Sun Flags Unjust Token Profits of Huobi Founder’s Brother

Hong Kong regulator, the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), has established guidelines for crypto staking service providers. That’s according to a statement published by the SFC to its website on April 7. The guidance is aimed at licensed virtual asset trading platforms (VATPs) and SFC-authorized funds with exposure to digital assets.Photo by Markus Winkler on UnsplashExpanding service offeringThe regulator points out that the guidance on staking falls in line with its recently announced “ASPIRe” roadmap, which is geared towards ensuring that the Chinese autonomous territory remains relevant in its efforts to maintain its status as a global hub for crypto businesses. Expanding product and service offerings within the crypto sector was one of the five pillars of that plan. Smoothing the way for the offering of staking works towards fulfilling that aspect of the ASPIRe plan. Written approvalIn this guidance, the SFC sets out that licensed service providers must obtain written approval from the regulator before any such product can be offered to investors in Hong Kong. That stipulation applies to both VATPs and authorized funds with digital asset exposure. Additionally, VATPs must retain control over staked assets, with no delegation in the custody of such assets to third parties permitted. In the case of authorized funds that include crypto assets, they must stake virtual asset holdings through licensed VATPs and other authorized institutions. Required disclosuresThe regulator has also stipulated that certain disclosures must be made by licensed exchanges to potential customers in respect of staking products. These include the disclosure of all associated risks, full transparency with regard to fees, minimum lock-up periods and custodial arrangements. Commenting on the provision of this guidance, SFC CEO Julia Leung said that the provision of a greater range of regulated services and products is crucial in order to sustain continued growth of Hong Kong’s virtual asset ecosystem. However, she added that any broadening of the range of services offered “must be done in a regulated environment where the safety of client virtual assets continues to be front and centre of the compliance framework for offering such service.”   The SFC outlined that it recognizes “the potential benefits of staking in enhancing the security of blockchain networks and allowing investors to earn yields on virtual assets within a regulated market environment.” The authorities in Hong Kong are not the only ones who recognize the benefits that the incorporation of staking within crypto investment products can bring. Last month, Robert Mitchnick, head of digital assets at the world’s largest asset manager, BlackRock, told the Digital Assets Summit in New York that Ether ETFs would benefit from the addition of staking.  Mitchnick suggested that the current inability to earn a staking yield within such products is a key limitation. He outlined that such a change is dependent upon relevant regulatory changes being implemented in the U.S. A more crypto-friendly climate in the U.S. since U.S. President Donald Trump took office has resulted in various lawsuits being dropped against companies like Coinbase related to the staking services that had been offered. A number of U.S. Ether ETF issuers, including Franklin Templeton, Grayscale and Bitwise, have put forward proposals to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to have staking included in these products.

As cryptocurrencies increasingly position themselves as a recognized asset class and potential hedge against fiat inflation, illicit activity tied to digital tokens is becoming more visible. A recent high-profile case in the UK has brought this issue into sharp focus, centering on a fraud scheme originating in China. According to BBC News, the case involves Qian Zhimin, a woman who raised funds from more than 100,000 investors in China by claiming to operate a crypto mining company that also develops health products. Instead, she laundered the proceeds and fled the country. On Nov. 11, Qian was sentenced to 11 years and eight months in prison by a UK court.Photo by Vasilis Chatzopoulos on Unsplash$6B fraud and lavish lifestyle​Qian entered Britain on a forged passport in September 2017 and proceeded to live an extravagant lifestyle, renting a mansion in Hampstead for over £17,000 ($22,700) per month. She was arrested in northern England in April 2024, and it was found that she held roughly 61,000 Bitcoin, valued at roughly £5 billion ($6.6 billion), having converted portions of her holdings to cover her substantial living expenses. ​The sheer scale of her wealth was revealed after police searched her rented residence, discovering the Bitcoin reserves on hard drives and laptops. It marks the largest crypto seizure ever recorded in the UK. During the raid, officers also found four other individuals at the property illegally employed to handle household tasks such as shopping, cleaning, and security. ​Since Qian’s arrival in the UK, the value of her Bitcoin holdings has appreciated more than 20-fold. With the fraudster now sentenced, victims are seeing a glimmer of hope for restitution. A civil case scheduled for early next year will determine the fate of the seized assets. However, while many defrauded Chinese investors are reportedly preparing to file claims, establishing a clear paper trail may prove difficult. Many victims routed funds through local intermediaries rather than transferring them directly to Qian’s firm. ​U.S. Bitcoin forfeiture and Beijing’s allegationsWhile the UK courts grapple with the aftermath of Qian’s fraud, a separate crypto controversy is brewing between the U.S. and China, highlighting Beijing's continued vigilance over the sector despite its 2021 ban on trading and mining. According to Cointelegraph, the state-supported National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center (CVERC) has alleged that American authorities are connected to the disappearance of roughly 127,000 Bitcoin, valued at around $14.5 billion, from the LuBian mining pool. ​These allegations surfaced after the U.S. filed a civil forfeiture claim in October against Chen Zhi, the Cambodia-based founder of the Prince Group, who is believed to have owned the assets prior to the breach. At the time of the filing, the U.S. Treasury Department noted that the funds were already under its control. ​CVERC contends that Washington hasn't explained how it accessed the assets. Citing data from analytics firm Arkham, the Chinese agency suggested the funds had been under U.S. control for over a year. They argued that the prolonged inactivity of the Bitcoin before the formal seizure is inconsistent with the typical behavior of hackers seeking quick profit, implying state-level involvement. Economic chess between Washington and BeijingThis matter of Bitcoin control adds a new layer of complexity to U.S.–China relations, even as a trade truce between the two countries took effect on Nov. 10. In a report by CNBC, Washington cut tariffs on China’s fentanyl-linked imports to 10% and extended a reciprocal rate reduction under that agreement. In exchange, Beijing is said to have eased certain restrictions on rare earth exports. Analysts at Morgan Stanley suggest that China is maintaining its export-control regime, implemented in April, to retain strategic leverage. They caution that recurring negotiations and strategic divergence will remain defining features of the evolving bilateral relationship. 

At the Foresight 2024 Hong Kong Summit on Aug. 11, Gary Tiu, director and head of regulatory affairs for OSL, a crypto market custodian, exchange and prime brokerage, outlined in a panel discussion that the crypto exchange-traded fund (ETF) market in the Chinese autonomous territory is challenged insofar as it lacks market incentives.Photo by Cecelia Chang on UnsplashThe intermediary problemTiu’s company hosted the event, alongside Foresight News and crypto publication The Block, who reported on Tiu’s comments. The OSL executive said that when it comes to funds and structured products in Hong Kong, there’s a “very rich layer of intermediaries— brokers, banks, private banks, retail banks, etc.” involved. Tiu explained that they make a lot of money from the distribution of such products, resulting in unlisted products being marketed far more effectively by comparison with listed products. It’s against that backdrop of misaligned incentives that Tiu identifies challenges for crypto ETFs on the public markets in Hong Kong. He stated: “So I think the incentive system in Hong Kong is one of the reasons why ETFs do have a bit of a hard time growing as a financial instrument.” In the case of ETFs, the OSL executive explained that equity brokers take just a few basis points in commission, only about 1-2% of what they make on the sale of structured products. Bias against Bitcoin and EtherTiu is also of the belief that cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ether have a reputational problem among Hong Kong’s investment community, stating: “I think there is still a bit of a bias in the eyes of the regulators and also in the eyes of the financial institutions, that somehow bitcoin ETF is just this unique class of risk that you need to be extra cautious about.” Chen Zhao, who heads up the digital assets section of Hong Kong-based independent financial advisory firm Fosun Wealth, chimed in with his own concerns. According to Zhao, the crypto ETF products currently marketed in Hong Kong are lacking in terms of the depth of dealers and brokers offering the products. Zhao explained that there are three main types of market participant active on the Hong Kong markets, namely western institutions, Hong Kong-based institutions and their counterparts from mainland China.  Zhao stated: “Chinese brokers and dealers, they’re not allowed or they choose not to deal with the product, and for the western financial institutions, they don’t have the necessity of dealing the products because they acquire more fees and incentives, and have easier access to the U.S. ETFs.” While progress is far more modest by comparison with the U.S. market, the Hong Kong crypto ETF market continues to develop, with spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs setting a record trading volume last week. In the same week, Mox Bank, a subsidiary of British banking multinational Standard Chartered, launched trading services relative to spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF products in Hong Kong. Last month, OSL CEO Patrick Pan, anticipated that an Ethereum ETF product that incorporated staking would launch in Hong Kong within six months. Many commentators have suggested that institutional interest in Ethereum ETFs will begin in earnest once a yield-producing staking product hits the market.