NEOPLY Receives Support from Abu Dhabi for Blockchain Expansion in UAE

Calls for Regulation of Crypto Investment Management Firms Amidst Growing ConcernsThere have been recent calls in South Korea for crypto investment management companies to be subject to the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act amidst concerns about potential regulatory blind spots negatively impacting crypto investors.Photo by Conny Schneider on UnsplashPushing for regulatory oversightKang Seong-hoo, chairman of the Korea Digital Asset Business Association (KDA) went into detail regarding the issue during a forum held by the association on Thursday to discuss the efficient use of technology and safety management in the era of the digital economy.He emphasized that dealings related to virtual asset management such as deposits, lending, and staking must be regulated by authorities under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act. This is due to the fact that crypto investment management companies are not within the purview of the Act On Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information or the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, the latter of which is set to take effect next year.The Act On Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information defines financial companies as those that provide services for selling, buying, exchanging, transferring, keeping, or managing virtual assets; or act as a broker, intermediary, or agent for these services. However, there is no mention of crypto management companies.Echoes of past crypto platform controversiesThese concerns are driven by the looming possibility of another debacle like the class-action lawsuits against crypto platforms like Haru Invest or Delio arising again as a result of regulatory gray areas. Two months ago, investors had filed a legal complaint after the two lenders unexpectedly suspended customer deposits and withdrawals, claiming that they suffered around KRW 50 billion (approximately $39 million at the time of the incident) in damages as a result.Furthermore, the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), a division under the Korean Financial Services Commission (FSC), recently stated in a report that virtual asset deposits, lending, and DeFi services do not fall under the obligations of the Act On Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information.“Given the context of the ongoing crypto winter since last year, the business model of virtual asset management companies, which is heavily reliant on arbitrage between exchanges, poses a high risk of incidents similar to the Haru Invest and Delio cases,” said Chairman Kang.“In order to ensure virtual asset user protection and market safety, authorities should promptly explore regulatory measures under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act for virtual asset management such as deposits, lending, staking, and the like.”

28 crypto service providers register with India’s FIUIn India, 28 entities providing services related to virtual digital assets (VDAs) have successfully registered with the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), the body responsible for combating money laundering in the world’s most populous country.Notable names in this list include Neblio Technologies, more commonly known as CoinDCX, Zanmai Labs, the company responsible for the WazirX crypto platform, Bitcipher Labs’ CoinSwitch, Nextgendev Solutions and Awlencan Innovations India’s Zebpay.Photo by Big G Media on UnsplashA need to register as ‘reporting entities’This information comes in response to a question posed in the Lok Sabha (India’s lower house of Parliament), where the government emphasized the significance of these entities complying with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). In March, the government had formally designated companies dealing in VDAs, crypto exchanges and related intermediaries as “reporting entities” under the PMLA.According to the notification, crypto exchanges and their intermediaries are obligated to conduct Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures for their clients and platform users. This includes maintaining KYC details, identity documents, account files and business correspondence records with clients.Offshore exchanges required to registerMinister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary mentioned that the registration process for VDA service providers catering to the Indian market is underway. Non-compliance with these regulations may result in appropriate action under the PMLA. It has been clarified that offshore crypto exchanges operating in India are required to adhere to these guidelines. Despite that, none of the 28 entities who have registered so far appear to be offshore companies.Commenting on the development via the X social media platform, Sumit Gupta, Co-Founder of CoinDCX, wrote:”Emphasizing compliance to PMLA is vital for the safety and financial integrity of Indians, as dealing with non-registered platforms exposes citizens to nefarious actors, putting their finances at risk.” . . . “It’s encouraging to witness the Government initiating actions against non-compliant offshore entities.”While steps to provide guidelines for the industry are largely positive, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has been vocal in its criticism of cryptocurrencies and calls for potential bans have cast a shadow over the industry in India. The recent collapse of prominent platforms like FTX have not been helpful, only serving to exacerbate concerns relative to India’s crypto ecosystem.The negative sentiment, coupled with an ongoing funding winter, has resulted in the closure of operations for some crypto platforms, including Pillow and WeTrade, this year. Firms like CoinSwitch and Gupta’s CoinDCX have had to reduce headcount in 2023 amid challenging market conditions.Despite these challenges, there are also positive signs. A recent report by blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis found that India has been the frontrunner more recently in terms of crypto adoption in Asia.This latest development provides guidelines where anti-money laundering processes are concerned for crypto firms in India. However, the government needs to follow through with a complete regulatory framework for the industry. The Indian courts recently declined to act on such a petition on the basis that it falls within the remit of the country’s legislature and is outside the purview of the courts.

Korean Prosecutors Say Do Kwon and His Colleagues Knew Terra Was Unviable from the BeginningKorean prosecutors claimed that Terraform Labs founder Do Kwon and the key members behind the Terra-LUNA crash were aware of the project’s unviability from the beginning, according to a file issued by the Seoul Southern District Court.©Terraform LabsTerraform Labs founders misleading Korean investorsTerraform Labs founders Do Kwon and Daniel Shin attracted 280,000 investors in Korea alone, claiming that the Terra stablecoin is a means of transaction, even though the company leaders had been notified by the financial authority that Terra-accepting businesses were impermissible. It is reported that during a search and seizure of the company, Korean prosecutors collected evidence that its employees shared such knowledge on their internal messaging system.Terra’s cross trading on crypto exchangesKnowing their cryptocurrency’s unviability, Terra executives registered its sister token LUNA for listing on major Korean crypto exchanges in May 2019. According to the Korean prosecution, they used a bot to create a trade volume of more than 800 million won in three domestic crypto exchanges by cross trading between 2019 and early last year.Cross trading is illegal in the stock market, as it is considered as an act of price manipulation, but LUNA was traded in crypto exchanges and it hasn’t been determined whether their token is a security or not. Under current Korean law, the court has to accept it as a security to punish those behind the Terra collapse.Shin’s denial of allegationsMeanwhile, Daniel Shin denied the prosecution’s allegations and argued that they had never received such a notice from the financial regulator.