Daehong and Animoca Brands Partner to Leverage NFTs in Expanding Web3 Projects

Crypto Winter Halves Korean Bank Fee ProfitsLast year, Korean banks collected only half the amount in fees from crypto exchanges compared to the previous year, according to Korean news agency News1.©Pexels/PixabayDeclining bank fee profitsFiles submitted by the Korean Financial Services Commission to Yun Chang-hyun, a member of the ruling People Power Party, revealed that the five major Korean crypto exchanges paid 20.4 billion KRW (~$15.6 million) in fees to banks last year, which is a 49.4% decrease from the previous year’s 40.3 billion KRW (~$30.7 million). These exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit, and Gopax) have established agreements with banks to hold real-name bank accounts, which is a legal requirement for exchanges that wish to conduct trades in Korean won.Banks that have provided real-name accounts to crypto exchanges saw an increase in fee profits from 2019 to 2021. However, due to a decline in market sentiment last year, trade volume decreased, resulting in a reduction of bank fees. Last year’s crypto winter is attributable to various factors, including uncertainties in the global economy and collapses of crypto enterprises such as Terraform Labs and FTX.Fees by exchangesIn terms of fees paid to banks by exchanges last year, the largest exchange, Upbit, paid 13.9 billion KRW (~$10.6 million) in fees to Kbank, a mobile banking service provider. Bithumb and Coinone paid 4.9 billion KRW (~$3.7 million) and 989 million KRW (~$750,000) in fees to NH Bank, respectively. It is worth noting that Coinone switched its bank from NH Bank to Kakao Bank last November, paying 72 million KRW (~$55,000) to Kakao Bank in the fourth quarter. Korbit paid 486 million KRW (~$370,000) and 19 million KRW (~$14,500) to Shinhan Bank and Jeonbuk Bank, respectively. Gopax partnered with Jeonbuk Bank to obtain its real-name accounts in April last year.Lawmaker Yun said it was apparent that partnerships were being forged between only a handful of banks and crypto enterprises. Current regulations have to be reviewed to encourage more banks to participate in various blockchain businesses, he added.

The South Korean Financial Services Commission (FSC) made an official announcement on Friday (KST) stating that "domestic securities firms brokering spot bitcoin ETFs that are listed on overseas markets may be considered a violation of the government's stance on virtual assets and the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act." This stance refers to a press release published on Dec. 13, 2017 that outlined the government’s conclusion that virtual assets must be dealt with carefully.Photo by Lauren Seo on UnsplashFuture possibilityHowever, this statement is not to be interpreted as a complete dismissal of the possibility that South Korea could adopt the ETF. The agency added that it would look into the issue thanks to a more stable regulatory landscape sweeping the country following the implementation of regulations on virtual assets like the Virtual Asset User Protection Act. Authorities are also taking into consideration the fact that other countries like the U.S. are adopting a more open stance. Market downturnFollowing the announcement, stocks related to the ETF in the South Korean market – which had surged on the news of a spot bitcoin ETF listing on the U.S. stock market a day ago – saw share prices drop within a day. As of 10:04 a.m. on Friday, Woori Technology Investment was trading at KRW 7,650 ($5.82), down 4.61 percent from the day before, and Hanwha Investment & Securities was down 9.09 percent to KRW 4,000. Both of these firms hold stakes in Dunamu, the operator of South Korea's largest cryptocurrency exchange Upbit.

Hong Kong Pressing Banks to Facilitate Crypto ClientsHong Kong’s banking regulator is urging banks, including HSBC and Standard Chartered, to onboard crypto exchanges as clients, despite increasing regulatory scrutiny of the industry in the United States.That’s according to a report published by the Financial Times (FT) on Wednesday. The FT cited three people who it claims are familiar with the matter, together with a letter seen by the publication as the basis for the assertion.Photo by Ansel Lee on PexelsChallenging crypto banking reticenceAt a recent meeting, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) questioned these UK-based lenders, together with the Bank of China, about their reluctance to accept crypto exchanges as customers, according to sources familiar with the matter. The HKMA emphasized that due diligence on potential clients should not create unnecessary burdens, particularly for those seeking opportunities in Hong Kong. While banks do not have a ban on crypto clients, concerns over potential money laundering and illegal activities have made them cautious.The pressure faced by banks highlights the challenges Hong Kong is facing in establishing itself as a global hub for the crypto industry, especially in light of previous high-profile collapses, such as the implosion of FTX. However, the HKMA is encouraging banks to overcome their reservations, as the regulator believes there is resistance from senior executives who adhere to traditional banking mindsets.The enthusiasm of some Hong Kong officials for the sector is evident as pro-Beijing lawmaker Johnny Ng invited Coinbase and other crypto exchanges to set up operations in the city following the recent SEC lawsuit against Binance and Coinbase.Caught between opposing forcesBanks in Hong Kong find themselves walking a fine line between supporting the crypto industry as encouraged by the government and being cautious due to the US regulatory environment. They want to ensure the industry’s development aligns with government policies, but they are also concerned about potential anti-money laundering and know-your-customer issues.The HKMA and the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) have been vocal about their expectations, setting them apart from regulators in other jurisdictions that may be more skeptical of cryptocurrencies. Last month it emerged that crypto startups are having difficulties in establishing banking facilities in the autonomous Chinese territory. At the time, the HKMA did convene a meeting to bring parties together in order to forge a path forward.While Hong Kong has a history as a crypto center, its position weakened after Beijing’s crackdown on the industry in 2017. However, the Hong Kong government aims to reestablish the city as a hub for digital assets, having expressed its desire to provide a supportive environment for crypto-related businesses. The introduction of a new licensing regime for crypto platforms in Hong Kong is part of the government’s efforts to attract more crypto groups to the city.HSBC, Standard Chartered, and the Bank of China hold influential positions in Hong Kong as issuers of the city’s currency and have key roles in the Hong Kong Association of Banks lobby group. Standard Chartered claims that it maintains regular dialogue with regulators on various subjects, while HSBC has claimed that it is actively engaging in policies and developments within the nascent industry.