Im reading the report about crypto-asset of the European Securities and Market and market authority (ESMA) and they catalog us as:
“payment-type crypto-assets (cases 3, 4 and 6.), have no tangible value, except for the expectation they may serve as a means of exchange or payment to pay for goods or services that are external to the ecosystem in which they are built. Also, many have hybrid features or may evolve over time.”
I think the ELECTRONEUM project has to guide where the market will be regularized (without taking into account the Brexit) and they say:
The survey highlighted that most NCAs assessed that crypto-asset case 1, 2, 4 and 6 could be deemed as transferable securities and/or other types of financial instruments as defined under MiFID II. This effectively suggests that a number of crypto-assets, provided they meet the relevant conditions, may qualify as transferable securities and/or other types of financial instruments. These crypto-assets should therefore comply with the existing EU financial regulation (whose application depends on the qualification as financial instrument under MiFID II), which in turn raises the issue of the potential gaps and issues that may exist in the current rules when it comes to supervising those instruments.
I attached the link https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/esma50-157-1391_crypto_advice.pdf