K-GAMES and KOCCA release report on overseas gaming regulations

Korean Crypto Expert Claims NFTs and Security Tokens Shouldn’t Be a Priority for Investors YetAlthough there has been a lot of speculation recently regarding the prospects of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and security tokens as lucrative investment opportunities, these topics should not be of concern yet, said Kim Dong-hwan, CEO of Korean crypto consulting firm Wonder Frame, at Tuesday’s 2023 FNTimes Investment Forum hosted in Seoul by the Korean Financial Times.Photo by Markus Winkler on UnsplashFrom a price-to-earnings perspective, these types of investments should not be of priority to the average investor, Kim said, stating that this argument is rooted in historical context. Bitcoin, the kingpin of cryptocurrencies, had its first breakthrough in 2012 when its price was around $13. Since then, its value has skyrocketed nearly 2,000 times. Those who profited from Bitcoin then went on to invest in Ethereum, the second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization. Ultimately, the money earned from Bitcoin was constantly circulating in the crypto market.Grappling for liquidityHowever, Bitcoin’s liquidity — the frequency at which assets are bought and sold, which can be deemed the most important aspect of investing in and trading cryptocurrencies — is currently down. Liquidity in the crypto market usually flows in order from Bitcoin first, to altcoins, then to NFTs, Kim explained, because investments in NFTs are made by people who hold cryptocurrencies, not Korean won. Therefore, NFTs, which have now experienced more than a 90% decline from their peak, must depend on Bitcoin’s price recovery for their own resurgence.Securing liquidity for security tokens is also difficult, considering the fact that while these assets share common characteristics with cryptocurrencies, they are subject to strict regulatory oversight by financial authorities such as the Korea Exchange. Therein lies the difficulty in forecasting the prospects for security tokens.Kim thus questioned whether there would be market makers or liquidity providers that would be willing to boldly step into the role of satisfying the market, given the close scrutiny of authorities such as Korea’s Financial Services Commission (FSC) and Financial Supervisory Service (FSS). Although crypto exchanges like Upbit act as market makers by facilitating daily trading worth trillions of won, speculation suggests that securities firms that are responsible for supplying security token liquidity may find it challenging to do the same.Weak investments and negative perceptions of DeFiAnother concern for security tokens is fractional investments, which tend to be concentrated on assets of lower value. “Security tokens are fundamentally about dividing underlying assets and then selling them. However, in many cases, these underlying assets are of lower value or have no choice but to be traded this way,” Kim said.Kim also mentioned the regulatory hurdles hindering decentralized finance (DeFi) in general, despite its reputed appeal. “DeFi is perceived by international organizations like the Financial Stability Board (FSB), the US Federal Reserve System, and the European Union (EU) as a public enemy that causes financial instability in the real world,” he said.Taking all these factors into consideration, Kim recommended against investing in security tokens or NFTs at this time, given the current situation where even Bitcoin’s liquidity is at an all-time low. He suggested that, with market interest rates approaching 5%, unless there is a specific need to invest in virtual assets, it may be better to explore investment options positioned for higher interest rates.Kim is an industry expert who has previously written articles for crypto news site CoinDesk Korea for four years and has taken on the role of Chief Business Development Officer (CBDO) at Blitz Labs, a virtual asset research firm. He founded Wonder Frame in 2022, where he currently works as a professional consultant.

HeyBit to Cease Virtual Asset Deposit Services in OctoberSouth Korean centralized finance (CeFi) company HeyBit announced on Monday that it will terminate its virtual asset deposit service, Harvest, on October 2 in line with regulatory guidelines.Photo by Andre Taissin on UnsplashRegulatory limitations“Although we have made efforts to pay promised returns and provide stable digital asset investment products, we have ultimately decided to terminate the Harvest service in accordance with the policy guidelines of regulatory authorities,” the company said in a statement.It further emphasized that the service termination is solely due to regulatory restrictions, rather than questions of financial integrity or credit issues, while also citing its judgment call that running a deposit business is practically impossible at the moment.“Although some customers of other businesses have faced damages due to operational issues, the results of our due diligence report for the second quarter of 2023 were consistent with that of our last four reports, stating that the value of the assets we own exceeds that of deposited assets,” HeyBit said, seemingly referring to the recent class-action lawsuits against the Korean crypto platforms Haru Invest and Delio, who had unexpectedly suspended customer deposits and withdrawals, inciting KRW 50 billion (approximately $39 million at the time of the incident) in damages in the process. The company stressed that it was unrelated to this debacle and was securely storing all customer assets, alleviating potential investor concerns.The company has thus been able to properly handle management operations involving promised returns, additional deposits, and withdrawals for Harvest users up until now.However, it has decided to comply with the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, which is set to take effect next year in Korea. Article 7, Paragraph 2 of this act outlines that virtual asset companies must keep their own virtual assets and customers’ virtual assets separate, and they must own the same quantity and type of virtual assets — including deposited assets — as those that have been entrusted by customers.“We are thus unable to use the assets entrusted to us by our customers as a source of return,” HeyBit said.Planned reboundDespite this setback, the company promised to resume services based on regulatory and policy changes in the future, including revamping virtual asset deposit services.

According to India’s Finance Ministry, Binance and a number of other virtual asset service providers (VASPs) are not tax-compliant in India. Cases of tax evasion detectedNews of this matter emerged via written answers, published on Dec. 2, provided in response to parliamentary questions which had been put to India’s Finance Minister, Pankaj Chaudhary. The minister confirmed that a “few cases of evasion of Goods and Services Tax (GST) by cryptocurrency exchanges and investors” had been detected. The document goes on to list 17 crypto entities who are currently being investigated on that basis, with Binance being the most well-known among them. Notable Indian exchanges listed include WazirX, CoinDCX and CoinSwitch. Chaudhary included details of cases booked against these exchanges. In Binance’s case, it was required to pay 722 crore Indian rupees, which amounts to around $85.2 million. While Binance doesn’t appear to have incurred penalties, in the case of WazirX, the exchange had an assessed tax shortfall of 40.51 crore Indian rupees ($4.78 million), but after fees and interest, it was provided with a demand for 49.19 crore Indian rupees ($5.8 million). CoinDCX and CoinSwitch were also assessed with a demand for 20.86 crore Indian rupees ($2.46 million) and 19.38 crore Indian rupees ($2.28 million), inclusive of penalties and interest. In the case of WazirX, CoinDCX and CoinSwitch, the exchanges have had to pay an additional 21%, 24% and 37% respectively in fees and interest over and above their original tax liabilities.Photo by Naveed Ahmed on UnsplashPrevious tax and regulatory issuesTo date, the Finance Ministry has recovered 122.3 crore rupees ($14.4 million) as part of these investigations. Binance has as yet not paid the funds demanded by the authorities. It emerged in August that India’s Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI) had imposed an $86 million tax demand on the company, with Binance contesting the assessment. The global crypto exchange platform had previously paid a $2.5 million fine for having engaged with Indian customers despite not having been approved by the authorities to trade within the country. After a number of months during which it didn’t trade within the Indian market, in August Binance regularized its standing and gained approval to trade. In a request for comment on the matter from Cointelegraph, a Binance representative stated: “We continue to work closely with regulatory authorities and attend necessary hearings to address any concerns and questions. Binance remains responsive and cooperative and is committed to addressing all necessary tax inquiries.” The company recently hired UK-based accounting and business advisory firm Grant Thornton to assist with accounting, tax and audit preparedness. In the case of WazirX, a spokesperson said that “GST law on cryptocurrencies was not clear in India,” and that on this basis, the company found itself being assessed for non-payment of the applicable taxes.