Philippine government introduces document notarization on Polygon

Crypto Features in India-UK Markets DialogueAccording to a press release published by HM Treasury, the 2nd India-UK Financial Markets Dialogue meeting held on Wednesday featured six key themes with crypto featuring among them.©Pexels/SkitterphotoThe event brought officials from both nations together in the first in-person financial dialogue since 2017. While the meeting considered banking, insurance and reinsurance, capital markets, asset management and sustainable finance, it also allotted time to discuss payments and crypto-assets.CBDC knowledge sharingBoth sets of officials discussed the scope for augmenting knowledge on Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) by way of mutual learning. The officials agreed on the importance of robust global approaches relative to the emergence and development of crypto-assets internationally. The joint statement issued following the meeting revealed that progress relative to the G20 roadmap for enhancing cross-border payments was a matter which was discussed. It’s an item that could have major implications for the use of cryptocurrency in cross border transactions.Global collaborationThe meeting marks another move towards greater global collaboration on policy and regulation relative to digital payment systems and crypto assets. Earlier this month, India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said that the introduction of any new regulations on digital assets needs to be coordinated on a global basis. “The G20 and its members agree that it’s not going to be possible to have an independent, standalone country dealing with crypto assets”, Sitharaman stated at a news conference following a meeting of central bank governors and G20 finance ministers.There’s a growing recognition among politicians, government and central bank officials that decentralized money doesn’t end at a territory’s borders due to its inherently decentralized properties.Taking steps to regulate cryptoWhile on the one hand strategizing as to how digital assets can be best controlled on a global level, India is also taking its own individual steps towards national regulatory action. Recently, it expanded its Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) to include consideration of digital assets. The newly amended PMLA will now deal with the exchange of digital assets for fiat money and vice versa. It also considers safekeeping, transfer and administration relative to cryptocurrency. Furthermore, its broadened scope deals with financial services offered related to virtual or digital assets.Rajagopal Menon, the VP of India’s leading cryptocurrency exchange WazirX, has said that “regulations levied by India have been baby steps toward institutional participation in the crypto exchange.” While market participants in the digital assets space are apprehensive about the regulatory measures that governments and state regulators choose to adopt, so long as the objective isn’t to regulate the innovation out of existence, such developments can have a profoundly positive effect on the digital assets market.There’s no doubt that in line with Menon’s point relative to the Indian context, the same scenario can play out in all digital markets given the application of the right regulatory approach. Institutional investment for the most part has eluded crypto despite many already heralding its arrival in recent years. Institutions move slowly and the only way in which they will be comfortable in working with digital assets is with complete regulatory clarity having been set out.So while some in crypto may be concerned at the mention of global regulatory coordination in respect of digital assets, so long as it doesn’t go too far, greater work towards improved regulatory clarity in the digital assets market can be a catalyst for further adoption and growth in India, the UK and further afield.

3AC Liquidators Pursue $1.3 Billion from FoundersLiquidators appointed for Three Arrows Capital (3AC), the failed Singaporean cryptocurrency hedge fund, are seeking to recover $1.3 billion from the fund’s co-founders.That’s according to an unidentified source cited by Bloomberg in a report published on Tuesday. The requested amount represents losses incurred by the founders during the months leading up to the firm’s collapse, according to a source familiar with the liquidators’ claims.Photo by Giorgio Trovato on UnsplashLiability allegationsDuring a meeting with the hedge fund’s creditors on Tuesday, the liquidators discussed the allegations against Three Arrows co-founders Su Zhu and Kyle Davies. The co-founders are accused of causing the hedge fund to accumulate significant leverage between May and June 2022, despite already suffering substantial losses from ill-fated Luna tokens and other investments.The liquidators argue that the firm was insolvent at that time. Consequently, they have taken legal action against Zhu and Davies in a British Virgin Islands court to recover the losses on behalf of the fund’s creditors.Lawyers representing Zhu and Davies have not yet responded to requests for comment. However, in a Twitter post last June, Zhu mentioned that their attempts to cooperate with the liquidators were met with resistance.Crypto failure catalystThe failure of Three Arrows Capital coincided with a downturn in the digital currency market, impacting platforms that had exposure to the hedge fund, including crypto lenders BlockFi and Voyager Digital. These platforms subsequently filed for bankruptcy in the weeks following the liquidation of the hedge fund.The liquidators’ allegations against the co-founders represent an escalation of actions taken against Zhu and Davies, whom they have accused of non-cooperation during the investigation. The liquidators, who are partners at the consulting and advisory firm Teneo, were appointed by a British Virgin Islands court last year to recover funds for Three Arrows Capital’s creditors, who are collectively owed approximately $3.3 billion.Earlier this month, the liquidators urged a New York bankruptcy judge to impose a daily fine of $10,000 on Davies. They argue that this substantial fine is warranted because he has failed to respond to a subpoena requesting business records and other relevant information.While the liquidators do not currently know the whereabouts of Davies or Zhu, court documents from earlier this month referenced a New York Times article reporting that Davies had traveled to Bali after the collapse of Three Arrows Capital.Restraining orderIn May Zhu had secured a restraining order against BitMEX Co-Founder Arthur Hayes in a Singaporean court. Hayes believes that he is owed $6 million by the 3AC co-founders. Despite significant adverse publicity within the crypto space, the 3AC co-founders have proceeded to do business within the industry.They’ve established a crypto claims trading platform, OPNX, and alongside that Dubai-based business, they’ve also established a new venture capital fund, 3AC Ventures.The Dubai regulator, the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), has reprimanded OPNX and the business's founders for operating an unregistered digital assets business within the territory.

Korea’s DAXA Prohibits Relisting of Delisted Cryptos for a YearThe Digital Asset Exchange Alliance (DAXA) in Korea will prohibit the relisting of cryptocurrencies delisted from its member exchanges for a year, according to Korean media outlet Edaily.©Pexels/Jan van der WolfDAXA’s arbitrary regulationSome criticize this regulation, arbitrarily created by DAXA, which consists of five major Korean cryptocurrency exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit, and Gopax), as this rule poses a significant impact on crypto issuers and investors.In fact, a blockchain industry insider said that when cryptos are designated by DAXA as a risky asset, their operators receive a notification from the group that relisting is possible after a year once delisted. So far, assets that have been delisted or designated as such are WEMIX, PCI, BASIC, SRM, and OMG.Coinone’s relisting of WEMIXDAXA added this stipulation, as it faced criticism for the absence of relisting regulations in its guidelines when Coinone, one of its members, exclusively relisted the WEMIX token. This raised doubts about the self-regulation of the industry because DAXA had decided the delisting of WEMIX on the grounds that the information on its circulation supply was unreliable.Crypto enterprises are complaining about DAXA’s devising of strict penalties when delisting processes are not transparent. DAXA has stated that a consensus has been reached for the first draft and it will be continuously revised.Stronger DAXA presenceThe Korean crypto industry forecasts that this regulation will empower DAXA’s presence in the crypto scene, considering that its members are responsible for 98% of the domestic trading volume.Experts note that DAXA needs to establish fairness and transparency in order for it to gain trust as a self-regulatory body. Park Yong-beom, Chairman of the Korea Society of Blockchain, said rules on listing and delisting have to be fair and transparent, and if market participants find them unconvincing, it would undermine the credibility and authority of the self-regulatory body.In an interview with Economic Review, Former KB Kookmin Bank CEO Lee Kun-ho suggested that DAXA should prioritize market vitalization and ecosystem strengthening. He believes that instead of focusing on market management and supervision, DAXA should concentrate on enhancing investor protection.