The Legal and Tax Dimension of Metaverse

Abstract

Human life changes as technology advances. The virtual universe, also known as the metaverse, is the final transition point. Unlike previous work on the Metaverse based on Second Life, the current Metaverse is based on the social values of Generation Z, with no distinction between the online and offline self. Despite the fact that Second Life is a virtual world, it has attracted significant investment and has emerged as an important venue for the marketing and branding of real-world products and services. In contrast to the previous Metaverse, integrating advanced social activities and neural network methods has necessitated a new definition for Metaverse, which is appropriate for today. In this context, the current study focuses on the Metaverse field’s expectations and concerns and its legal and tax implications. At the same time, the study will highlight the concept of the Metaverse and its relationship to the concept of the virtual world. The article also examines the legal dimensions of virtual items, primarily by looking at global practices and examples in Türkiye. The metaverse taxation process will be explained in light of the US virtual world tax decisions by considering the experiences with Second Life.

Keywords

• Metaverse
• virtual world
• taxation
• artificial intelligence
• non-fungible tokens (NFT)

Hukuksal ve Vergisel Boyutlarıyla Metaverse

Öz

Teknoloji geliştikçe insan hayatı değişime uğramaktadır. Metaverse olarak tanımlanan sanal evren ise, değişimin ulaştığı en son noktadır. Second Life’a dayanan Metaverse üzerine önceki çalışmaların aksine, mevcut Metaverse, çevrimiçi ve çevrimdışı benliklerin farklı olmadığı Z Kuşağı’nın sosyal değerine dayanmaktadır. Second life sanal bir dünya olmasına karşılık önemli yatırımları da çekmiştir ve gerçek hayattaki ürün ve hizmetlerin pazarlanması ve marka tanıtımı için önemli bir yer haline gelmiştir. Gelişmiş sosyal aktivitelerin ve sinir ağı yöntemlerinin entegrasyonu, önceki Metaverse’den farklı olarak, günümüze uygun yeni bir Metaverse tanımı gerektirir. Bu bağlamda mevcut çalışma, Metaverse alanına dair beklentileri ve endişeleri hukuksal ve vergisel boyutlarıyla ele almaktadır. Aynı zamanda Metaverse kavramı ve bu kavramın sanal dünya kavramı ile olan bağıntısı üzerinde durulmaktadır. Makale ayrıca sanal ögelerin hukuksal boyutunu çoğunlukla dünya uygulamaları yer yer Türkiye örnekleri dikkate alarak analiz etmektedir. Metaverse vergilendirme süreci Second life tecrübeleri de dikkate alınarak ABD sanal dünya vergi kararları ışığında açıklanacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Metaverse
• sanal dünya
• vergilendirme
• yapay zekâ
• takas edilemez jetonlar (NFT)

Kaynakça

1. Analytica, O. (2022). Metaverse adoption will multiply cybersecurity risks. Expert Briefings. google scholar
2. Barlow, J. P. (2019). A declaration of the independence of cyberspace. Duke L. & Tech. Rev., 18(5). google scholar
3. Bartle, R. A. (2004). Virtual worldliness: What the imaginary asks of the real. NYL Sch. L. Rev., 49(19). google scholar
4. Belk, R., Humayun, M., & Brouard, M. (2022). Money, possessions, and ownership in the metaverse: NFTs. cryptocurrencies, web3 and wild markets. Journal of Business Research, 153, 198-205. google scholar
5. Camp, B. T. (2007). Play’s the thing: A theory of taxing virtual worlds. The Hastings LJ, 59(1). google scholar
6. Duncan, I., Miller, A., & Jiang, S. (2012). A taxonomy of virtual worlds usage in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 949-964. google scholar
7. Hagerty, P. (2012). The metaverse pioneers and the colonization of OpenSimulator. Metaverse Creativity (new title: Virtual Creativity), 2(1), 97-114. google scholar
8. Han, M. L., Kwak, B. I., & Kim, H. K. (2022). Cheating and detection method in massively multiplayer online role-playing game: Systematic literature review. IEEE Access. google scholar

9. Holmberg, K., & Huvila, I. (2008). Learning together apart: Distance education in a virtual world. First Monday. google scholar
10. Honey, M., Connor, K., Veltman, M., Bodily, D., & Diener, S. (2012). Teaching with Second Life®: Hemorrhage management as an example of a process for developing simulations for multiuser virtual environments. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 8(3), e79-e85. google scholar
11. Jarmon, L., & Sanchez, J. (2008). The educators coop: A virtual world model for real world collaboration. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 45(1), 1-10. google scholar
12. Kaney Jr, J. D. (1980). Federal income taxation of exchanges in partition of commonly owned property: Realization vs. realism. Fla. St. UL Rev., 8, 629. google scholar
13. Kasiyanto, S., & Kilinc, M. R. (2022). The legal conundrums of the metaverse. Journal of Central Banking Law and Institutions, 1(2), 299-322. google scholar
14. Kim, J. (2021). Advertising in the metaverse: Research agenda. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 21(3), 141-144. google scholar
15. Kurbanoğlu, S. (1996). Sanal gerçeklik: Gerçek mi, değil mi?. Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 10(1), 21-31. google scholar
16. Lederman, L. (2007). Stranger than fiction: Taxing virtual worlds. NYUL Rev., 82, 1620. google scholar
17. Llewelyn, G. (2006). Crowdsourcing in second life. Gwyneth Llewelyn’s essays on Second Life® socio-economic issues. google scholar
18. Mandal, T., Sağır, A. B., Öztürk, M. N. A., Uysal, M. Y., Külekçi, M. ve Büyükakıncı, B. Y. (2022). Metaverse: sanal dünyadan gerçek gizlilik ve güvenlik problemlerine. İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4(2), 100-106. google scholar
19. McArdle, G., & Bertolotto, M. (2012). Assessing the application of three-dimensional collaborative technologies within an e-learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(1), 57-75. google scholar
20. McFarlane, B. (2022). Property: Duties, diversity, and limits. King's Law Journal, 33(1), 23-33. google scholar
21. Minocha, S., Tran, M., & Reeves, A. J. (2010). Conducting empirical research in 3d virtual worlds: Experiences from two projects in Second Life. Journal For Virtual Worlds Research, 3(1). google scholar
22. Mutluoğlu, D. (2020). Kripto para birimleri ve suçtan kaynaklanan malvarlığı değerlerini aklama suçu. google scholar
23. Nejaim, B., & Novikov, I. (2022). On the digital singularity: Recognising virtual property through the eyes of new jurisprudence over the conflicts of digital goods. International Journal of Law in Changing World, 1(1), 62-75. google scholar
24. Park, S. M., & Kim, Y. G. (2022). A metaverse: taxonomy, components, applications, and open challenges. IEEE access, 10, 4209-4251. google scholar
25. Rambus (2017) Smart cities: Threat and countermeasures. Erişim adresi: https://www.rambus.com/iot/smart-cities/ google scholar
26. Rainey, B. P. (2009). The unlawful internet gambling enforcement act of2006: Legislative problems and solutions. J.Legis., 35(2), 147-169. google scholar
27. Ream, J., Chu, Y., & Schatsky, D. (2016). Upgrading blockchains: Smart contract use cases in industry. Retrieved December, 12, 2017. google scholar
28. Sherman, W. R., & Craig, A. B. (2003). Understanding virtual reality. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kauffman. google scholar
29. Szabo, N. (1994). Smart contracts. google scholar
30. Tevetoğlu, M. (2021). Ethereum ve akıllı sözleşmeler. İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(1), 193-208. google scholar
31. Todd, E., Gates, T., Avraham, N., Bartnick, W., Zanczak, H., Aw, C., Bruce, K. & Splittgerber, A. (2021). Data protection and privacy. In R. Smith (Ed.), Reed Smith Guide to the Metaverse (pp. 41-46). google scholar
32. Yüksel, H. (2022). Yeni medya ve dijital dönüşümün ötesi “metaverse”. Kafkas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 29, 237-258. google scholar