Shinhan Bank to Issue NFTs at 2023 Global Blockchain Incheon Conference

In a significant move to propel Thailand towards becoming a digital asset hub, the Finance Ministry has announced the exemption of value-added tax (VAT) on digital asset trading. VAT exemptionAccording to the Bangkok Post, the decision became effective on Jan. 1. It aims to foster the growth of the digital asset industry and support the country's growing digital economy. Paopoom Rojanasakul, secretary to the finance minister, underscored the ministry's commitment to promoting digital assets as a viable fundraising tool. By suspending the requirement to pay 7% VAT on income derived from cryptocurrency and digital token trading, authorities seek to encourage investment in the digital asset market. This VAT exemption extends beyond authorized digital asset exchanges to include brokers and dealers under the supervision of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The move aligns with Thailand's ambition to position itself as the region's premier digital asset hub. Moreover, the Finance Ministry and SEC are actively amending the 2019 Securities and Exchange Act to enhance regulations concerning digital investment tokens, bringing them more in line with securities.Photo by Markus Winkler on UnsplashAttracting offshore digital asset sector investmentThailand's attractiveness to offshore digital asset investors has grown substantially in recent years. The new tax policies are poised to further bolster the country's position in the global digital asset market. Last month, the Thai SEC adjusted the rules governing digital token investments, raising the investment ceiling that had been imposed on retail investors where initial coin offerings (ICOs) relative to infrastructure and real estate are concerned. Furthermore, the Commission has updated criteria for custodial wallet provider businesses, enabling them to extend their services to digital asset business operators, thereby facilitating smoother operations within the digital asset ecosystem. However, Mr. Paopoom emphasized the importance of balancing development with financial stability. While fostering innovation in the digital asset sector, the government remains mindful of safeguarding the integrity of the financial system. Despite these advancements, the SEC has made it clear that it will not permit the trading of spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in Thailand. This decision contrasts with the recent approval of bitcoin ETFs in the United States and moves towards approving crypto ETFs in Hong Kong, reflecting Thailand's cautious approach to cryptocurrency-related financial products. Nevertheless, Thailand continues to attract global crypto exchanges, with industry giants such as Binance establishing a presence in the country. Last month, Binance announced the launch of crypto exchange services to the general public in Thailand through Gulf Binance, a joint venture with Thailand’s Gulf Innova. The VAT exemption on digital asset trading represents a pivotal step in Thailand's journey towards embracing the digital economy. With supportive regulatory measures and a dynamic market environment, Thailand aims to take its place as a leading player in digital assets.   

HKMA Issues Warning Against Crypto Firm MisrepresentationThe Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), the central bank for the Chinese autonomous territory, has taken a stand against cryptocurrency businesses that falsely present themselves as “banks” and market their products as “deposits,” issuing a public advisory to raise awareness about the issue.Photo by Marcel Eberle on UnsplashBanking ordinance violationsIn a press release published to its website on Friday, the HKMA said that instances had arisen where crypto firms had labeled themselves as “crypto banks,” “crypto asset banks,” and “digital trading banks.” The regulatory authority underscored that such misrepresentations could be in violation of the Banking Ordinance in Hong Kong.In addition to adopting misleading bank-related titles, these crypto firms have been advertising “savings plans” as “low risk” with “high return,” potentially misleading the public into believing that these entities are authorized banks in Hong Kong, where they can securely deposit their funds.The HKMA stressed that only entities such as licensed banks, restricted license banks, and deposit-taking companies, collectively referred to as “authorized institutions” and holding a license granted by the HKMA, are legally permitted to engage in banking or deposit-taking activities in Hong Kong.Furthermore, funds held on crypto exchanges are not covered by Hong Kong’s Deposit Protection Scheme. “Under the Banking Ordinance, only licensed banks, restricted license banks and deposit-taking companies, which have been granted a license by the HKMA can carry out banking or deposit-taking business in Hong Kong,” the HKMA stated.Misuse of banking termsAny entity using the term “bank” in its business name or implying that it offers banking services in Hong Kong is committing an offense, according to the central bank. The same rule applies to any entity engaging in deposit-taking activities in Hong Kong or soliciting the public to make deposits.It’s important to note that crypto firms not officially recognized as banks in Hong Kong are not subject to the oversight of the HKMA.The HKMA advised the public to exercise caution. In cases of uncertainty regarding an entity claiming to be a bank or soliciting deposits in Hong Kong, individuals are encouraged to consult the register of authorized institutions on the HKMA’s website, and if doubts persist, it suggests that they should contact the authority via its Public Enquiry Service hotline.According to section 97 of the Banking Ordinance, only a bank or a central bank can use the term “bank” or its derivatives in its business name in Hong Kong without the written consent of the HKMA.Additionally, sections 11 and 12 of the Banking Ordinance stipulate that only entities possessing a valid banking license or recognized as authorized institutions are permitted to engage in banking or deposit-taking activities in Hong Kong. As per section 92 of the Banking Ordinance, only an authorized institution is authorized to issue advertisements inviting the public to make deposits, with certain exceptions.The HKMA’s advisory serves as a stern reminder to the crypto industry that regulatory compliance and transparency are essential, particularly when using terms associated with traditional banking, to protect the interests of the public.

Shanghai Court Recognizes Unique Traits of BitcoinThe Shanghai Second Intermediate People’s Court has added a layer of legitimacy to Bitcoin despite China’s prevailing anti-crypto stance.In a recently published report, the court recognized digital currencies such as Bitcoin as being unique and non-replicable. It went further still in singling out Bitcoin as being distinct from the thousands of other cryptocurrencies that are currently in existence.Photo by Zhou Xian on UnsplashSun chimes inThe significance of this development has caught the attention of Justin Sun, the Founder of the TRON blockchain network, who took to the X social media platform (formerly Twitter) to share insights from the report. Sun wrote:”The Second Intermediate People’s Court of Shanghai believes that with the development of internet technology, digital currencies represented by Bitcoin possess uniqueness and non-replicability.”Legal attributesDelving deeper into the report’s content, it becomes evident that the court was engaging in a discussion about the legal attributes of Bitcoin and how judicial decisions should be approached in cases involving cryptocurrencies.One striking aspect of the report is how it acknowledges the usage of cryptocurrencies in illegal financial activities, such as illicit fundraising. In this instance, the court has indirectly acknowledged the financial nature of cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, despite the fact that a ban has been in place on trading Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies since 2021.That said, the report also notes that due to the regulatory stance on cryptocurrencies, the legal attributes of digital currencies remain ambiguous, creating challenges in their judicial handling. Despite some courts attempting to disregard the “monetary” and “property” attributes of digital currencies, these efforts have proved unsuccessful.Inherent characteristicsRegarding the monetary attribute, the courts still identify the sale price of digital currencies in their judgments. When it comes to property attributes, these courts struggle to ignore the inherent property value presented by digital currencies during legal proceedings.While acknowledging Bitcoin’s decentralized nature and lack of centralized control, the article still underscores its “major functions of currency,” such as scalability, circulation, storage, and means of payment, making it a global currency.Future implicationsThe legal opinion expressed by the Shanghai court provides a notable boost to the legitimacy of Bitcoin and other digital currencies. It asserts that these tokens undeniably possess value, even if the People’s Bank of China chooses not to formally recognize them.Moreover, the court’s inclination toward classifying cryptocurrencies as personal property aligns with another report from the Chinese courts as well as rulings in other jurisdictions, such as Singapore. Similarly the Shanghai court acknowledges that Bitcoin can be acquired through various means, including mining, inheritance, and buying and selling.The court’s recognition of the enduring value of cryptocurrencies echoes the sentiment that value is a collective human judgment. In this respect, the Shanghai court’s perspective aligns with the reality that many Chinese citizens continue to use digital currencies as a medium of exchange despite the existing ban.The Shanghai court’s unintentional validation of Bitcoin’s unique attributes and value may have broader implications for the legal status and recognition of cryptocurrencies in China and beyond. This latest development could contribute to a more nuanced approach to cryptocurrency regulation and legal interpretation in the future.