Singapore Looks to Prohibit Crypto Lending and Staking

While Indonesia has been recognized as one of the world's swiftest embracers of cryptocurrencies, it has faced a notable setback more recently, with a 60% decline in transaction volumes on local exchanges compared to the preceding year. High taxesIn a recent report by CoinDesk Indonesia, the publication speculates that the imposition of high taxes may be a pivotal factor dissuading traders and impacting the overall market dynamics. Indonesia’s tax system treats crypto assets as commodities, with the burdensome taxes arising as a direct consequence of that classification. The tax framework in Indonesia subjects crypto assets to both income tax and value-added tax (VAT), treating them akin to commodities. Leading crypto exchanges in the country reveal that the cumulative tax load on each transaction could surpass the trading fees imposed by exchanges, potentially discouraging users from engaging in crypto transactions. Oscar Darmawan, the CEO of the leading Indonesian crypto exchange INDODAX, told CoinDesk that users bear an income tax of 0.1% and a VAT of 0.11% on every crypto transaction. Additionally, exchanges are required to remit a 0.04% fee to the recently established national crypto bourse. Darmawan clarified that “this places a significant financial burden on the domestic crypto industry." expresses Darmawan in an interview with CoinDesk Indonesia, underscoring the challenges faced by the industry due to the current tax structure.Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich on PexelsAn international issueThe tax treatment of digital assets has been a bugbear for the crypto space on an international basis. In Japan, it arose last month that the country’s lawmakers were considering applying an exemption for companies from paying taxes on unrealized cryptocurrency gains. It has since transpired that such an amendment will be applied to its fiscal 2024 tax reform plan. India has applied a heavy tax burden where crypto is concerned, with a 30% tax applied to capital gains relative to the sale of crypto assets. Additionally, 1% taxation applies by way of a tax deducted at source (TDS) on crypto transactions. The use of cryptocurrency for the purchase of goods and services in the United States remains a stumbling block, given that the current tax code treats such a scenario as a taxable event. Last year, two U.S. senators attempted to address that issue, by including a $200 exemption for purchases made with cryptocurrency. Calls for crypto asset reclassificationIn response to this dilemma in Indonesia, some stakeholders within the local crypto industry advocate for a paradigm shift in the classification of crypto assets. They propose treating crypto as securities instead of commodities, anticipating that this alteration could alleviate the tax burden on users. Yudhono Rawis, the CEO of the exchange platform Tokocrypto, asserts: "Both stocks and crypto are tradable assets with profit potential … Thus, implementing the same tax regime for both these investment instruments would be more equitable and consistent." The industry anticipates regulatory changes in the near future, as crypto oversight in Indonesia is set to transition from the commodities regulator to the Financial Services Authority (OJK) in January 2025.  

Hong Kong Crypto Exchange Contemplates Sale at HK$1 Billion ValuationHong Kong’s BC Technology Group is reportedly considering the sale of its crypto platform, OSL, with a suggested valuation of approximately HK$1 billion ($128 million).Photo by Samuel Chan on UnsplashDiscussions with potential buyersThat’s according to a report published by Bloomberg on Monday. OSL holds the distinction of being one of only two exchanges alongside competitor HashKey licensed under the digital asset regulations introduced by the city of Hong Kong in June. Bloomberg cited anonymous sources familiar with the matter having revealed that BC Technology has initiated discussions with potential buyers, including industry players and funds.OSL’s platform encompasses prime brokerage, exchange services, and secure custody solutions for the cryptocurrency markets. Furthermore, OSL plays a pivotal role in facilitating financial institutions’ access to virtual asset trading. Rather than a complete sale of the company, BC Technology is considering the possibility of divesting specific parts of the business, according to these sources.It’s important to note that these deliberations are ongoing, and there is no guarantee that they will culminate in a final deal, as highlighted by the insiders. In response to an inquiry from Bloomberg News, a representative from BC Technology stated:“We are a highly transparent and regulated company. We do not comment on market rumors and speculations.”Valuable trading licenseOSL's regulatory licensing is likely to add considerably to its value. Earlier this year it emerged that digital asset sector firms were shelling out a range between HK$20 million and HK$200 million in their efforts to secure crypto trading licenses in Hong Kong.In May the company obtained Type 1, 4, and 9 licensing from Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) through its OSL Asset Management (OSLAM) business. Following the acquisition of licensing, the firm moved to launch its first fund, concentrating on blockchain, artificial intelligence (AI), and Web3 technologies.Hong Kong’s crypto hub challengesHong Kong enabled retail-level crypto trading on June 1, with the aim of further establishing the city as a hub for the cryptocurrency sector. The regulatory change enabled retail investors to trade larger tokens such as Bitcoin and Ethereum on licensed exchanges. Despite these efforts, demand for cryptocurrencies remains lackluster due to the lingering effects of last year’s wave of crypto sector bankruptcies.To compound matters, Hong Kong is also grappling with the repercussions of the JPEX exchange scandal, an unlicensed Dubai-headquartered entity that further tarnished the reputation of the digital asset industry in the region.BC Technology’s market value has shown substantial growth, surging to almost HK$1.9 billion from its low point earlier in the year. However, the company’s shares remain down by 80% from their peak in June 2021, which coincided with the cryptocurrency market’s frenzy during the pandemic.In response to market developments, OSL has withdrawn its application for a digital asset license in Singapore and it is preparing a revised submission. It’s worth noting that certain clients from Singapore are being transitioned to the exchange in Hong Kong.

Suspected Malicious Activity Drains AnySwap Tokens via Multichain ExecutorAccording to an on-chain sleuth known as Spreek, a person is using the Multichain Executor to drain tokens associated with the AnySwap bridging protocol.Multichain is a cross-chain routing network, established and maintained by a Chinese developer team. It supports in excess of 25 blockchains and more than 1,100 tokens.Photo by Marek Piwnicki on Unsplash$100 million outflowThis revelation comes after abnormal outflows of over $100 million from Multichain bridges on July 7, which were flagged by the Multichain team. Spreek’s report via Twitter on July 10 states that the Multichain Executor address has been draining anyToken addresses across multiple chains and transferring them to a new externally owned account (EOA).Evidence provided in the report includes an Ethereum transaction, 0x53ede4462d90978b992b0a88727de19afe4e96f0374aa1a221b8ff65fda5a6fe, which called the “anySwapFeeTo” method on the Multichain Router: V4 contract. This transaction resulted in approximately $15,275.90 worth of anyDAI being minted on Ethereum, sent to the Multichain Executor, burned, and exchanged for the underlying DAI backing the asset.The funds from these transactions were sent to the following address:0x1eed63efba5f81d95bfe37d82c8e736b974f477b. Similarly, on the BNB Smart Chain (BSC), the Multichain Executor used the anySwapFeeTo function to convert $208,997 worth of anyUSDC into Binance-pegged USDC and sent them to the same address. Additionally, 50.80 anyBTC, equivalent to $39,251.43 at the time, was converted into Binance-pegged Bitcoin and sent to the address.In total, approximately $263,524.33 worth of tokens were sent to this address through the anySwapFeeTo method. Spreek suggests that this behavior could be part of the protocol’s normal functioning. However, a different account engaged in similar activity the day before and ultimately sold the drained tokens, indicating malicious intent.Potential exploitSpreek theorizes that the attacker may be exploiting the anySwapFeeTo function by setting fees to an arbitrarily large amount, allowing them to drain users’ funds. The function apparently permits setting any value, enabling the address to choose the total value of the token held in that anyToken.The Multichain incident has puzzled blockchain analysts, as it remains unclear whether it resulted from an exploit or if it was simply large token-holders moving their funds between networks. The mystery began on July 7 when over $100 million worth of tokens were withdrawn from the Ethereum side of Multichain’s bridges and transferred to wallet addresses with no prior transactions. This represented the majority of funds held on each bridge.Hack or rug pullThe Multichain team labeled these withdrawals as “abnormal” and advised users to stop using the protocol. However, they have not disclosed the source or nature of the anomaly. In response to the incident, stablecoin issuers Circle and Tether froze some of the addresses involved in the suspicious transactions. Chainanalysis, a blockchain analytics firm, has commented that the incident appears more like a hack or rug pull rather than a migration.Adding to the complexity, the Multichain team has reported that their CEO is missing, and they have shut down certain bridges due to losing access to some of the network’s multi-party computation network servers. There have been various concerns relative to Multichain since May. The situation continues to evolve, with ongoing investigations and efforts to mitigate any potential damage caused by the suspected malicious activity.