According to CoinDesk, the analysis suggests that Libra is not a cryptocurrency. The importance of the definition will influence the final use case and regulatory treatment, and may also change investors' perceptions of future stable currencies and blockchain-based securities. The only thing Libra has with cryptocurrencies is moving across the blockchain. It differs from its stable currency in that it is linked to a basket of bank deposits and short-term government securities. By definition, assets supported by securities are also securities. Libra is more like an ETF than a stable currency supported by legal currency. Even without mentioning “securities,” regulators’ attitudes toward stable currencies remain unresolved. If Libra is classified as a security, its use in trading will involve the sale of the security, as well as capital gains or losses. The impact on taxation may not be significant. The main impact is that it provides a glimpse of the possible forms of new asset classes. The use of securities as a payment mechanism is innovative and opens up many potential use cases. The necessary stable value does not mean a limited increase, as the issuance of new shares as a value-linked dividend can remain pegged and provide returns to the holder. One algorithm does not let the stock price rise, but instead issues more stocks, and the stock price falls to destroy some stocks. Wealth will fluctuate and stock prices will remain stable. The financial friction of using securities as a payment is not a problem for the organization because it has a back office that is proficient in dealing with the problem. Another idea is the idea of a basket of money and government debt-backed securities. We can see the emergence of custom securities to hedge the issuer's currency risk.