Metaplanet issues more bonds to buy Bitcoin & opens U.S. subsidiary

The Need to Distinguish Between Security and Non-Security Virtual AssetsWith the recent enactment of the Virtual Asset User Protection Bill in South Korea, there is a need to lay out criteria for determining whether virtual assets qualify as securities, says Kim Ja-bong, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute of Finance, in his report titled “The Implications of Determining Which Virtual Assets Constitute Securities and Investor Protection” released on Saturday.Photo by Shubham Dhage on UnsplashThe implications of the Virtual Asset User Protection ActThe Virtual Asset User Protection Act — which will take effect in July of next year — aims to protect customer assets, establish regulations against unfair trading practices, and enforce penalties. Notably, it will target virtual assets that are not securities, deeming it necessary for regulators to determine if virtual assets qualify as securities or not in order to enforce the bill. Assets with characteristics of securities will fall under the jurisdiction of the Capital Markets Act.Therefore, if the Virtual Asset User Protection Act does not provide sufficient investor protection, issuers may be incentivized to issue non-security assets rather than security assets to avoid the regulations of the Capital Markets Act. This further necessitates the act of distinguishing between virtual assets that are securities versus those that are not.Determining if a virtual asset is a security or notThere are two approaches to do this, according to Kim: the passive approach, which avoids considering a virtual asset as a security whenever possible, and the active approach, which treats a virtual asset as a security whenever applicable.He argues that it is better to focus on whether an investment contract qualifies as a security if it is considered an investment contract, rather than simply selecting a specific approach.Furthermore, the nature of virtual assets renders them unbound by national borders, so it is necessary to establish assessment criteria that correspond with international standards, such as those used in the US and Europe.This is especially important because if the criteria differ from international standards, there is a risk of domestic investors suffering damages due to an issuer’s pursuit of regulatory arbitrage between countries.Equitable recognition and potential for security tokensAccording to Kim, the importance of determining whether virtual assets are securities lies in ensuring that security tokens receive the same recognition and trading treatment as traditional securities such as stocks. With such a measure, security token offerings can serve as an efficient and reliable method for raising funds. Although there may be concerns that such a regulation may hinder the development of virtual assets, it may well be an opportunity for security tokens to be qualified and trusted as high-quality financial instruments just like existing securities, Kim claims.Even for virtual assets that are not considered securities, there are many types of assets that are financial in nature, such as e-money tokens — therefore, it is necessary to actively protect investors in non-security virtual assets through financial regulations such as reinforcing disclosure obligations, which is being done in the EU through the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).Empowering regulators for enhanced investor protection and market integrityKim underscored that investor protection and healthy growth of the virtual asset market are made possible mainly through expanding regulators’ authority to protect economic interests and prevent damages. The author also suggested institutional reforms that grant regulators substantial authority, which would enhance their ability to protect investors effectively and provide compensation for damages.He added that regulators should also have the authority to enforce liability for damages or impose civil penalties for unfair trading practices conducted using classified information.

UAE researchers introduce carbon trading platform on blockchainAmid escalating climate concerns, the Technology Innovation Institute (TII) in Abu Dhabi has unveiled a blockchain designed to monitor carbon emissions and facilitate trading.Announcement during COP28The institute’s Cryptography Research Center (CRC) recently announced the launch of its proprietary blockchain-powered carbon trading platform, showcasing the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) commitment to spearheading global climate initiatives. TII CEO Ray Johnson stated:“We are proud to announce this digitized tracking and trading platform at COP28, representing the UAE’s drive to become a technology and innovation powerhouse and its commitment to leading the world’s climate action agenda.”The revelation coincides with the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 28), which runs until Dec. 12 and is taking place in Dubai. The conference involves nations making commitments to reduce emissions and transition various sectors toward sustainable energy sources.Photo by Matthias Heyde on UnsplashEnabling carbon trading internationallyThe newly introduced blockchain platform is poised to enable the international trade of carbon tokens, monitor greenhouse projects and incentivize participation in emission reduction initiatives. By leveraging the principles of carbon trading and tracking, organizations will gain valuable insights into their environmental impact. The platform’s deployment on the blockchain ensures transparency and encourages broader participation, compelling major players to fulfill their environmental promises.The lightweight blockchain has been developed with minimal environmental impact in mind, aligning with the broader goals of the government’s climate action initiatives. This blockchain network allows organizations to record their emissions openly, prompting users to generate tokens that quantify carbon removed from company operations through capture or trading.Moreover, the network incorporates auditors to ensure the entire process is secure, transparent, accurate and safe. This approach aims to provide the industry with accurate data on their activities without relying on cumbersome third-party expert monitoring.Harnessing blockchain’s transparencyThe move to utilize blockchain technology for addressing climate change aligns with the long-standing belief of the United Nations and various international organizations. Blockchain’s transparency and openness empower industries to have accurate data on their activities, eliminating the need for complex third-party monitoring that often comes at a higher cost.In response to growing criticism of the energy consumption associated with blockchain technology, certain firms have taken steps to adopt greener practices. Notably, in 2021, the Ethereum blockchain transitioned to a Proof-of-Stake model, reducing its carbon footprint by over 99% by eliminating miners and introducing validators. Ethereum also launched the Ethereum Climate Platform (ECP), attracting participation from industry giants like Microsoft.Furthermore, cryptocurrency companies have allocated funds for solar-powered digital asset projects, encouraging developers to embrace eco-friendly practices. This shift towards sustainable initiatives underscores the industry’s commitment to addressing environmental concerns.In a related development, in August, it was reported that the UAE Ministry of Climate Change and Environment (MOCCAE) had entered into a collaboration with the Industrial Innovation Group and the Venom Foundation to work towards a blockchain-based carbon credit system.The introduction of the UAE’s blockchain-powered carbon trading platform marks a significant step towards fostering global climate initiatives. The innovative technology not only enhances transparency and accountability in carbon trading but also aligns with the broader global shift towards sustainable and eco-friendly practices within the blockchain industry.

Japan’s Financial Services Agency (FSA), a government agency and financial regulator responsible for overseeing banking, securities and exchange, has ordered both Apple and Google to remove specified unregistered crypto exchange apps from the Japanese versions of their app stores.Photo by Louie Martinez on UnsplashFive exchange apps specifiedIt is understood that the request was made at the beginning of this month, with the regulator specifically calling for the removal of the ability of Japanese consumers to download apps related to Bybit, MEXC Global, LBank Exchange, KuCoin and Bitget. In response to a query from The Block, Bitget Chief Legal Officer (CLO) Hon Ng said that the company is “aware of the issue and sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused by the temporary removal of the Bitget app from the iOS App Store in Japan." The Bitget CLO went on to state that the company is working with Apple and regulators to resolve the matter. News of the regulator’s request emerged via a report published by Japanese financial media platform Nikkei on Feb. 7.  Apple had removed the apps from its App Store on Feb. 6. Reclassification of digital assets as securitiesA subsequent report by Nikkei on Feb. 10 suggests that the FSA is considering classifying digital assets as financial products akin to securities. The objective of the move is to protect Japanese investors as it would mean increased disclosure requirements from those that offer crypto-related investment products. Last August, FSA Commissioner Hideki Ito told Bloomberg that any decision to approve crypto-linked exchange-traded funds (ETFs) requires “careful consideration.” At the time Ito said that many people believe that digital assets “do not necessarily contribute to the wealth creation of the Japanese people in a stable and long-term manner.” The Japanese have been far more cautious in their approach to virtual assets by comparison with other Asian centers such as Hong Kong, which had approved spot Bitcoin and Ether ETFs some time ago. It appears that Japan’s FSA is wary of the volatility of cryptocurrencies and risks associated with the nascent assets. It’s understood that the FSA will announce crypto policy reforms by June 2025. Legislative amendments would then follow in the following parliamentary session in 2026. The change would mean a lifting of the current prohibition related to crypto ETFs. Another aspect likely to be reformed is taxation as it relates to crypto. It’s thought that a reduction from the existing 55% tax rate on crypto to 20% is on the cards. This is not the first occasion when a regulator has leaned on Apple and Google to cut off access to crypto exchange apps. In January 2024 Apple India blocked access to eight exchanges which had been subject of a show-cause notice from India’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). Following a seven month ban, access to the Binance app was subsequently restored once it had come back into compliance in India. In April 2024 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the Philippines had ordered both Google and Apple to remove the Binance app from their app stores on the basis that it posed a risk to Filipino investors at the time.