The interest in crypto-assets has fuelled the discussion about the viability of paying wages through this type of asset.

The use of crypto-assets as a means of salary payment is conceptually attractive in the context of multinational companies that employ many remote workers, since this mode of payment can simplify transactions: they are instantaneous, escape the possible constraints of local economies – not being subject to exchange rates and other banking costs – and retain their value anywhere in the world.

Conversely, and also on a conceptual level, there are disadvantages to consider, such as the tax framework for crypto-assets in each country and the risk of devaluation of the asset received by the employee.

Regardless of its advantages and disadvantages, the possibility of paying salaries in crypto-assets should be analysed in the context of the legal instruments in force in each country.

To summarise: Crypto-assets are digital representations of values or rights stored and traded on a blockchain network or through other DLT (distributed ledger technology). These assets can take various forms, with Bitcoin being one of the best-known. Unlike fiat currencies, there is no central authority to verify and authorise the storage and transactions of crypto-assets, and peer-to-peer payment technology is used, which does not require any intermediary, thus streamlining procedures and saving on the fees and commissions usually charged by traditional intermediaries, one of the key points of blockchain. In addition to their purpose as a medium of exchange, crypto-assets function as a mid- to long-term financial investment product.

However, the legal framework has not kept up with this rapid pace. Despite the approval of the MiCA Regulation, there is still little regulation in this area, which is reflected in various domains, including labour relations. Since crypto-assets are not legal tender, they cannot be imposed as a means of payment and therefore cannot (at least for the time being) be considered money.

In the field of labour relations, the Portuguese Labour Conditions Authority (ACT) has already had the opportunity to comment on this issue in the media, stating that ‘the system of monetary circulation does not accept deposits, payments and transactions that are supported by non-official currencies, i.e. those that are not legal tender’, therefore, under the terms of the law, remuneration should be paid in cash or non-cash benefits within the legally imposed limits.

But are crypto-assets remuneration in kind? Strictly speaking, the patrimonial nature of the remuneration does not prevent it from being made up of non-pecuniary values, but it is necessary that these can be valued in cash and that the proportion of the remuneration to be satisfied in kind –  the value of which is limited to what is current in the region –  does not exceed 50 per cent of the remuneration as a whole. Among other things and given the high fluctuation in the value of crypto-assets, it is unclear how crypto-assets could fulfil this last requirement.

Having ruled out the idea of paying the remuneration (or part of it) in crypto-assets, the question arises as to whether it is possible to pay bonuses or prizes through these instruments. As we know, in the purest of terms, prizes and bonuses have the character of an incentive, which tends not to be certain or regular, and therefore do not qualify as remuneration.

In this sense, and if no circumstances imply their qualification as remuneration, there are no grounds to prevent the payment of bonuses and prizes with crypto-assets.

Although, in the current context, it is not yet feasible to pay remuneration in crypto-assets in Portugal, it may nevertheless make sense for some companies, after weighing up the associated tax implications, to evaluate the use of crypto-assets in the payment of prizes and bonuses to their employees, which could also bring significant advantages for all parties involved.