Sui Token Debuts on Korea’s Top Five Crypto Exchanges

The Thai Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued a directive mandating Zipmex, a Singapore-based digital asset trading and brokerage platform, to temporarily suspend its operations. This decision is driven by the SEC's call for significant changes in Zipmex's management structure and an improvement in its financial position. The regulator outlined that the cryptocurrency exchange can resume normal operations if it addresses these concerns.Photo by Dan Freeman on Unsplash15 days to rectify issuesIn an official announcement last Friday, the SEC conveyed that Zipmex has a specified period of 15 days to rectify its financial position and operational deficiencies, aligning with the prior orders from the financial regulator. The SEC emphasizes that once the crypto exchange fulfills the regulator's requirements, users should be able to resume fund withdrawals. The securities watchdog had initially issued an order to Zipmex on Jan. 12, instructing the exchange to adjust the maintenance of its net liquid capital and modify its business administration structure and personnel to enhance efficiency and protect customer interests. Anek Yooyuen, Deputy Secretary General of the SEC, explained the legal process involved, stating: "According to the process specified by law, if the digital asset business operator is unable to comply with the SEC’s orders within the specified period, the SEC may propose that the Minister of Finance consider revoking the order." Implementation of robust system to protect investorsIn addition to implementing the SEC's orders regarding its financial operation and operational deficiencies, the exchange is required to establish a robust system protecting investors' deposited assets against exploitation. Once these objectives have been achieved within the required timeframe, Zipmex is obligated to submit a report on these implementations for SEC approval, paving the way for the resumption of operations. The Thai regulator stated that “Zipmex will be able to resume normal business operations upon receiving permission from the SEC.” Longstanding regulatory scrutinyZipmex has been under the regulatory microscope since 2023, facing scrutiny following the company’s struggles off the back of the last crypto market downturn. The SEC's investigation includes a probe into an acquisition by V Ventures and whether Zipmex operated in Thailand without regulatory approval. V Ventures canceled its $100 million buyout of the company in 2023, which would have included the return of customer deposits. The Thoresen Thai Agencies subsidiary company deemed the entire deal terminated on the basis that Zipmex had not fulfilled its contractual obligations relative to the buyout. The platform suspended trading in November 2023, citing regulatory compliance as the reason. Despite the operational suspension, user withdrawals will remain accessible to facilitate an exit from the platform. The initial freeze of withdrawals in July 2022 due to Terra's ecosystem collapse, coupled with crypto lender bankruptcies, led Zipmex to seek court protection and legal assistance to raise capital for creditor payouts. The platform presented a reorganization plan last year, proposing creditor payouts of up to 30 cents on the dollar, subject to asset recovery. However, the initial offer was set at 3.35 cents, with the potential for a higher repayment figure based on the firm's eventual asset recovery. 

While many people assumed that Bitcoin hashrate had moved overseas once China implemented a Bitcoin mining ban in 2021, miners within mainland China still dominate the activity. 55% of hashrateThat’s according to a report on X by Ki Young Ju, the founder and CEO of crypto data analytics firm CryptoQuant. Taking to the social media platform on September 23, the CryptoQuant CEO claimed that Chinese mining pools account for 55% of all Bitcoin mining activity.  Since the 2021 ban, an increasing proportion of hashrate has been accounted for elsewhere, including the United States. Ju clarifies that U.S.-based mining pools now account for 40% of Bitcoin hashrate. He added:”U.S. pools primarily cater to institutional miners in America, while Chinese pools support relatively smaller miners in Asia.”Photo by Joshua Sortino on UnsplashShift towards U.S.-based miningWhile the majority of Bitcoin mining is accounted for within China’s borders, Ju acknowledges a growing shift towards U.S.-based mining. Some commentators have speculated that while officially a ban was put in place, in reality the ban presented an opportunity to jettison inefficient mining equipment, selling it on overseas, while maintaining only the most efficient miners within China. Others such as Daniel Batten, an advisor to Nasdaq-listed Bitcoin miner Marathon Digital, went further in suggesting that the reporting of a blanket ban on Bitcoin mining within China was misleading. Instead, he believes that mining was suspended for a time and then rebooted. Taking to X in June, Batten wrote: “Stop referring to it as a ban. It wasn't and it plays into [mainstream media] narratives of Bitcoin mining being unwelcome by nation states.” At the time, rather than Ju’s 55%, Batten estimated that 15% of overall hashrate was accounted for by Chinese miners. Profitability challengesIn the months following the halving of the Bitcoin mining reward, miners have been struggling to maintain profitability. Bitbo data indicates that miner revenue weighed in at $827.56 million in August, representing a 10.5% drop when compared with $927.35 million in July. The situation has raised questions about the ongoing sustainability of securing the Bitcoin network via the current mining model.  Yet despite these adverse conditions, miners have been maintaining the high hashrate level. JPMorgan analysts recently indicated that the Bitcoin hashrate has recovered to pre-halving levels. A report by Decrypt earlier this month claimed that some miners are aggressively purchasing new mining equipment while maintaining significant holdings of Bitcoin rather than selling it off. Alongside what was perceived to be a ban on Bitcoin mining in 2021, China prohibited the trading of cryptocurrencies. Notwithstanding that, it’s thought that many Chinese residents have access to crypto via bank accounts in Hong Kong, connected with global crypto exchanges. Hong Kong is perceived to be China’s sandbox for crypto with many speculating that the current pro-crypto stance taken within the Chinese autonomous territory had been approved by the authorities in mainland China. Whether China will lift its ban on crypto trading remains the subject of ongoing speculation. 

Singapore Judge Says Crypto Not MoneyIn recent years, legal processes in various jurisdictions worldwide have seen judges comment on whether cryptocurrency is actually money. The latest such determination has been made by Justice Vinodh Coomaraswamy who outlined in a Singapore court that while being a component of financial transactions, cryptocurrencies are not money.The consideration emerged in a recent court hearing at Singapore’s High Court in a case involving the Algorand Foundation and failed Singapore-based hedge fund, Three Arrows Capital (3AC). Justice Coomaraswamy’s comments arose due to a discussion in the midst of the court proceedings involving the Judge and counsel representing the Algorand Foundation.©Pexels/EKATERINA BOLOVTSOVASeashells as moneyIn setting out his rationale for the need for 3AC to be wound up, Daniel Chan, a lawyer for the WongPartnership law firm that was representing the Algorand Foundation in the proceedings, told the judge that despite foreign currencies not being recognized as legal tender in Singapore, or used broadly as a medium of exchange within the city state, those foreign currencies are recognized by Singapore law as money. Using that analogy Chan suggested that by implication, the same scenario should be considered where cryptocurrencies are concerned.The judge provided a counterpoint: “What if you had a [community] in the world that used seashells as its internal medium of exchange? Would the Singapore courts have to recognize that as money.” Chan claimed that the judge had used an extreme example although Coomaraswamy remained steadfast in his view, pointing out that seashells had indeed been used as a form of money in the distant past.Coomaraswamy proceeded to dismiss the Algorand Foundation’s winding up application. He acknowledged that the Foundation did have standing in bringing the application. However, as he determined that cryptocurrency couldn’t be classed as money, on that basis he dismissed the application. In conveying his decision, he stated: “The word indebtedness, in my view, must require a debt which is in fiat currency. Determining whether or not a particular intangible, such as cryptocurrency, is money would require a detailed examination of evidence which is not appropriate in the context of insolvency.”Legal tenderThus far, bitcoin has been recognized as legal tender in two countries — El Salvador and the Central African Republic. In 2020, a French court referred to the leading cryptocurrency as money, agreeing that Bitcoin loans can be recognized as customer loans in the same way as loans denominated in fiat currencies. Earlier that year, an Australian court recognized bitcoin as a legally legitimate form of investment. In the United States, a Federal court recognized bitcoin as “money” or “funds” in a prosecution taken against Silk Road website operator Ross Ulbricht.There have been many similar instances in courts globally where judges have had to grapple with the consideration of whether bitcoin and crypto more generally can be regarded as money. Similar to the difficulty authorities are having in regulating cryptocurrency, it’s an issue that in most cases lacks complete clarity and in which we can expect further discussions on, similar to this most recent consideration in the Singaporean high court.