Korean Firms Join Forces to Expand the Security Token Market

Conflict Identified as Crypto.com Trading on its Own PlatformTrading practices at Crypto.com, the Singapore-based cryptocurrency exchange, have raised questions about potential conflicts of interest within the digital assets industry.Citing a number of unnamed sources, the Financial Times (FT) made the claim in a report published on Monday.Photo by Pixabay on PexelsConflict of interestIn traditional financial markets, exchanges typically match buyers with sellers at competitive transparent prices, while market making and proprietary trading are conducted by separate private companies. However, US regulators have recently cracked down on similar activities at digital asset exchanges. Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, faced 13 charges from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including allegations of manipulative trading to inflate trading volume.The presence of internal traders at Crypto.com has not been widely known since the company’s launch in 2016. The FT’s sources claim that Crypto.com executives provided sworn statements to external trading houses denying the company’s involvement in trading activities.Employees were allegedly instructed to deny the existence of an internal market-making operation. In response to inquiries, Crypto.com denied that employees were asked to lie, stating that their internal market maker functioned similarly to third-party market makers, ensuring tight spreads and efficient markets on their platform.The majority of Crypto.com’s revenue reportedly comes from its app for retail traders, where the company acts as the counterparty for transactions and operates as a broker model. The company’s trading team hedges these positions on various venues, including their own exchange, to maintain risk neutrality. Crypto.com emphasized that their exchange provides a level playing field for institutional traders.According to insiders, Crypto.com’s proprietary trading desk engages in trading activities on the company’s exchange and other platforms, solely focused on generating profits rather than facilitating an exchange. The market making desk, on the other hand, aims to enhance liquidity on the platform.Not a revenue sourceCrypto.com defended its practices by stating that comparing trading volumes to competitors is common in the industry. It said that the company’s priority is to continuously improve order book liquidity and reduce spreads, benefiting all participants. The firm told Decrypt that trading is not a source of revenue: “While we do have some market making activity, for example, we have internal market makers for our CFTC-regulated product Up/Downs in the United States.”As a private company, Crypto.com publishes accounts in different countries, but revenue breakdown by business line is not disclosed.Closure of institutional tradingFollowing the SEC’s enforcement actions, earlier this month Crypto.com announced the closure of its exchange for institutional US traders due to limited demand in the current market landscape, effective from June 21.In any marketplace transparency and fairness are crucial. It’s fair to say that there has been some level of sharp practice among some actors in the marketplace while regulators have been lacking in getting up to speed with the emergent sector, and moving to protect consumers. With the major crypto platform failures of 2022 has come renewed interest in resolving these issues. That may make for some short-term difficulty, but in the longer term, it should mean greater protections for market participants so long as a common sense approach is pursued.

Shinhan Bank and SCB TechX Succeed in Stablecoin Remittance PilotSouth Korean banking institution Shinhan Bank, Thai Siam Commercial Bank’s tech arm SCB TechX, and a Taiwanese financial institution recently announced the successful completion of a proof-of-concept (PoC) pilot of stablecoin remittances. The PoC was built on the hashgraph consensus-based public ledger, Hedera. Hashgraph consensus is a technology that provides an alternative to the more commonly used blockchain consensus mechanisms.Photo by Lea L on UnsplashThree currenciesThe pilot test was conducted to assess the feasibility and functionality of a system involving real-time settlement and real-time foreign exchange (FX) rate integration. The test was successful in implementing these capabilities for three currencies: the Thai Baht (THB), the New Taiwan dollar (NTD), and the South Korean won (KRW). Since the PoC is compatible with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM), EVM-based stablecoins should be able to join the PoC framework without significant modifications.More efficient and affordableIn November 2021, Shinhan Bank developed this PoC on the Hedera network in collaboration with an international bank outside Korea, employing stablecoins for cross-border remittances. The success of the subsequent pilot test this year represents a major achievement in the pursuit of more efficient and affordable cross-border payments, especially given that the financial industry has been increasingly recognizing the transformative possibilities of blockchain and distributed ledger technology.These banks expect that this stablecoin solution will allow individuals and organizations to conduct transactions in locally denominated stablecoins, benefiting from remarkably low fees.Kim Byung-hee, Chief of the Blockchain Division at Shinhan Bank, said, “The successful completion of this second PoC marks an important step forward in our efforts to make cross-border payments faster, cheaper, and more accessible to people around the world.”SCB TechX’s CEO Trirat Suwanprateeb echoed this sentiment, stating that this endeavor can help “increase financial inclusion and improve access to financial services for individuals and businesses in underserved communities.”

As the Virtual Asset User Protection Act is set to take effect in July, South Korean virtual asset services providers (VASPs) are preparing themselves for new crypto accounting standards. This development is pushing crypto businesses to take consultation services from accounting firms, local media outlet Yonhap Infomax today reported.  Pronounced last year, the new crypto accounting guideline is scheduled to be applied to VASPs starting this July. Rather than providing clear and explicit standards, the guideline requires crypto businesses to interpret it on their own based on “reasonable grounds.” One accountant in the crypto industry said that individual crypto exchanges are wrapping their heads around the new crypto accounting standards, pondering over numerous issues such as whether to manage customer assets in a single record-keeping system. Photo by Volkan Olmez on UnsplashThe most significant concern among VASPs is that the new standard will highly likely recognize crypto assets entrusted by customers as either assets or liabilities. So far, local crypto exchanges haven’t recognized custodial tokens as assets; instead, they have been including these tokens in the footnotes. Only the money users deposited in Korean won has been acknowledged as “customer deposit liabilities.” Dunamu, the operator of crypto exchange Upbit, stated in the footnotes of its previous quarterly report that virtual assets entrusted by customers do not meet the accounting definition of an asset, leading the exchange to exclude its users’ custodial tokens from the asset category.  Varying interpretation of ‘control over custodial assets’ A lot is at stake depending on how individual crypto exchanges interpret the new guideline. If crypto exchanges are deemed to have control over custodial assets, they must meticulously document the details of the assets in custody on their financial statements, including the total amount of custodial assets and how they are managed under what policies.  These details would serve as decisive factors in determining who bears the liabilities in the event of future incidents.  Crypto businesses’ accounting dilemmaThe Korean financial regulators have explained that the new guideline is not the ultimate golden rule, implying that there could be a leeway for crypto businesses if they have reasonable grounds for not following the new accounting standard. However, regulators said they will conduct thorough examinations on the financial statements following their publishment, to ensure that custodial assets are not left out in the documents. This is where VASPs face a difficult choice between two different options; they can either classify custodial tokens as something other than an asset and undergo thorough examinations, or they can recognize them as an asset and risk being included in the “mutual investment-restricted group.” This is a group consisting of large local firms with over nearly KRW 10 trillion ($7.5 billion) in total assets. The companies listed in the group are subject to strict government regulations.  Previous recognition of Dunamu as ‘big firm’ raises concerns among VASPsThe local regulatory authority previously classified Dunamu as part of the mutual investment-restricted group in 2022.  At the time, Korean won deposits made by Upbit users, categorized under the customer deposit liabilities, were recognized as part of its assets by the Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC). The KFTC determined that Dunamu had controlling power over the customers’ deposits. This judgment by the KFTC led the company to fall under the mutual investment-restricted group. Once the new accounting standard takes effect in July, the likelihood is that the exchange’s custodial tokens, currently valued at KRW 20.2 trillion, will also be recognized as assets. Meanwhile, another prominent crypto exchange Bithumb is reported to have KRW 4.5 trillion in total assets.   Another accountant in the crypto industry expressed concerns, saying that VASPs will have to deal with more regulations if incorporated into the mutual investment-restricted group. The person added that recognizing custodial tokens as assets could further heighten the management risks for crypto businesses.