (2015). The Evolving Impact of the Invisible Web: Exploring Economic and Political Ramifications.Journal of Web Librarianship,9(4), 145-161. Franklin, M. (2016). A PROFILE OF BITCOIN CURRENCY: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY.International Journal of Business Economics Perspectives,11(1). Garcia, D., Tessone, C. J., Mavrodiev, P., Perony, N. (2014). The digital traces of bubbles: feedback cycles between socio-economic signals in the Bitcoin economy.Journal of the Royal Society Interface,11(99), 20140623. Gimigliano, G. (Ed.). (2016).Bitcoin and Mobile Payments: Constructing a European Union Framework. Springer. Hendrickson, J. R., Hogan, T. L., Luther, W. J. (2016). The political economy of bitcoin.Economic Inquiry,54(2), 925-939 Maddox, A., Singh, S., Horst, H., Adamson, G. (2016). An ethnography of Bitcoin: Towards a future research agenda.Australian Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy,4(1). O'brien, R., Williams, M. (2016).Global political economy: Evolution and dynamics. Palgrave Macmillan. Remeikiene, R., Gaspareniene, L., Schneider, F. G. (2017). The definition of digital shadow economy.Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 1-22. Ruan, K. (2017). Introducing cybernomics: A unifying economic framework for measuring cyber risk.Computers Security,65, 77-89. Vigna, P., Casey, M. J. (2016).The age of cryptocurrency: how bitcoin and the blockchain are challenging the global economic order. Macmillan. Wonglimpiyarat, J. (2016). Technological Change of the Innovation Payment System.International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management,13(04), 1650014.