Turkish crypto legislation: anticipated reforms await clarity

The Legal Future of South Korea’s Crypto Industry: Necessary Legislation and SystemsA recent National Assembly symposium organized by South Korea’s Digital Asset Policy Forum brought experts together to discuss the challenges and prospects of the implementation of the Virtual Asset User Protection Act at the National Assembly Members’ Office Building in Seoul on Tuesday.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on UnsplashInternational modelsReferences were made to global examples, such as the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) — the world’s first standalone virtual asset legislation enacted in the EU — which ensures transparency, disclosure, authorization, and supervision of crypto-asset transactions. However, unlike the capital market, MiCA does not impose regular disclosure reporting requirements or corrections on them. Firms in Japan, on the other hand, are asked to provide disclosure under autonomous regulation through the Japan Virtual and Crypto Assets Exchange Association (JVCEA).Notably, in its recent Policy Recommendations for Crypto and Digital Asset Markets Consultation Report, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) states that it is “seeking to encourage optimal consistency in the way crypto-asset markets and securities markets are regulated within individual IOSCO jurisdictions, in accordance with the principle of ‘same activities, same risks, same regulatory outcomes’.” This principle refers to the concept that any crypto-asset activity that has a similar function and poses similar risks to those in the traditional financial system — such as operating a trading platform or providing custody services — is subject to regulation that ensures equivalent outcomes, as defined by the UK Parliament.The IOSCO report also suggests that crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) should disclose information regarding ownership and control of crypto-assets, issuer and business-related information, issuer management teams, transaction history and operational description of crypto-assets, token ownership concentration, transfer protocols, and a given CASP’s treatment of the client crypto-assets and their respective rights and entitlements during events like hard forks and airdrops.Hurdles to overcomeExperts at the forum reflected these considerations in their sentiments. Han Suh-hee, a lawyer at Barun Law Firm, emphasized that it is important to determine what kind of information should be disclosed. She argued that it is necessary to discuss to what extent information about virtual asset issuers should be disclosed and whether mandating firms to disclose their financial and business conditions is efficient.In particular, Han underlined the need to consider the differences between virtual assets and stocks when establishing a framework for the disclosure of virtual assets holdings. Unlike stocks, virtual assets possess distinctive characteristics like their borderless and decentralized nature, unclear issuer backgrounds, and the ability to conduct peer-to-peer (P2P) transactions.Lee Han-jin, a lawyer at Kim & Chang Law Firm, added that the enactment of Korea’s Virtual Asset User Protection Act was aimed at establishing a system directly targeted at regulating virtual assets and virtual asset service operators (VASPs) — a significant development from the Financial Transaction Reporting Act, which had until now been the only legal framework responsible for regulating VASPs along with other entities like casino business operators. Virtual assets are now subject to a more systematized regulatory approach.However, he said that the Virtual Asset User Protection Act still has its setbacks because it is undergoing a two-stage legislative process. Lee criticized the fact that the same definition of VASPs outlined in the Financial Transaction Reporting Act had been brought over, which limits their identity to transaction intermediaries, wallet operators, and custodians while overlooking their other roles like crypto management, crypto deposits, and crypto collective investments.Lee also pointed out another weakness: the scope of prohibition on using undisclosed information and market manipulation is broader in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act than in the Capital Markets Act. He argued that enforcement decrees should stipulate the definition of insiders and exceptional cases when deliberating on the prohibition of insider virtual asset trading.Lee thus emphasized the need for a clear definition of virtual assets in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, as it is yet unclear whether they are objects or assets. All things considered, he believes there must be a law that can encompass blockchain-based decentralization, outline the similarities and differences between digital assets and financial products, and accommodate new services that utilize smart contracts.“We are in the process of creating a regulatory system similar to those being adopted in other countries based on their respective markets,” said Lee Seok-ran, head of the Financial Innovation Bureau at the Financial Services Commission (FSC). “Unlike the stock market, which is equipped with regulations to prevent fraudulent transactions and misconduct, virtual assets are traded on multiple exchanges, so we are considering how to interpret unfair trading activities and conduct market surveillance.”She explained that the commission is prioritizing user protection measures and subordinate regulations. “I believe we will be able to create a system for subordinate regulations on disclosure once an overall global trajectory is established. But before that happens, we are working on guidelines for defining unfair trading activities with regulators and the Digital Asset eXchange Alliance (DAXA).” Unfair trading activities associated with virtual assets include not only those conducted on exchanges but also under other circumstances.The FSC officer said that the financial authority is set to establish legal criteria to distinguish cases such as false statements in white papers of crypto projects. She added that enforcement decrees will define both the conditions for restricting deposits and withdrawals on crypto exchanges and the corresponding limits.

Korea to Tighten Scrutiny of Crypto Exchange Shareholders Amid Rising ConcernsSouth Korea’s financial regulator is stepping up efforts to evaluate the qualifications of majority shareholders of cryptocurrency exchanges, according to a report by local news outlet Newsis. This initiative follows instances where majority shareholders of local exchanges, including Bithumb, found themselves embroiled in criminal proceedings. Drawing parallels with the banking sector, the regulator is scrutinizing the credentials of majority shareholders to ensure compliance and integrity within the cryptocurrency exchange landscape.Photo by Terrence Low on UnsplashRevamping reporting requirementsThe Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) under the Financial Services Commission recently set up a task force to revamp the reporting requirements for crypto exchanges.The upcoming requirements are anticipated to be integrated into the reporting forms that cryptocurrency exchanges must complete, starting in October of next year. Essentially, these stipulations will determine whether existing exchanges, such as Upbit, Bithumb, and Coinone, can sustain their operations in the future.Periodic evaluationAccording to the Enforcement Decree of the Financial Transaction Reports Act, all virtual asset service providers (VASPs), including exchanges, are mandated to submit a renewal report every three years. Upbit, having been the first to submit its initial report in October 2021, will join other crypto exchanges in updating their reports in October 2024.A majority shareholder qualification assessment is a process in which the government periodically checks whether majority shareholders have the necessary qualifications to operate a financial company. Through this process, the FIU aims to curb potential illicit activities by majority shareholders, who hold significant sway over cryptocurrency exchange operations, thereby mitigating any potential harm to the users.Regulatory grey areaThis measure emerged from concerns that majority shareholders of exchanges have existed in a regulatory grey area. In fact, under the Financial Transaction Reports Act, only exchange representatives and registered officers are required to report and undergo examination when declaring VASPs. This leaves the actual owners and controllers — the majority shareholders — unidentified and unexamined.The current circumstances involving VASPs are markedly different and more concerning compared to other financial sectors. In the banking sector, restrictions are placed on share ownership and voting rights if majority shareholders have breached financial laws or if they are capital entities forbidden from owning a bank. Similarly, online peer-to-peer lenders and large lenders are also under obligation to have their majority shareholders scrutinized, as they fall under analogous regulations.Fraud and manipulation allegationsThe heightened scrutiny is also thought to have been sparked by recent allegations of fraud and market manipulation involving some majority shareholders of Korean exchanges. For instance, Mr. Kang Jong-hyun, a majority shareholder of Bithumb, is currently facing a criminal trial for allegations of fraudulent and unfair trade activities under the Capital Markets Act. Additionally, Song Chi-hyung, the majority shareholder of Upbit and chairman of Dunamu, is facing a Supreme Court trial over alleged price manipulation through wash trading.Moves to amend legislationMeanwhile, efforts are underway in the National Assembly to amend the existing legislation. Yun Chang-hyun, a lawmaker from the ruling People Power Party and a member of the National Policy Committee, has recently proposed a bill to revise the Financial Transaction Reports Act. The amendment seeks to implement a majority shareholder screening system for VASPs.The proposed amendments would obligate VASPs, including crypto exchanges, to disclose information about their majority shareholders in their reports, thereby enabling the FIU to scrutinize any past financial crimes or economic offenses committed by these majority shareholders.

India Launches Crypto-Enabled Web Browser InitiativeIn a further leap into the digital frontier, the Indian Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has unveiled the Indian Web Browser Development Challenge (IWBDC), signaling a significant move towards reducing the nation’s reliance on foreign technology.Photo by Julian Yu on UnsplashIndigenous web browserCentral to this ambitious initiative is the creation of an indigenous web browser with an innovative twist — the integration of cryptographic features for digitally signing documents. This advancement is poised to heighten the security and efficiency of online transactions, elevating India’s digital landscape.The launch event for the challenge took place at the India Habitat Centre and showcased a collaborative endeavor involving MeitY, Controller of Certifying Authorities (CCA), and the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC).Harnessing blockchain technologyAt its core, this initiative aims to bridge the traditional internet framework with the burgeoning potential of blockchain technology. A press release published by MeitY on Wednesday clarified that the web browser will boast an embedded CCA India root certificate, bolstering the browser’s security framework and upholding the sanctity of data privacy.Sunita Verma, Research & Development Group Coordinator at MeitY, underscored the profound significance of this initiative in India’s digital narrative. She conveyed the message from Alkesh Kumar Sharma, MeitY’s Secretary, emphasizing that this challenge embodies a pivotal stride toward realizing the vision of an “Aatmanirbhar Bharat” or self-reliant India.Further echoing this sentiment, Verma stated:“Digital India has orchestrated a transformative shift in our nation’s operational fabric. As we journey forward, the convergence of technology and homegrown innovation stands as a critical waypoint. More than just a browser, this is a symbol of a self-sufficient, digitally empowered India.”Progressive use caseIn line with the drive towards digital sovereignty, Arvind Kumar, MeitY’s CCA, illuminated the paramount significance of trustworthiness and security in the realm of digital interactions. He expressed his confidence that the forthcoming browser, fortified with the India Root Certificate, will render the nation more resilient against internet vulnerabilities, ultimately curbing dependence on foreign technology players.The IWBDC extends an open invitation to innovators across diverse domains, encompassing academia, industry, startups, and individuals, to contribute their ingenuity to this groundbreaking venture. The challenge brings with it a substantial prize pool of Rs. 3.41 crore ($0.4 million), offering not only financial incentives but also a chance to shape the trajectory of India’s digital future.While establishment agencies in India have largely been opposed to the legalization of cryptocurrencies, this initiative demonstrates that others are looking to exploit the blockchain and cryptocurrency innovation.While the Indian government has been active in calling for global crypto regulation, the country itself has not as yet finalized any such legislation relative to Web3 and cryptocurrency. Initiatives like this one help to showcase the possibilities that this innovation can bring about. That should serve to steer regulation in India towards a set of rules that enable the further development of that innovation.As the curtains rise on the Indian Web Browser Development Challenge, the world’s most populous nation is taking a decisive stride towards asserting its tech self-reliance, intertwining innovation with security, and laying the foundation for a digitally progressive India.