OKX adds token support for atomicals, runes, doginals and stamps

Japanese Exchanges Canvas Regulator to Permit 10x LeverageJapan’s cryptocurrency exchanges are advocating for looser regulations on margin trading, despite the global digital asset market crash experienced last year.According to a report published by Bloomberg on Monday, The Japan Virtual & Crypto Assets Exchange Association has revealed that many industry insiders are seeking leverage limits of four to 10 times for retail investors.Currently, customers are limited to doubling their exposure through borrowing. Genki Oda, the Vice Chairman of the association, believes that relaxing the leverage rule could enhance Japan’s appeal to crypto and blockchain companies, thereby stimulating increased trading activity.Photo by Su San Lee on UnsplashOngoing discussionJapanese digital asset exchanges are currently engaged in discussions to establish a consensus on the recommended leverage limit. They are planning to present their proposal to the Financial Services Agency (FSA) as early as next month.While Japan has made some efforts to ease certain cryptocurrency regulations, such as token listing and taxation, the overall regulatory environment is considered strict. The FSA expects crypto firms to provide solid justifications for loosening margin trading caps, demonstrating how it would contribute to the government’s objective of expanding blockchain-based industries. However, the agency remains open to discussions with digital asset businesses on the matter.Plummeting trade volumesPreviously, Japanese crypto platforms offered leverage up to 25 times, resulting in annual margin trading volumes of approximately $500 billion in 2020 and 2021. However, after the FSA imposed a limit of two times to curb excessive speculation and protect investors from amplified losses, trading volumes plummeted by 75% in 2022.In other parts of the world, digital asset exchanges typically offer spot margin trading with leverage ranging from five to 10 times the initial deposit, depending on local regulations. Some platforms even offer more aggressive lending options, often associated with speculative behavior that can generate waves of greed and fear within the crypto market.Oda argues that digital asset volatility has decreased since 2020 and asserts that Japanese exchanges are well-prepared to assist investors in managing the risks associated with margin trading positions. However, any relaxation of leverage rules is not expected to occur before 2024.Leverage dangersLast year’s global cryptocurrency downturn exposed risky practices and resulted in numerous bankruptcies. Regulators worldwide have responded by implementing new rules and regulations that address the lessons learned. While leverage might be in the interests of the exchange operators, many industry commentators have warned that leverage brings about market weakness.Caitlin Long, Founder and CEO of Custodia Bank, has been one such commentator, warning that massive leverage “built an industry of insolvent intermediaries” on a “foundation of sand”. It’s commonly believed that leverage leads to unsustainable market bubbles rather than iterative organic market growth.In 2022, an index tracking the top 100 cryptocurrencies partially recovered, showing a 33% increase since the beginning of this year. However, the market still faces challenges, as institutional and individual investors have exited, leading to reduced liquidity and lower expectations for price volatility in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

The Legal Future of South Korea’s Crypto Industry: Necessary Legislation and SystemsA recent National Assembly symposium organized by South Korea’s Digital Asset Policy Forum brought experts together to discuss the challenges and prospects of the implementation of the Virtual Asset User Protection Act at the National Assembly Members’ Office Building in Seoul on Tuesday.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on UnsplashInternational modelsReferences were made to global examples, such as the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) — the world’s first standalone virtual asset legislation enacted in the EU — which ensures transparency, disclosure, authorization, and supervision of crypto-asset transactions. However, unlike the capital market, MiCA does not impose regular disclosure reporting requirements or corrections on them. Firms in Japan, on the other hand, are asked to provide disclosure under autonomous regulation through the Japan Virtual and Crypto Assets Exchange Association (JVCEA).Notably, in its recent Policy Recommendations for Crypto and Digital Asset Markets Consultation Report, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) states that it is “seeking to encourage optimal consistency in the way crypto-asset markets and securities markets are regulated within individual IOSCO jurisdictions, in accordance with the principle of ‘same activities, same risks, same regulatory outcomes’.” This principle refers to the concept that any crypto-asset activity that has a similar function and poses similar risks to those in the traditional financial system — such as operating a trading platform or providing custody services — is subject to regulation that ensures equivalent outcomes, as defined by the UK Parliament.The IOSCO report also suggests that crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) should disclose information regarding ownership and control of crypto-assets, issuer and business-related information, issuer management teams, transaction history and operational description of crypto-assets, token ownership concentration, transfer protocols, and a given CASP’s treatment of the client crypto-assets and their respective rights and entitlements during events like hard forks and airdrops.Hurdles to overcomeExperts at the forum reflected these considerations in their sentiments. Han Suh-hee, a lawyer at Barun Law Firm, emphasized that it is important to determine what kind of information should be disclosed. She argued that it is necessary to discuss to what extent information about virtual asset issuers should be disclosed and whether mandating firms to disclose their financial and business conditions is efficient.In particular, Han underlined the need to consider the differences between virtual assets and stocks when establishing a framework for the disclosure of virtual assets holdings. Unlike stocks, virtual assets possess distinctive characteristics like their borderless and decentralized nature, unclear issuer backgrounds, and the ability to conduct peer-to-peer (P2P) transactions.Lee Han-jin, a lawyer at Kim & Chang Law Firm, added that the enactment of Korea’s Virtual Asset User Protection Act was aimed at establishing a system directly targeted at regulating virtual assets and virtual asset service operators (VASPs) — a significant development from the Financial Transaction Reporting Act, which had until now been the only legal framework responsible for regulating VASPs along with other entities like casino business operators. Virtual assets are now subject to a more systematized regulatory approach.However, he said that the Virtual Asset User Protection Act still has its setbacks because it is undergoing a two-stage legislative process. Lee criticized the fact that the same definition of VASPs outlined in the Financial Transaction Reporting Act had been brought over, which limits their identity to transaction intermediaries, wallet operators, and custodians while overlooking their other roles like crypto management, crypto deposits, and crypto collective investments.Lee also pointed out another weakness: the scope of prohibition on using undisclosed information and market manipulation is broader in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act than in the Capital Markets Act. He argued that enforcement decrees should stipulate the definition of insiders and exceptional cases when deliberating on the prohibition of insider virtual asset trading.Lee thus emphasized the need for a clear definition of virtual assets in the Virtual Asset User Protection Act, as it is yet unclear whether they are objects or assets. All things considered, he believes there must be a law that can encompass blockchain-based decentralization, outline the similarities and differences between digital assets and financial products, and accommodate new services that utilize smart contracts.“We are in the process of creating a regulatory system similar to those being adopted in other countries based on their respective markets,” said Lee Seok-ran, head of the Financial Innovation Bureau at the Financial Services Commission (FSC). “Unlike the stock market, which is equipped with regulations to prevent fraudulent transactions and misconduct, virtual assets are traded on multiple exchanges, so we are considering how to interpret unfair trading activities and conduct market surveillance.”She explained that the commission is prioritizing user protection measures and subordinate regulations. “I believe we will be able to create a system for subordinate regulations on disclosure once an overall global trajectory is established. But before that happens, we are working on guidelines for defining unfair trading activities with regulators and the Digital Asset eXchange Alliance (DAXA).” Unfair trading activities associated with virtual assets include not only those conducted on exchanges but also under other circumstances.The FSC officer said that the financial authority is set to establish legal criteria to distinguish cases such as false statements in white papers of crypto projects. She added that enforcement decrees will define both the conditions for restricting deposits and withdrawals on crypto exchanges and the corresponding limits.

In an interview with local media, Hong Kong legislator Johnny Ng called for the Chinese autonomous territory to implement a national Bitcoin reserve. Ng made the comments in a discussion with Hong Kong-based state-owned Chinese language media outlet, Wenweipo. The legislator believes that there is an opportunity for Hong Kong to take advantage of China’s “one country, two systems” approach to governance, which gives it the freedom to implement such a reserve despite mainland China remaining much less enthusiastic where Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are concerned.Photo by Kanchanara on UnsplashSpot Bitcoin ETF impactThe Hong Kong Legislative Council member suggested that as a first step, Hong Kong needs to assess the impact that spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in the United States have had. Spot Bitcoin ETFs were launched in the U.S. in January. The leading spot Bitcoin ETF, IBIT, provided by asset manager BlackRock, has achieved a growth rate five times faster than any other ETF launched in the past. El Salvador and the Kingdom of Bhutan are examples of nations that have made Bitcoin a significant component within their national reserves. A recent report suggests that El Salvador currently holds 6,000 Bitcoin which it purchased at an average price of $45,465. In November, Arkham Intelligence reported that Bhutan was holding Bitcoin with a dollar value which had exceeded $1 billion at that time. Ng also referred to a move by individual states in the U.S. towards holding Bitcoin as a reserve asset. In August, the state of Wisconsin increased its holdings of shares in BlackRock’s spot Bitcoin ETF, IBIT. Last month, the state of Pennsylvania introduced a bill to make Bitcoin a strategic asset. Ohio has proposed similar legislation while Alabama’s State Auditor, Andrew Sorrell, has suggested that his state should establish a Bitcoin reserve. Reducing price volatilityNg believes that furthering the Chinese autonomous territory’s dealings relative to Bitcoin could prove beneficial, given that Bitcoin has the potential to play a role in attracting more talent and investment to Hong Kong. Additionally, he feels that the development of Bitcoin reserves at state level could help in reducing the price volatility of the asset as it goes through the process of global adoption. The Hong Kong lawmaker also believes that there is an opportunity for the Chinese antonymous territory to benefit from first mover advantage, stating that “the value of Bitcoin will be more stable, causing more and more other countries to follow suit and reduce their holdings of traditional assets.” Ng's latest interview follows a similar comment he made on X in July, where he suggested that Bitcoin is worth considering as an official financial reserve for a country. David Bailey, CEO of Bitcoin Magazine, took to X stating: “Hong Kong making moves, SBR here we go. President Trump must make the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve his top priority the day he enters the White House.”In recent days, soundings from Japan and Russia suggested that neither of these countries was prepared to establish Bitcoin reserves. However, just like with the advent of the Bitcoin ETF in the U.S., following Trump’s expression of interest in the establishment of a strategic Bitcoin reserve, the level of consideration of the matter has increased considerably among governments around the world.