Market speculates on Qatari investment driving bitcoin price surge

The Philippines' financial regulator announced that it is implementing what amounts to a ban on Binance in the Southeast Asian nation by blocking local access to the leading global cryptocurrency exchange. This decision, publicized via a press release on March 25, comes as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) raised concerns last November over Binance's operations in the country, citing a lack of necessary licenses for certain investment products. According to the press release, the SEC revealed that it sought assistance from the National Telecommunication Commission (NTC) to enforce the ban, expressing worries about the security of Filipino investors' funds on the platform. In a letter addressed to the NTC, SEC Chairman Emilio Aquino stated:"The SEC has identified the aforementioned platform and concluded that the public's continued access to these websites/apps poses a threat to the security of the funds of investing Filipinos.”Photo by Krisia on PexelsA similar move was taken last December by the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) in India, as it acted to block access to what it deemed to be non-compliant global crypto exchanges. Unlicensed servicesThe SEC alleges that Binance offers services like leveraged trading and crypto savings accounts without the required licenses, violating the country's Securities Regulation Code. Consequently, the ban is set to be implemented within three months, allowing investors time to exit their positions held through Binance. Furthermore, the SEC has requested Google and Meta to restrict Binance-related advertisements targeted at Filipino users on their platforms, extending the regulatory measures to online advertising as well. A similar stance was taken by authorities in Thailand last August with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) engaging in talks with Facebook in an effort to curb questionable crypto-related advertising on the platform. Regulatory setbackThis move by the Philippines' financial watchdog marks another regulatory setback for Binance, which has faced increasing scrutiny globally. In December 2023, a U.S. court ordered Binance to pay significant fines to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for evading federal law and operating an illegal derivatives exchange. As part of the settlement, Binance's former CEO, Changpeng Zhao (CZ), agreed to step down from his position, with Zhao also facing civil and criminal charges related to anti-money laundering laws. The SEC's cautionary stance against Binance dates back to November 2023, shortly after Zhao's legal troubles in the U.S. emerged. At that time, the SEC expressed its intention to ban Binance in the Philippines, though the execution was postponed due to changes in the leadership of the regulatory body. Notably, Kenneth Stern, who headed up Binance's operations in the Philippines, exited the company in July 2023, amidst mounting regulatory pressures and legal challenges. Binance had seen many leading executives part ways with it in the lead-up to the company’s settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) last year. With regulatory actions tightening around Binance globally, the future of the exchange in various jurisdictions remains uncertain. The ban in the Philippines adds to the ongoing regulatory challenges faced by the company and underscores the growing importance of compliance within the cryptocurrency industry.

U.S. regulator, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), has fined Seychelles-headquartered crypto prime brokerage Falcon Labs as part of an overall settlement with the company.  The CFTC had found that the company had operated as an unregistered futures commission merchant (FCM) and furthermore, that it had enabled access to digital asset exchanges without the requisite registration.Photo by Joshua Hoehne on UnsplashSettlement termsIn a press release published to its website on May 13, the CFTC set out the nature of its settlement with Falcon Labs. The parties have agreed that Falcon Labs must discontinue its activities in acting as an unregistered FCM, with particular emphasis on it having provided U.S. individuals with access to digital asset derivatives trading.  Furthermore a fine of $1,179,008 has been applied in disgorgement and in addition, Falcon will have to pay a civil monetary penalty of $589,504. These penalties have been significantly reduced by comparison with the CFTCs original ask, on the basis that Falcon Labs cooperated fully with the CFTC’s Division of Enforcement over the course of the regulator’s investigative process into the activities of the company. In its statement the regulator set out its intent relative to enforcement going forward. Ian McGinley, the CFTC’s Director of Enforcement, stated:”The CFTC is taking the fight one step further by, for the first time, charging an intermediary that inappropriately facilitated access to those exchanges. Today’s action highlights that the CFTC will not hesitate to charge any entities—exchanges or intermediaries—who are providing customers access to digital asset products and services that require registration but have failed to appropriately register.” McGinley added that “the CFTC’s enforcement program has made clear it will not tolerate digital asset exchanges that fail to register with the CFTC or comply with the agency’s rules that maintain integrity in the derivatives markets.” No admission of guiltIn responding to the CFTCs original complaint, Falcon Labs tried to up the ante in terms of compliance. It moved to improve customer identification controls. As a consequence of its market position as a trading intermediary Falcon Labs enabled customer trading on a number of digital asset exchange platforms.  That activity included facilitating U.S.-based institutional customers relative to crypto derivatives trading. It allowed its own account with various digital asset trading platforms to be used, through a system of sub-accounts, by its customers, oftentimes without adequate customer information having been sought. In reaching this settlement with the CFTC Falcon Labs has not made any admission of guilt relative to the regulator’s findings. Alongside paying the agreed upon fines, it will voluntarily agree to adhere to the implementation of improved controls and to withhold its services from user groups that are deemed to be restricted, including all U.S. nationals. Taking to the X social media platform to comment on the matter, Mike Sellig, a partner at New York-based law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher, claimed that the settlement demonstrated that the CFTC was following in the footsteps of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), establishing “a body of widely applicable precedent.”

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), the city-state’s central bank and primary financial regulator, has set a deadline of June 30 for unlicensed digital token service providers (DTSPs) working out of Singapore to cease offering their services to clients in overseas markets.Photo by Hu Chen on UnsplashResponding to feedbackThe deadline emerged by way of a process MAS has followed as part of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2022 (FSM Act). Last October, the regulator invited feedback from stakeholders related to the authority’s approach to the regulation of DTSPs. MAS published its response to that feedback on May 30.  It stated:”DTSPs which are subject to a licensing requirement under section 137 of the FSM Act must suspend or cease carrying on a business of providing DT services outside Singapore by 30 June 2025.” It added that it was not including any transitional arrangement for DTSPs despite MAS receiving such a suggestion from a number of feedback respondents. Instead, unlicensed DTSPs will need to abide by the June 30 deadline and have acquired a license by then or cease unlicensed activity.The regulator defines DTSPs as individuals, partnerships or Singapore corporations operating from a place of business in Singapore, including those formed or incorporated in Singapore who offer digital token services outside Singapore. Those found in breach of the regulation could face up to three years in prison and fines of up to S$250,000 ($195,000). Companies who have already obtained licensing or those exempted by way of the Securities and Futures Act, Payment Services Act and the Financial Advisers Act are free to continue trading. Challenging licensing requirementsThose who wish to become compliant will have to satisfy some challenging requirements. For those granted a license, an annual license fee of S$10,000 ($7,780) applies. Small-scale DTSPs need to satisfy a $150,000 ($116,670) ongoing capital requirement, while larger, well-established DTSPs must comply with a S$250,000 ($195,000) capital requirement. Additionally, MAS has put in place competency requirements related to a DTSP's CEO, directors, partners and managers. Hagen Rooke, a partner at law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, outlined on LinkedIn that while it's possible for unlicensed operators to obtain licensing, it will be very difficult to get a license. In its feedback response document, the regulator stated: “MAS will approach the licensing of DTSPs in a prudent and cautious manner and there will be extremely limited circumstances under which MAS will consider granting an applicant a licence under section 138 of the FSM Act.” Rooke advised crypto companies that may be affected to act swiftly in order to derisk through an operational restructuring or removing the businesses' Singapore touchpoints. He suggested that firms need to consider if it has customers outside of Singapore or front-office functions located outside of the city-state to determine if they could be affected by this regulatory measure. A number of Asian countries have moved to take action against unlicensed foreign firms that have engaged with local investors, with Thailand becoming the latest country to do so recently. However, the Singaporean authorities have approached the issue from the opposite perspective, citing the potential reputational risk that unlicensed DTSPs pose for Singapore.