UAE Forges Partnership to Develop Blockchain-Based Carbon Credit System

Crypto.com, one of the world's largest cryptocurrency exchanges, has indefinitely delayed its service launch in South Korea after the country's financial regulators conducted an on-site inspection on the exchange. The inspection came after the country’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) under the Financial Services Commission detected data that appeared to violate anti-money laundering (AML) compliance requirements from the documents submitted by Crypto.com, according to local media Segye Ilbo. This decision came just six days ahead of its planned launch, originally scheduled for April 29.  The exchange has secured a virtual asset service provider (VASP) license by acquiring the local trading platform called OkBit in June 2022. A VASP license allows a digital asset exchange to operate in Korea.  Photo by Leeloo The First on PexelMitigating ‘Kimchi Premium’ effect Crypto.com initially planned to launch a mobile app featuring cryptocurrency trading on April 29, targeting South Korean retail investors. The platform aimed to differentiate itself from other local competitors by offering crypto assets at reasonable prices, mitigating the so-called Kimchi Premium effect, as announced in a press conference on April 2. The Kimchi premium refers to relatively high crypto prices in the Korean market compared to other foreign markets, which is prevalent in Korea’s major licensed crypto exchanges. The effect often results in Korean investors buying crypto assets at higher prices than those on other global crypto exchanges such as Binance. This is likely where the concerns for AML violation come up, financial experts assume, as the platform’s strategy could facilitate arbitrage during operation.  Crypto.com remains committed to Korea launch In a statement sent to CoinDesk, a spokesperson of Crypto.com said, “Crypto.com maintains the highest Anti-money Laundering standards in the industry. We will postpone our launch and take this opportunity to make sure Korean regulators understand our thorough policies, procedures, systems and controls, which have been reviewed and approved by major jurisdictions around the world.”  The person also mentioned that South Korea is a difficult market for global crypto exchanges to enter, but still emphasized the company’s commitment to cooperating with local regulators.  “OkBit maintained approximately 900 customers at the point of acquisition by Crypto.com, and OkBit has never been cited for any AML infractions. Since the acquisition, existing OkBit customer access has been limited to withdrawals,” the spokesperson said. 

South Korea’s FIU Faces Staffing Cuts Amid Crypto ChallengesThe Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), a department operating under the South Korean Financial Services Commission (FSC), is downsizing its Virtual Asset Inspection Division, reducing its members from nine to seven, as reported by the local news outlet Etoday. The FIU has faced chronic understaffing for several years, and with the cryptocurrency market expanding and issues accumulating, there is growing concern within the industry about the possibility of a regulatory and supervisory gap.Photo by JEONGUK — on UnsplashTemporary division’s tenure extensionMeanwhile, the FIU seeks to extend the tenure of the temporary virtual asset inspection division, currently scheduled to operate from September 16, 2023, until June 30, 2024. Presently, this division comprises one rank 4 officer, four rank 5 officers, three rank 6 officers, and one rank 7 officer. However, the upcoming organizational changes will involve the removal of one rank 5 officer and one rank 6 officer. Moreover, the two temporary employees (one rank 5 and one rank 6), assigned specifically to examine and analyze financial transactions related to virtual assets, will be reduced to a single rank 5 officer.Understaffing and budget issuesAfter several years of grappling with staffing shortages, it appears that a decision has been made to actually reduce the overall number of FIU personnel. Last year, when the NPC of the National Assembly reviewed the budget of the FSC, it pointed out the shortage of FIU personnel. According to the NPC’s report on the FSC, as of 2022, the FIU’s capacity was 83 staff members. However, the current number stands at only 68, which includes 34 individuals who have been seconded from other agencies. Additionally, there are an additional 13 personnel whose positions are not represented in the organizational chart.The FIU’s spending on labor costs has consistently been lower than that of the FSC’s headquarters each year. Between 2017 and July 2022, the FIU used, on average, 83.71% of its allocated budget for labor costs. In contrast, the FSC had a higher average utilization rate at 89.2%. The NPC pointed out that this discrepancy is largely due to staffing imbalances between the two organizations, suggesting that a reevaluation of staffing levels may be necessary.The FIU has long been considered a less popular unit within the FSC. In recent years, the situation has become particularly challenging for the Virtual Asset Inspection Division, which has been swamped with various problems. This has led to a general reluctance among FSC staff to join this particular division.A person familiar with the matter told Etoday that departments within the FSC focusing on financial policy areas like insurance, banking, and capital markets have traditionally been the go-to choices for those aiming for promotions. However, the source added that there’s been a recent shift: more officers are now showing interest in joining the FIU, often with an eye toward transitioning into related industries after retirement.MOIS hesitant on permanent staffingMeanwhile, the Ministry of the Interior and Safety (MOIS) has been reluctant to make the FSC’s Financial Innovation Bureau and the FIU’s Virtual Asset Inspection Division permanent fixtures. While the FSC argues that solidifying these divisions would necessitate a larger staff and budget, the MOIS is holding back. According to another source, the staffing issue isn’t exclusive to the FIU; the FSC as a whole is understaffed. Despite the FSC’s desire to expand its workforce, the MOIS remains unwilling to approve the additional resources.Crypto professionals are worried that financial regulators are cutting back on staff even as challenges within the sector continue to mount. An official from a virtual asset exchange voiced frustration, pointing to the contrasting approach in neighboring Japan. The official noted that Japan is actively pushing to advance its Web3 sector by not only establishing a dedicated virtual asset department within its Financial Services Agency, but also by forming specialized task forces to address specific challenges. The official finds it baffling that Korea, on the other hand, is downsizing departments that tackle these important issues.

While cryptocurrencies may be banned in China, crypto trading activity continues in some corners, nonetheless, sometimes through accessing overseas exchanges. With that, authorities recently uncovered a massive underground banking operation that exploited crypto trading platforms to evade local forex regulations.Photo by Manuel Joseph on Pexels$2.2 billion laundering operationOn Sunday, an account on popular Chinese social media platform WeChat run by China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) published details of the $2.2 billion laundering operation bust. Xu Xiao, the Inspector at the Qingdao Branch of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange, revealed that the scheme involved underground banks who purchased virtual currencies and then sold the virtual currencies through overseas trading platforms to obtain the foreign currency they needed. This process, he explained, completes the conversion of yuan and foreign currencies, constituting the illegal act of buying and selling foreign exchange. Stringent capital controlsChina enforces stringent rules on money transfers outside the country. Citizens are limited to exchanging up to $50,000 in foreign currency and require a permit for transactions beyond that limit. Any transaction exceeding the limit without a permit is considered money laundering. During a recent investigation, authorities seized cryptocurrencies valued at approximately $28,000 in Tether, Litecoin and other digital currencies. However, the operation is estimated to have facilitated the movement of over $2.2 billion, involving more than a thousand bank accounts across 17 provinces and municipalities. Monetary control loopholesChina, once the largest cryptocurrency market, imposed a comprehensive ban on crypto exchanges in September 2017 and subsequently expanded its restrictions to include crypto mining and trading. Despite these measures, reports have surfaced about underground crypto exchange operations. Earlier this year, an investigative report by the Wall Street Journal found that global exchange Binance continues to do thriving business with Chinese customers. Global crypto exchanges are reportedly still onboarding Chinese clients indirectly. The South China Morning Post (SCMP) recently accused Binance of facilitating Chinese crypto trading accounts by falsely claiming they are from Taiwan. While mainland China adopts a hostile stance towards cryptocurrencies, the special administrative region of Hong Kong remains progressive in the sector. Hong Kong’s regulatory authorities have introduced specific rules for cryptocurrencies and are licensing crypto exchanges operating within the jurisdiction. Arthur Hayes, the co-founder of the BitMEX crypto derivatives platform, recently described Hong Kong as the gateway for mainland China to global capital markets. Hayes asserted that wealthy Chinese individuals all bank in Hong Kong and with that, they all have access to crypto exchanges and brokers. In Cambodia, it is understood that illicit Chinese-linked activities oftentimes implicate the use of U.S. dollar stablecoin Tether (USDT) to move funds in and out of China even though Tether is banned in Cambodia. The latest crackdown in China underscores the ongoing challenges faced by authorities in controlling crypto-related activities, highlighting the dynamic nature of such activity within and adjacent to mainland China. As regulatory scrutiny intensifies, the contrast between mainland China’s approach and Hong Kong’s more open stance toward cryptocurrencies becomes increasingly evident.