Uzbekistan’s New Private Bank Joins National Crypto Card Initiative

Recognition of Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 6 has led to many crypto proponents in Asia foreseeing a positive outcome for crypto within the Asian region, and globally.Photo by Kevin Lanceplaine on UnsplashBright future for cryptoAccording to a report published by the South China Morning Post (SCMP), crypto proponents in China are expectant of a bright future for crypto both on the Chinese mainland and in Hong Kong. The mindset seems to be that a pro-crypto stance in the U.S. will lead to other jurisdictions taking a similar approach. HashKey CEO Livio Weng expressed such a view, stating:“Trump’s pro-crypto stance is expected not only to invigorate the US virtual-asset industry, but also to encourage Hong Kong to further relax its own virtual-asset policies in its quest to become a global Web3 hub.”  Prior to being elected, Trump had promised to fire Gary Gensler, who as Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has pursued a strategy of regulation by enforcement, a course of action that has been broadly criticized by crypto market participants in the United States. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse wasted no time in calling on Trump to act, and to fire Gensler. Influencing regulatory attitudesThere seems to be a consensus among commentators that the regulatory approach to crypto in the U.S. is going to become crypto-friendly. Crypto analyst Miles Deutscher suggests that “a Trump victory is a WIN for US tech innovation, as it would solidify [the United States’] status as a crypto powerhouse.” Weng believes that “this shift could also positively influence regulatory attitudes toward virtual assets in mainland China.” That view is mirrored in South Korea by KP Jang, head of Xangle Research. Jang asserts that “if Trump implements bold virtual asset policies while improving existing regulations, it is expected to accelerate regulatory reforms in Korea as well.” Sumit Gupta, CEO and co-founder of India’s largest crypto exchange, CoinDCX, outlined on X that Trump’s victory is a pivotal moment for global crypto, adding:”The direct effects of Trump’s policies might not alter India’s regulatory environment right away. However, global sentiment and investor behaviour will be influenced, eventually reaching India.” The CoinDCX CEO believes that should Trump now appoint regulatory leadership that’s crypto-positive, any resultant crypto regulatory framework adopted by the U.S. could become a blueprint for use by other nations. Gupta identified further potential upside insofar as the implementation of positive crypto policies by Trump would lead to a more attractive environment for crypto, “potentially opening up enhanced funding opportunities and partnerships for Indian startups as investors seek global growth.” Bitcoin price surgeAt the time of writing, the Bitcoin unit price is up 0.64% over the course of the past 24 hours, at $74,884. American business news channel CNBC reported that Bitcoin could reach $100,000 before Trump even takes office.  Matthew Hougan, chief investment officer (CIO) at crypto asset fund manager Bitwise, said that Trump’s election victory could herald in a “golden age of crypto,” with a friendlier regulatory environment leading to greater institutional investment and mainstream adoption.

Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the independent state agency responsible for oversight and development of the Southeast Asian nation’s capital markets, is seeking public commentary on the updated set of rules it has proposed to regulate initial coin offering (ICO) portals.  In a notice published on its website on July 18, the SEC outlined that it is seeking public comments in relation to the criteria it has established for investor communication and service provision by ICO portals as part of its proposed regulations.Photo by Alin Meceanu on UnsplashEasing knowledge test requirementsThe regulations had been approved in principle last month and put an onus on ICO portals to ensure that retail investors take a knowledge test and pass that test before they are permitted to participate in trading ICO tokens. The current regulations stipulate that retail investors must undertake knowledge tests on an ongoing three-monthly basis. The updated regulations propose that ICO portals conduct suitability tests that are sufficiently comprehensive such that the investor understands the risks associated with any potential ICO-related investment. The SEC stated that the objective is that the investor has “a risk tolerance level appropriate and in alignment with the product risk.” Instead of quarterly knowledge tests, the proposed regulations require suitability assessments to be carried out once every two years. In this way, the commission believes that it will reduce the administrative burden for ICO portals while reducing friction for the investor. It stated: “These proposed requirements are in line with regulatory practices applicable to both securities and digital asset business operators.” Jagdish Pandya, founder of blockchain venture builder BlockOn Ventures, told Decrypt that “Thailand has been a first mover for crypto regulations and the SEC has played a pivotal role in providing all regulated activities and licenses, much ahead of Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, and Vietnam in South East Asia.”  Moving past previous ICO market failuresPandya added that the proposed suitability tests would protect “amateur investors” from piling into ICOs and losing their funds like in the “old ICO scam era.” ICOs first gained significant popularity in 2017 as the crypto market started to expand. Around $6.2 billion in funding was raised by a broad range of crypto projects in that year. However, a complete lack of regulation at the time meant that the ICO marketplace was laden with outright scams. ICOs were being hyped up in pump-and-dump schemes, with investors losing most, if not all, of their funds as the fraudulent ICO promoters rug-pulled them, abandoning the projects and taking off with the ICO funding. Thailand’s existing ICO portal regulations were introduced in November 2023. The regulations require project promoters to make disclosures with regard to project creditworthiness and risk for debt-like tokens with a predetermined fixed rate of return.  Those promoting infrastructure-backed tokens, which allow the token holder to earn a revenue share from infrastructure projects, are subject to rules regarding items such as due diligence, asset valuation and issuer asset management.

The Need to Distinguish Between Security and Non-Security Virtual AssetsWith the recent enactment of the Virtual Asset User Protection Bill in South Korea, there is a need to lay out criteria for determining whether virtual assets qualify as securities, says Kim Ja-bong, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute of Finance, in his report titled “The Implications of Determining Which Virtual Assets Constitute Securities and Investor Protection” released on Saturday.Photo by Shubham Dhage on UnsplashThe implications of the Virtual Asset User Protection ActThe Virtual Asset User Protection Act — which will take effect in July of next year — aims to protect customer assets, establish regulations against unfair trading practices, and enforce penalties. Notably, it will target virtual assets that are not securities, deeming it necessary for regulators to determine if virtual assets qualify as securities or not in order to enforce the bill. Assets with characteristics of securities will fall under the jurisdiction of the Capital Markets Act.Therefore, if the Virtual Asset User Protection Act does not provide sufficient investor protection, issuers may be incentivized to issue non-security assets rather than security assets to avoid the regulations of the Capital Markets Act. This further necessitates the act of distinguishing between virtual assets that are securities versus those that are not.Determining if a virtual asset is a security or notThere are two approaches to do this, according to Kim: the passive approach, which avoids considering a virtual asset as a security whenever possible, and the active approach, which treats a virtual asset as a security whenever applicable.He argues that it is better to focus on whether an investment contract qualifies as a security if it is considered an investment contract, rather than simply selecting a specific approach.Furthermore, the nature of virtual assets renders them unbound by national borders, so it is necessary to establish assessment criteria that correspond with international standards, such as those used in the US and Europe.This is especially important because if the criteria differ from international standards, there is a risk of domestic investors suffering damages due to an issuer’s pursuit of regulatory arbitrage between countries.Equitable recognition and potential for security tokensAccording to Kim, the importance of determining whether virtual assets are securities lies in ensuring that security tokens receive the same recognition and trading treatment as traditional securities such as stocks. With such a measure, security token offerings can serve as an efficient and reliable method for raising funds. Although there may be concerns that such a regulation may hinder the development of virtual assets, it may well be an opportunity for security tokens to be qualified and trusted as high-quality financial instruments just like existing securities, Kim claims.Even for virtual assets that are not considered securities, there are many types of assets that are financial in nature, such as e-money tokens — therefore, it is necessary to actively protect investors in non-security virtual assets through financial regulations such as reinforcing disclosure obligations, which is being done in the EU through the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).Empowering regulators for enhanced investor protection and market integrityKim underscored that investor protection and healthy growth of the virtual asset market are made possible mainly through expanding regulators’ authority to protect economic interests and prevent damages. The author also suggested institutional reforms that grant regulators substantial authority, which would enhance their ability to protect investors effectively and provide compensation for damages.He added that regulators should also have the authority to enforce liability for damages or impose civil penalties for unfair trading practices conducted using classified information.