Bithumb’s No-Trading-Fee Policy Proves Effective in Boosting User Engagement

Terraform Labs Co-Founder Indicted in South KoreaTen individuals linked to the Terra USD collapse have been indicted in South Korea on charges associated with violations of capital markets law, including the Co-Founder of Terraform Labs, Daniel Shin. That’s according to a report published by Bloomberg on Tuesday.©Pexels/Donald TongTwo of the ten were charged with breach of trust while the remaining eight, including Shin, were charged with illegal trading. Prosecutors confirmed that all of the charged individuals have ties to Terraform Labs, the company responsible for developing the Terra protocol, and the Terra USD (TUSD) stablecoin and Luna cryptocurrency which collapsed in 2022.It’s understood that the ten individuals were also accused of illegal disclosure of clients’ payment information and the embezzlement of corporate funds. The authorities have claimed that the ten individuals are responsible for causing “astronomical damage” to investors. They estimate that all ten of them took 463 billion won, around $347 million, in profit.Business interestsShin co-founded Terraform Labs with Do Kwon in 2018. He left the project in 2020, long before its spectacular failure in 2022. However, he would have profited considerably from the project. Prior to co-founding Terraform Labs, Shin had founded lifestyle commerce company TMON in 2010. Two years later, he founded venture capital and private equity firm, Fast Track Asia while in 2017 he was a founding partner of another venture capital and private equity firm, Bass Investment.He remains involved in all of those other businesses. Furthermore, Shin founded integrated payments firm PortOne Global in January 2020, immediately upon exiting Terraform Labs. He remains CEO of PortOne Global today.$185 million frozenOn Tuesday, the Seoul Southern District Prosecutor’s Office outlined that it had frozen assets to the value of 246.8 billion won, approximately $185 million, belonging to those that it has brought charges against. South Korean authorities had previously acknowledged a difficulty in seizing assets related to Terraform Labs Co-Founder Do Kwon. It’s understood that a transfer of funds from Do Kwon to a prominent South Korean law firm is being investigated. Otherwise, the search for funds has led them overseas where it’s understood that Do Kwon purchased real estate in his mother’s name in the United States in a bid to evade asset confiscation.Free pending trialShin remains at liberty pending trial. Back in December, a South Korean court turned down a request to arrest him on the basis that he wasn’t likely to destroy evidence and wouldn’t pose a flight risk.That hasn’t proven to be the case where his former colleague Do Kwon is concerned. Do Kwon fled to Montenegro where he was recently charged with having entered the country on false documents. Both South Korea and the United States have formally applied for his extradition. In the United States, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has sued both Do Kwon and Terraform Labs. Terraform Labs subsequently submitted a request to the courts in the US to dismiss the lawsuit, claiming the SEC lacks jurisdiction.

QCP Capital: Bitcoin Has $34K Price PotentialBitcoin’s potential for a significant price rally toward $34,000 has been discussed recently by analysts at QCP Capital, the Singapore-headquartered crypto asset trading firm. Despite Bitcoin’s recent lack of major volatility catalysts, QCP’s analysis suggests that a classic support rebound might trigger the return of the highest Bitcoin prices in over a year.Photo by Kanchanara on UnsplashCrucial price action time-frameAccording to QCP Capital’s latest market update on Tuesday, the upcoming weeks are poised to be crucial for Bitcoin’s price action. The cryptocurrency has been range-bound for months, leaving market observers speculating about the emergence of a new market trend.QCP Capital highlights September as a pivotal month due to the completion of a rising wedge pattern that started during the end of the 2022 bear market. This pattern has guided Bitcoin’s price movement, with the wedge reaching its first termination point at the beginning of September. The specific level of interest is $29,300, which aligns with the current focal point of the Bitcoin spot price.Rally potentialThe analysis ponders whether there will be a sharp rally that pushes the price to the $34,000 resistance level. This scenario has occurred three times this year, as the price kissed the support trendline. The report acknowledges that it might take a few more quiet weeks before the outcome becomes clear. The analysts expressed their intention to buy back their end of September short calls and anticipate going long on end of December volatility in due course.QCP Capital’s perspective aligns with other optimistic views on Bitcoin’s short-term price strength. Some projections even suggest that the 2023 Bitcoin bull market might return by October, although the market sentiment is varied, with some cautioning about the possibility of new lows before a broader recovery.Macroeconomic trendsTurning to macroeconomic trends, QCP Capital indicates that significant change is not on the immediate horizon, echoing the status quo in the crypto space. Comparing the current situation to the compressed trading environment of the crypto winter in 2018 and 2019, the analysis suggests that a macroeconomic shift would be required to reinvigorate the market, similar to what has happened in the past.Bitcoin’s volatility has reached historic lows, as illustrated by data just published by on-chain market intelligence firm, Glassnode. While a game-changing macro environment shift isn’t imminent, there are short-term catalysts on the crypto calendar for the upcoming months.These include events like Mt. Gox creditor payouts, the GBTC vs. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit, potential SEC decisions on Blackrock/Fidelity’s Bitcoin spot ETF applications, and potential news related to centralized crypto exchanges and stablecoins.The September deadline for comments on the initial Bitcoin spot price exchange-traded fund (ETF) applications is particularly noteworthy, as it’s widely seen as a turning point for the industry. Europe’s first Bitcoin spot ETF, which began trading on Tuesday, is being custodied by Fidelity Investments, marking another step in the maturation of the cryptocurrency market.

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.