Pakistan establishes authority to regulate crypto

In a recent announcement OPNX, the Seychelles-incorporated cryptocurrency bankruptcy claims platform co-founded by the creators of the now-defunct hedge fund Three Arrows Capital (3AC), has revealed its decision to cease all operations.Photo by Kelly Sikkema on UnsplashFebruary 14 shutdownIn a message to its users, subsequently shared on social media on Thursday, the OPNX team expressed its commitment to ensuring an orderly closure, urging users to settle all positions by Feb. 7 and withdraw their funds from the platform before Feb. 14, as all withdrawal functionality will be disabled thereafter. The team expressed gratitude to the OPNX community, acknowledging their dedication and trust throughout the platform's existence. Short for "Open Exchange," OPNX served as both a hybrid bankruptcy claims platform and a crypto exchange, enabling users to trade creditor claims of bankrupt crypto companies. The origin of OPNX can be linked to two defunct crypto entities — Coinflex and 3AC. Seychelles-based Coinflex was a crypto yield platform that was forced to suspend withdrawals in June 2022. It subsequently entered into a bankruptcy process. Coinflex co-founder Mark Lamb joined forces with 3AC’s Kyle Davies and Su Zhu to found OPNX. In October, Coinflex creditors sued Lamb, alleging that he had appropriated Coinflex's intellectual property, customer base, employees and technology to establish OPNX. Mired in problemsWithin its short existence, OPNX has been mired in problems. From the very outset, there was little goodwill for the new venture, given that many crypto sector participants took a dim view of Zhu and Davies due to the turmoil the collapse of 3AC caused within the industry. In April of last year, OPNX claimed to have significant venture capital backing, only for many of the VC entities mentioned to quickly deny such claims subsequently. The following month, the local regulator in Dubai, the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority, formally reprimanded the OPNX founders for promoting an unregulated business within the Emirate of Dubai. In August, it emerged that VARA had hit OPNX and its founders with a hefty fine. Following the closure announcement, the native OX token of OPNX experienced a significant price decline. Over the course of the past 24 hours, the token unit price has fallen 13.6% to $0.007981. The failure of 3AC led to Teneo, the firm responsible for liquidating 3AC's assets, subpoenaing Zhu and Davies for concealing details of their physical whereabouts through messages on social media platform X. The closure of OPNX adds to the challenges faced by Zhu and Davies, as Teneo is actively seeking to recover $1.3 billion directly from the co-founders. The claim asserts that Zhu and Davies engaged in substantial leverage with investor funds after the insolvency of their hedge fund. In September 2023, Singapore's central bank issued nine-year prohibition orders against Davies and Zhu, citing alleged violations of the country's securities laws at Three Arrows Capital. All the while, crypto community sentiment remains negative where OPNX and its founders are concerned. Taking to social media, Ikigai Asset Management’s Travis Kling didn’t mince his words, stating:”I mean it from the bottom of my heart when I say **** these criminals.” As OPNX concludes its operations, the unfolding events surrounding its co-founders and their association with the failed hedge fund continue to draw attention to the need for the industry to raise its standards.  

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.

Japanese Bitcoin treasury firm Metaplanet has opened a U.S. subsidiary company in Florida while also issuing 3.6 billion Japanese yen ($24.7 million) in bonds for the purpose of buying more Bitcoin.Photo by Kanchanara on UnsplashAccelerating the Bitcoin strategyIn an announcement on May 1, the company outlined that it had established Metaplanet Treasury Corporation in Miami, Florida. The firm cited the purpose of the subsidiary as a means through which it can accelerate its overriding strategy of accumulating more Bitcoin. Metaplanet CEO Simon Gerovich commented on X on the rationale behind locating the U.S. subsidiary in Florida, stating:”The reason for choosing Florida is clear: the state is rapidly emerging as a global hub for Bitcoin innovation, corporate adoption and financial liberalization.” Gerovich added that the newly formed company will enhance Metaplanet’s “around-the-clock operational capabilities across time zones.” The Metaplanet CEO sees the development as part of the firm’s evolution as a global Bitcoin treasury company.  $250 million capital raiseThe company stated that it had already established a corporate entity in the British Virgin Islands (BVI), with the U.S. addition enhancing the company’s ability “to respond to market dynamics with speed and precision.”  Metaplanet intends to raise $250 million in funding through the Miami-based entity, having launched it with initial capital of $10 million. It’s envisaged that the U.S. subsidiary can act as a vehicle to attract institutional investment.  Back in March it was reported that Metaplanet was investigating the idea of listing its stock in the U.S. At the time, Gerovich stated that the firm was “considering the best way to make Metaplanet shares more accessible to investors around the world.” As part of that process, Gerovich met with officials from the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and the Nasdaq.  In further U.S.-related developments, the company appointed Eric Trump, second son of U.S. President Donald Trump, to its strategic board of advisors in March. Last week, Metaplanet appointed David Bailey, CEO of Bitcoin Magazine, to its strategic board of advisors. Bond issuanceIn a separate development, Metaplanet has issued 3.6 billion Japanese yen ($24.7 million) in 0% ordinary bonds to purchase additional Bitcoin. The company used its EVO FUND as the mechanism through which it issued the bonds.  It has set out a goal of accumulating 10,000 BTC by the end of the year. Currently, the company holds 5,000 BTC. One community member believes that Metaplanet could hit this target as early as July on the basis of ongoing share dilution.Appearing on The Bitcoin Treasuries Podcast earlier this year, Metaplanet’s Director of Bitcoin Strategy, Dylan LeClair, described how prior to adopting its Bitcoin treasury strategy in 2024, the firm was a “zombie” on the Tokyo stock exchange with the pandemic having had a negative impact on the company’s fortunes.  He outlined that the company consolidated and dealt with some debt issues, but at that point it lacked a clear strategy. It then set out to replicate the success of U.S. Bitcoin treasury pioneer, Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy). On May 1 Gerovich posted on X that the company had achieved unrealized gains on Bitcoin exceeding six billion yen ($41.68 million).