Thai regulator takes action against deceptive crypto ads

Politician Responds as Buterin Questions Hong Kong’s Crypto CredentialsIn a measured response on Friday, Johnny Ng, a member of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council, addressed the comments made by Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin concerning Hong Kong’s future stance on cryptocurrencies.Photo by Florian Wehde on UnsplashInvitation extendedNg extended an invitation to Buterin to visit Hong Kong, allowing him to gain a more nuanced understanding of the region’s dynamics. Ng also expressed his intent to collaborate with relevant institutions and enterprises to provide Buterin with insights into Hong Kong’s current situation.Vitalik Buterin had voiced his concerns at the Web3 Transition Summit in Singapore on Thursday. Buterin stated:“If any crypto project wants to make Hong Kong their home, they would want to have some confidence — not just that it’s friendly now but that it will continue to be friendly years from now when all kinds of unknown, regulatory and political and other kinds of events are going to happen.”He acknowledged that he did not possess an in-depth understanding of Hong Kong’s intricacies, particularly in light of recent developments in its relationship with mainland China. Buterin emphasized the need for crypto projects to have confidence not only in Hong Kong’s current crypto-friendliness but also in its ability to maintain this stance amidst unforeseen regulatory, political, and other events.In response to Buterin’s remarks, Ng reassured him that Hong Kong’s crypto-related policies were not prone to sudden changes. He highlighted that these policies had been formulated with broad social consensus and underwent comprehensive procedural assessments. Ng asserted: “Therefore, I can tell Mr. Vitalik that Hong Kong’s policies are very stable.”He further elaborated on Hong Kong’s legislative process, emphasizing the stages of government policy drafting, public consultation, discussions within multiple committees of the Legislative Council, and the General Assembly’s review.Best-prepared crypto jurisdictionIn a separate development, Hong Kong has maintained its position as the best-prepared jurisdiction for widespread cryptocurrency adoption in 2023, according to a recently published study. The Chinese autonomous territory secured the top rank for the second consecutive year.This recognition is based on a crypto readiness score (CRS) that takes into account factors such as the presence of crypto ATMs, the regulatory environment, accessibility, and legality.In contrast, the United States slipped to third place, experiencing a 6.5% drop in its CRS score from the previous year. Switzerland emerged as the second-best-prepared jurisdiction, with its CRS score surging by over 9%.The Dutch demonstrated the highest per capita interest in crypto, while Hong Kong stood out for having the most crypto ATMs per square foot due to its smaller landmass. Within the United States, New York became the most crypto-ready state, boasting a CRS of 9.80, owing to a robust legislative environment and a thriving crypto and blockchain industry.Chainalysis crypto adoption reportMeanwhile, India emerged as the global leader in crypto adoption in 2023, according to a recently compiled Chainalysis report. The report also highlighted other lower middle-income nations, such as Nigeria and Thailand, ranking prominently in crypto adoption. India’s crypto market has surged to become the second-largest globally by raw estimated transaction volume.Johnny Ng’s response to Vitalik Buterin’s comments is indicative of the measured and informed approach of Hong Kong’s leadership regarding cryptocurrencies. With a stable and consensus-driven regulatory framework, Hong Kong remains a key player in the evolving landscape of digital currencies.

Pakistan Implements Ban on CryptocurrencyPakistan has moved to ban cryptocurrency once more, with the country’s Minister of State for Finance and Revenue, Aisha Ghaus Pasha disclosing the move last week.According to multiple local media reports within Pakistan, on May 16 Ghaus Pasha stated at a session of the Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Revenue, that cryptocurrencies are banned and “will never be legalized in Pakistan.”Photo by Hamid Roshaan on UnsplashFATF Grey ListGhaus Pasha supported this position by outlining that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) had set the banning of crypto as a condition for Pakistan’s removal from its “Grey List.”FATF is an initiative of the G7 group of countries, first established in 1989. Its mandate is to develop policies geared towards combating money laundering, and most especially, terrorist financing. The FATF grey list includes those jurisdictions who are deemed to require increased monitoring relative to their efforts to keep money laundering and terrorist financing to an absolute minimum.Pakistan had found itself on the FATF grey list over the course of a number of years. That meant reputational damage on an international basis, together with loss of investor confidence. It also signals the likelihood of weaknesses in a country’s financial system and in its financial controls. The categorization would have had an impact on the country’s ability to access international finance, impacted trade relations, and involved increased compliance costs.Against that background, there may be a certain logic to the Finance Minister’s stance, despite it naturally being distasteful to those of us that support the development of decentralized systems, blockchain, and cryptocurrency. After an extended period on that Grey List, Pakistan was only removed from it in October of last year.Currency devaluationNotwithstanding that, governments in the developing world may have added incentives in banning cryptocurrencies. Their currencies are oftentimes unstable, and the Pakistani rupee is no exception. Cryptocurrencies like bitcoin find their greatest use case in countries that have their currencies devalued or economies that fall into the trap of hyperinflation relative to the sovereign currency.In Pakistan’s case, the rupee plummeted to a record low against the US dollar in January. Naturally, that hurts ordinary citizens and provides the conditions under which people are more likely to investigate decentralized cryptocurrencies. On that basis, we shouldn’t be surprised to learn that the Pakistani government’s decision to ban crypto was publicly supported by Sohail Jawad, Director of the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP).Pakistani banks are naturally following the government and the central bank’s lead, in implementing the ban. One circular obtained by CoinDesk stated: “As per regulatory instructions from the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP), any remittance of foreign exchange directly/indirectly outside Pakistan to overseas foreign exchange trading, margin trading, and CFD trading apps/websites/platforms through any payment channel is not allowed/permitted by SBP and such payments are inherently risky and illegal.”Community reactionNaturally enough, the crypto community internationally and locally, is not enamored by the move. However, people who have been in the space over the last few years are accustomed to ever-changing stances taken by governments as a reaction to a technology that they simply don’t know how to deal with.Waqar Zaka, a Pakistani who works within the Web3 space commented previously on a ban that was implemented in Pakistan in 2017, only later to be found to be unconstitutional. Another Pakistani community member took to Twitter in taking a stand against the decision. Others still immediately considered how they could circumvent the ban.Crypto has always benefited from jurisdictional arbitrage, and while bans are not in any way helpful, in the longer run, they will never stop the roll out and further development of this innovation.

Korean Lawmakers Complete First Rough Draft of Virtual Asset User Protection BillKorean lawmakers have completed the first rough draft of the virtual asset user protection bill at a National Policy Committee meeting held later last month.©Pexels/Matthias ZomerAgreeing on term usage ‘virtual assets’So far, 18 bills have been proposed to regulate cryptocurrencies, and the lawmakers and the Financial Services Commission (FSC) agreed to use the term “virtual assets” to encompass similar terms such as digital assets and crypto assets.Phased enactment of billsThe bills are likely to be reviewed under the title “Virtual Asset User Protection Act.” The bipartisan group agreed to enact the bills in phases, introducing the user protection bill in the first phase and the virtual asset listing and issuance bill in the second phase.Meanwhile, there were mixed opinions on the content of the bills. In particular, there was debate over whether the bills should stipulate that the central bank digital currency (CBDC) is excluded from virtual assets, and whether the bills should include a standard for determining if a virtual asset is a security.Debate over stipulating CBDC’s statusThe stipulation of excluding CBDC from virtual assets was the most divisive topic since it would lead to defining the conditions for other assets such as non-fungible tokens. Moreover, the Act on Reporting and Using Specified Financial Transaction Information, which currently regulates virtual asset service providers (VASPs), does not contain any stipulation on CBDC. Some raised concerns that such discrepancies could later cause confusion. In the end, assembly members decided to discuss the matter again in April after consulting with the Bank of Korea and the Ministry of Government Legislation.Criteria for classifying virtual assets as securitiesRegarding whether to include criteria for classifying virtual assets as securities, the lawmakers and financial regulators took different sides.Lee Yong-woo, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, underlined that a clear statement of the relationship between the issuer and the recipient of virtual assets in a whitepaper can determine their security status. He added that such provisions should be included in the bills.Park Min-woo, an FSC official, on the other hand, commented on a cautious note that in case virtual assets fall under the category of securities, they may not be applicable to the virtual asset act. He explained that VASPs might deal with both securities and virtual assets, and in such cases, there could be a misunderstanding that VASPs are not subject to the virtual asset act simply because they trade securities.