Incheon Launches Blockchain Hub Center to Lead Web3 Era

HKMA Issues Warning Against Crypto Firm MisrepresentationThe Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), the central bank for the Chinese autonomous territory, has taken a stand against cryptocurrency businesses that falsely present themselves as “banks” and market their products as “deposits,” issuing a public advisory to raise awareness about the issue.Photo by Marcel Eberle on UnsplashBanking ordinance violationsIn a press release published to its website on Friday, the HKMA said that instances had arisen where crypto firms had labeled themselves as “crypto banks,” “crypto asset banks,” and “digital trading banks.” The regulatory authority underscored that such misrepresentations could be in violation of the Banking Ordinance in Hong Kong.In addition to adopting misleading bank-related titles, these crypto firms have been advertising “savings plans” as “low risk” with “high return,” potentially misleading the public into believing that these entities are authorized banks in Hong Kong, where they can securely deposit their funds.The HKMA stressed that only entities such as licensed banks, restricted license banks, and deposit-taking companies, collectively referred to as “authorized institutions” and holding a license granted by the HKMA, are legally permitted to engage in banking or deposit-taking activities in Hong Kong.Furthermore, funds held on crypto exchanges are not covered by Hong Kong’s Deposit Protection Scheme. “Under the Banking Ordinance, only licensed banks, restricted license banks and deposit-taking companies, which have been granted a license by the HKMA can carry out banking or deposit-taking business in Hong Kong,” the HKMA stated.Misuse of banking termsAny entity using the term “bank” in its business name or implying that it offers banking services in Hong Kong is committing an offense, according to the central bank. The same rule applies to any entity engaging in deposit-taking activities in Hong Kong or soliciting the public to make deposits.It’s important to note that crypto firms not officially recognized as banks in Hong Kong are not subject to the oversight of the HKMA.The HKMA advised the public to exercise caution. In cases of uncertainty regarding an entity claiming to be a bank or soliciting deposits in Hong Kong, individuals are encouraged to consult the register of authorized institutions on the HKMA’s website, and if doubts persist, it suggests that they should contact the authority via its Public Enquiry Service hotline.According to section 97 of the Banking Ordinance, only a bank or a central bank can use the term “bank” or its derivatives in its business name in Hong Kong without the written consent of the HKMA.Additionally, sections 11 and 12 of the Banking Ordinance stipulate that only entities possessing a valid banking license or recognized as authorized institutions are permitted to engage in banking or deposit-taking activities in Hong Kong. As per section 92 of the Banking Ordinance, only an authorized institution is authorized to issue advertisements inviting the public to make deposits, with certain exceptions.The HKMA’s advisory serves as a stern reminder to the crypto industry that regulatory compliance and transparency are essential, particularly when using terms associated with traditional banking, to protect the interests of the public.

HKX management has advised Hong Kong resident users of the platform to withdraw assets following the company’s decision to halt operations in Hong Kong.  The company publicized its decision on July 18, making the following statement on its website: “We would like to inform you that our management team has, after careful consideration, decided to withdraw our application for the Type 1 and Type 7 licenses under the Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571) and the virtual asset service provider license under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (Cap. 615).”Photo by Zhe ZHANG on UnsplashCompliance strugglesHKX’s exit from Hong Kong is the latest in a series of crypto exchange withdrawals from the Chinese autonomous territory. Other exchanges such as OKX, KuCoin, Gate.io and Binance had all bowed out back in May.  HKX initially applied for a Hong Kong license in February. However, like many others, the exchange failed to comply with Hong Kong’s regulatory requirements. While Hong Kong has been making a concerted effort to establish a regulatory framework and licensing system in order to create the conditions for it to become a crypto hub, it has also been grappling with making regulations strict enough to stamp out fraud in the wake of the JPEX exchange scandal. With that, it appears that many exchanges are finding the regulatory requirements difficult to live with. Originally, 24 exchanges had applied for a virtual asset trading platform (VATP) license. As it stands today, 12 of those original applicants have dropped out, with one more having its application returned with no clarity emerging as to the reason why. HKX has suspended new user registrations. The company’s management has not suggested that they will reapply for a license and reboot the service at a later stage. The company had flagged its intentions back in May, suspending trading and deposit services on May 29. OKX announced on May 24 that it was withdrawing from the Hong Kong market, citing a review of its business strategy. Around the same timeframe, Gate.io withdrew from the market in Hong Kong having failed to achieve compliance in accordance with the new licensing requirements.  Notwithstanding that outcome, the firm suggested that it planned to revamp its platform in line with the Chinese autonomous territory’s licensing requirements, and return to the market once that had been achieved. In a notice posted to its website on May 22, it stated: “Gate.HK is actively working on the aforementioned overhaul. We plan to resume our business in Hong Kong in the future and contribute to the virtual asset ecosystem after obtaining the relevant licenses.” That overhaul has yet to be completed as right now, the platform only allows the withdrawal of funds by its previous Hong Kong-based customers. Back in May 2023, Eddie Yue, the CEO of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, suggested that there would be no light touch regulation in Hong Kong. HashKey Exchange, alongside OSL, was the first business to secure licensing under the new framework. In April, HasKey CEO Livio Weng told the Financial Times that these regulations block access to overseas investors while the local market in Hong Kong isn’t very big. It emerged in recent weeks that Hong Kong regulators are reviewing whether crypto regulation is “excessively stringent.” 

Huobi Co-Founder Acquires 10 Million CRV TokensJun Du, Chinese Co-Founder of Seychelles-headquartered global crypto exchange Huobi, has recently completed the purchase of 10 million curve tokens (CRV) from Curve founder Michael Egorov.Photo by Growtika on UnsplashCurve protocol loan exposureThe transaction amounted to $4 million and is part of Egorov’s ongoing efforts to mitigate his at-risk loan exposure, a further consequence of last week’s $52 million hack of the Curve DeFi protocol.Initially, Du expressed his interest in acquiring 10 million CRV tokens at the prevailing rate of $0.40. This price aligned with multiple over-the-counter (OTC) agreements between Egorov and various cryptocurrency individuals. According to a report by The Block, Du later confirmed the purchase through a Twitter direct message, revealing that he had chosen to lock up the acquired tokens as veCRV. This lock-up mechanism grants voting rights within the Curve platform while requiring the tokens to remain locked for a specified duration.“I intend to uphold this lock-up for at least a year, with optimism for continuous improvements within the Curve ecosystem,” Du stated, highlighting his commitment to the project’s long-term growth.On his Twitter account, Du emphasized his unwavering support for Curve, drawing parallels to his past backing of BendDAO during a liquidity crisis. He clarified: “Challenges faced now are transient, and collective support will foster a stronger industry.”Alongside being a Co-Founder at Huobi, Du holds the positions of CEO at New Huo Tech, a digital asset service platform, and Co-Founder and General Partner (GP) at the Web3 fund ABCDE.Ongoing token sell-offIn actively managing liquidation risk, Egorov is persistently offloading CRV tokens to bolster his loan position, given his significant exposure. He has utilized multiple DeFi lending platforms to secure loans, predominantly employing CRV tokens as collateral to borrow stablecoins. His borrowing activity on platforms like Aave alone has involved $56 million in stablecoins against $149 million worth of CRV collateral.Egorov’s health ratings on these platforms have improved recently, hovering around 1.67 or higher. Nonetheless, there remains a lingering risk associated with potential liquidation of his positions if CRV’s price were to dip substantially. This could potentially lead to bad debt scenarios for the platforms, particularly due to the substantial proportion of CRV supply involved.Sales of 72 million CRVEgorov’s token sales have amounted to 72 million CRV, according to Nansen analyst Sandra Leow. Notable recipients of these tokens include Tron Founder Justin Sun, crypto trader “DCFGod,” and Andrew Kang, Co-Founder of Mechanism Capital.Aave Chan Initiative, an entity tied to the Aave protocol, has proposed that the Aave treasury allocate funds to purchase up to $2 million worth of CRV tokens. The intention is to lock up these tokens as veCRV for an extended period, potentially up to four years. This move is aimed at further reinforcing the stability of CRV’s market dynamics.