CMCC Global Launches $100 Million Fund for Asian Blockchain Startups

In Mumbai, users of cryptocurrency exchanges are increasingly being asked to prove they are real people—by moving their eyes or turning their heads in front of a camera—before they can open an account. In Tokyo, meanwhile, exchange operators are collecting a different kind of identity marker: each customer’s country of tax residence, recorded for reporting to authorities at home and abroad. Governments across Asia are tightening oversight of the crypto sector, with India and Japan pursuing parallel efforts to boost compliance, strengthen tax enforcement, and curb financial anonymity. Together, these measures are pushing digital assets closer to conventional financial standards.Photo by Rowan Heuvel on UnsplashIndia mandates biometric-style checksAccording to the Times of India, India’s Financial Intelligence Unit has required crypto exchanges to adopt more stringent know-your-customer (KYC) and anti-money-laundering (AML) procedures, including liveness checks designed to prevent accounts from being created using deepfakes. Under the guidelines, platforms must also record information such as geolocation data, IP addresses, and timestamps during onboarding, and link users to bank accounts through verification steps that include test transactions and government-issued identification like passports or voter IDs. The measures come as tax authorities continue to face obstacles in monitoring crypto activity. India taxes crypto profits at a flat rate of 30% and applies a 1% tax deducted at source (TDS) on transfers. According to a separate report by the Times of India, the Income Tax Department (ITD) told lawmakers that the pseudonymous and cross-border nature of crypto transactions can complicate compliance—particularly when funds move through offshore exchanges, private wallets, or decentralized finance platforms. Despite international information-sharing efforts, officials say tracing crypto holdings across jurisdictions remains challenging when transactions bypass regulated intermediaries. India’s central bank has also continued to argue in favor of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) over privately issued stablecoins. In its December financial stability report, the Reserve Bank of India said CBDCs can offer efficiency and programmability within a sovereign framework, while warning that stablecoins may introduce risks during periods of market stress. Japan implements OECD crypto tax rulesJapan, meanwhile, has moved to formalize international data exchange. On Jan. 1, 2026, it implemented the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), a standard developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to address cross-border tax evasion by automating the exchange of crypto transaction data between tax authorities. Under the new rules, users of Japanese crypto exchanges must declare their country—or countries—of tax residence. Exchange operators are required to collect and submit data to Japan’s tax authorities by April 30 of the following year, including transaction volumes, consideration received from purchases and sales, and asset-type breakdowns covering cryptocurrencies as well as security tokens and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Information related to non-resident users is also intended to be shared with relevant foreign tax authorities under existing tax cooperation arrangements. While both nations pursue stricter oversight and transparency, their broader policy trajectories differ. In India, regulatory tightening reinforces a restrictive environment focused on risk containment. In Japan, by contrast, the new compliance frameworks appear to be laying the groundwork for a broader economic embrace of digital assets. Japanese Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama, speaking at the Tokyo Stock Exchange last week, framed 2026 as the “inaugural year of digital.” Unlike her Indian counterparts, who remain wary of private crypto assets, Katayama argued that established market infrastructure should play a larger role in adoption. Pointing to the U.S. market, she suggested Japan could move toward exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and integration with stock and commodity exchanges to capture the benefits of blockchain-based assets. This pro-growth shift is reinforced by the prospect of fiscal relief. Tokyo is considering an overhaul that would reclassify crypto gains—currently taxed as miscellaneous income at rates of up to 55%—to a flat 20%, aligning them with stocks. The changes, however, are not expected to take effect until 2028, given the extent of the required legal and regulatory revisions. India, meanwhile, has indicated that it plans to adopt CARF by 2027, suggesting that its current emphasis on domestic controls may eventually be supplemented by deeper international cooperation—bringing offshore crypto activity more firmly into the view of tax authorities. 

Bithumb and Korbit Struggle to Gain Traction Despite Zero Trading FeesSouth Korean cryptocurrency exchanges Bithumb and Korbit have recently eliminated trading fees, but their bold decision hasn’t yielded much results. Bithumb was the first to implement this change and attracted users for about a week, but it is now seeing a loss in market share. Korbit, following Bithumb’s example, is also struggling to achieve meaningful outcomes.Photo by Alexander Grey on UnsplashLimited impactLocal media outlet Chosun Biz used data from crypto data platform CoinGecko to draw this conclusion. On October 26, Korbit’s daily trading volume represented 0.19% of the total trading volume among South Korea’s top five crypto exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit, and Gopax). This figure marked a 0.14 percentage point increase compared to the 0.05% recorded on October 19. Korbit had implemented a zero trading fee policy at 9 a.m. (KST) on October 20. Additionally, they launched a promotion offering KRW 5,000 ($3.69) worth of bitcoin to users who transferred virtual assets totaling KRW 1 million or more from Travel Rule-compliant exchanges to Korbit. While the promotion did contribute to Korbit’s market share, it still remains below 1%.Bithumb’s performance showed some improvement, albeit briefly. As of October 26, Bithumb’s market share stood at 18%, marking a 4.7 percentage point increase from its 13.3% share on October 3, the day before it eliminated trading fees. However, it’s worth noting that its market share had reached almost 30% shortly after the promotion’s launch. This indicates that its strategy is losing efficacy over time.The less-than-enthusiastic results from their daring marketing endeavors can be attributed to their inability to draw in retail investors. To begin with, Upbit, the leading player in the market, had already been providing a relatively low fee of 0.05%. Furthermore, adapting to new user interfaces on these exchanges posed a challenge. Zero trading fees weren’t attractive enough for crypto investors to leave their current platforms.Trading volume mattersIn the case of Korbit, its lower trading volume was a disadvantage when it came to attracting users. On crypto exchanges, a higher trading volume typically translates to faster trade executions. As a result, users of Korbit might experience delays in executing trades at their preferred price.Jeong Hye-won, a research associate at crypto data analytics platform Xangle, told Chosun Biz that users on exchanges with lower trading volumes tend to experience slippages due to slower transaction speeds and sparsely populated order books. A slippage means the difference between the initially placed order price and the executed order price. Jeong further explained that Korbit’s zero trading fee policy didn’t have a significant impact because it offers fewer listed tokens compared to Upbit and Bithumb.There is speculation that the free-trading fee promotions introduced by Bithumb and Korbit, despite their revenue sacrifices, might conclude sooner than initially anticipated due to their perceived ineffectiveness. Bithumb derives 99.95% of its revenue from trading fees, while Korbit relies on trading fees for 99.79% of its income. An industry insider has commented that trading fees play a vital role in an exchange’s revenue, and given Bithumb’s reported loss in earnings during the second quarter, there are concerns about their capacity to sustain this strategy.

NVT Ratio Signals Overvalued BTCThe network value to transaction (NVT) ratio of Bitcoin, which has been staying at a high level since the beginning of the year, has signaled its overvaluation, according to Yonhap Infomax.However, some argue that this will not necessarily lead to a crypto winter, considering that the nature of Bitcoin as an asset has changed and there is no sign of overheating in other indicators.©Pexels/PixabayPrice and NVT ratio correlationYonhap Infomax found out that the correlation between the NVT ratio and the price of Bitcoin over the past six years is -0.35. A value of 1 represents a completely positive correlation, while a value of -1 represents a completely negative correlation.Extending this period to 2010 makes the correlation close to 0, but during the early years, NVT ratios showed high volatility, shooting up to four digits. Such a high volatility doesn’t suggest much correlation. Until 2021, there was a high correlation of up to -0.44.The NVT ratio is calculated by dividing the market cap by the transacted volume. Conceptually, it is similar to the price-to-earnings ratio for the stock market.In 2017, when the crypto market was bullish, the average Bitcoin NVT ratio was 7.3. This number became 8.7 in 2021 when the market experienced a similar pattern. In retrospect, single-digit NVT ratios usually hint at bullish markets.This year so far, Bitcoin has been relatively overvalued, given that the average NVT ratio is 23.6.BTC price recoveryWhen the crypto market sentiment lost its confidence due to the FTX bankruptcy last year, the price of Bitcoin went down to $15,000. It later recovered to the near $30,000 level. The Bitcoin price once had reached an all-time high in 2021, surpassing $65,000.The years that manifested similar patterns as this year were 2018 and 2019. In those years, the Bitcoin NVT ratio plateaued around 20.Uncertain outlookThe NVT ratio itself could point to a possible crypto winter, but researchers say it’s hard to say.Jang Kyung-pil, a research analyst at crypto data platform Xangle, said that people now consider Bitcoin as a store of value rather than a means of transactions, pointing out that BTC’s market value to realized value (MVRV) ratio has hit the bottom at 0.84 and now reached 1.4. According to Jang, MVRV values under 1 indicate undervaluation and those above 3 indicate overvaluation.Jung Seok-moon, head of the research center at crypto exchange Korbit, said that the current NVT ratio signals BTC overvaluation. He added that the Fed is likely to turn dovish in its monetary policy, which would prompt a strong BTC uptrend.