ICOs are very attractive for investors and issuers. ICOs allow funding raising in exchange for cryptographically secure tokens, which are a means of paying for future projects or services. However, there is insignificant regulation of this process all over the world. Some countries have banned crypto assets; others have allowed the free use of tokens but do not give them official status. In this paper, the authors present an overview of the legal regulation of ICOs in different countries, dividing them into three groups: in the first group are the countries with developed legal norms and rules for conducting ICO, they have the subsequent circulation of tokens on their territory; in the second group are the countries that are most friendly to ICOs; the third group of countries has a wait-and-see attitude. The author connect the insufficient law regulation and risks of ICOs in different countries. The types of ICO risks are divided into three main categories: financial, technical, and analytical. The main ways to reduce these risks, depending on their types, are highlighted in this study. They are connected with the improvement of the legal regulation of the publication of a White Paper, the KYC procedure, and the involvement of escrow agents.

At present, in the era of globalization, the banking sector failure in one country can cause negative externalities for the financial institutions of other states. The fundamental problem of implementing standards based on Basel II is that these standards contribute to the development of pro-cyclicality of banking regulation. The authors emphasize the need to design such a regulatory system, which should contribute to innovative development and at the same time restrain socially dubious novelties. Therefore, the article substantiates the need to increase the size of the capital "buffer", which is intended to address the problem of improving the financial situation and increasing the financial viability of the largest banks and banking systems. This reduces risks and increases the capital "safety cushion", as well as optimizes the impact on the commercial banks behavior caused by the use of counter-cyclical capital regulation requirements. The conducted research supported the hypothesis put forward by the authors that when forming a countercyclical capital buffer it is necessary to focus on indicators of: return on assets of the banking system (ROА) and return on equity (ROE), depending on GDP growth, but this dependence does not become evident immediately, but with a time lag of 1 year. The object of the research is the banking system of Russia.