Regulatory crackdown as Hong Kong authorities act against crypto entities

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.”

Bithumb and Korbit Struggle to Gain Traction Despite Zero Trading FeesSouth Korean cryptocurrency exchanges Bithumb and Korbit have recently eliminated trading fees, but their bold decision hasn’t yielded much results. Bithumb was the first to implement this change and attracted users for about a week, but it is now seeing a loss in market share. Korbit, following Bithumb’s example, is also struggling to achieve meaningful outcomes.Photo by Alexander Grey on UnsplashLimited impactLocal media outlet Chosun Biz used data from crypto data platform CoinGecko to draw this conclusion. On October 26, Korbit’s daily trading volume represented 0.19% of the total trading volume among South Korea’s top five crypto exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit, and Gopax). This figure marked a 0.14 percentage point increase compared to the 0.05% recorded on October 19. Korbit had implemented a zero trading fee policy at 9 a.m. (KST) on October 20. Additionally, they launched a promotion offering KRW 5,000 ($3.69) worth of bitcoin to users who transferred virtual assets totaling KRW 1 million or more from Travel Rule-compliant exchanges to Korbit. While the promotion did contribute to Korbit’s market share, it still remains below 1%.Bithumb’s performance showed some improvement, albeit briefly. As of October 26, Bithumb’s market share stood at 18%, marking a 4.7 percentage point increase from its 13.3% share on October 3, the day before it eliminated trading fees. However, it’s worth noting that its market share had reached almost 30% shortly after the promotion’s launch. This indicates that its strategy is losing efficacy over time.The less-than-enthusiastic results from their daring marketing endeavors can be attributed to their inability to draw in retail investors. To begin with, Upbit, the leading player in the market, had already been providing a relatively low fee of 0.05%. Furthermore, adapting to new user interfaces on these exchanges posed a challenge. Zero trading fees weren’t attractive enough for crypto investors to leave their current platforms.Trading volume mattersIn the case of Korbit, its lower trading volume was a disadvantage when it came to attracting users. On crypto exchanges, a higher trading volume typically translates to faster trade executions. As a result, users of Korbit might experience delays in executing trades at their preferred price.Jeong Hye-won, a research associate at crypto data analytics platform Xangle, told Chosun Biz that users on exchanges with lower trading volumes tend to experience slippages due to slower transaction speeds and sparsely populated order books. A slippage means the difference between the initially placed order price and the executed order price. Jeong further explained that Korbit’s zero trading fee policy didn’t have a significant impact because it offers fewer listed tokens compared to Upbit and Bithumb.There is speculation that the free-trading fee promotions introduced by Bithumb and Korbit, despite their revenue sacrifices, might conclude sooner than initially anticipated due to their perceived ineffectiveness. Bithumb derives 99.95% of its revenue from trading fees, while Korbit relies on trading fees for 99.79% of its income. An industry insider has commented that trading fees play a vital role in an exchange’s revenue, and given Bithumb’s reported loss in earnings during the second quarter, there are concerns about their capacity to sustain this strategy.

Vietnam has moved to take a positive approach to crypto assets by passing legislation to legalize them. Last week, the Southeast Asian nation’s National Assembly passed the Digital Technology Industry Law, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2026, according to a report published in the official online newspaper of the Vietnamese government. Photo by Daniel Bernard on UnsplashCategorizing digital assetsThe law sets out two categories of digital assets, virtual assets and crypto assets. The legislation frames virtual assets as digital assets used for exchange or investments. Meanwhile, crypto assets are to be regarded as digital assets utilized to validate transactions and confirm ownership while relying on the use of encryption technology. Neither category includes securities or digital versions of fiat currencies such as central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) or other financial instruments. The legislation gives the Vietnamese government the authority to define and apply specific regulatory conditions when it comes to items such as anti-money laundering (AML) measures and the inclusion of international cybersecurity standards. It is hoped that the law will pave the way for the development of home-grown technological enterprises within Vietnam, while also promoting a nationwide digital transformation process. Regulatory clarityThe legislation is significant as it clearly sets out the legal status of digital assets in Vietnam after years of uncertainty and regulatory ambiguity. Singapore-based blockchain-focused Business Strategist, Anndy Lian, said that such legal clarity could result in Vietnam becoming a regional hub for the crypto sector.  Anh Tran, who belongs to Superteam Vietnam, a community for Solana builders in Vietnam, said that the development was huge for founders, developers and investors in the crypto space in Vietnam. He stated: “For a country who has always been at the forefront of crypto adoption, [Vietnam] is now a 'green-lighted zone' in principle, but we're still waiting at the red light for operational rules.” He refers to the fact that Vietnamese regulators still have until Jan. 1, 2026, to flesh out the details in terms of defining who can issue, trade, custody or manage crypto, and how AML, cybersecurity and taxation are handled. Vietnamese officials are likely to give strong consideration to AML measures relative to crypto given that the Southeast Asian nation has been on the grey list of the Financial Action Task Force since 2023. Countries who appear on the grey list are under considerably more scrutiny with regard to AML matters. While another community member claimed that anywhere crypto regulation has been implemented, actual usage has declined, Tran maintained that regulation is inevitable and that “crypto doesn’t need to be lawless to be free.” Last October, Vietnam set out its blockchain strategy, aspiring to the goal of achieving regional leadership in the sector by 2030. In March, the country’s Prime Minister, Pham Minh Chinh, requested that a legal framework for cryptocurrencies be established.  According to Chainalysis’ 2024 Global Crypto Adoption Index, Vietnam ranks fifth in the world.