Connect with us

Regulation

Regulation by Enforcement Is ‘Not Effective’ for the Crypto Industry: SEC Commissioner Peirce | Video

BlockChainBulletin Staff

Published

on

Search CoinDesk

We’re coming to you from the Coin Desk podcast studio presented by Bito, founded in 2013 with the first institutional grade Bitcoin Wallet Bit Go is the gold standard in custody staking and settlement today. Bito supports over 800 coins and processes 20% of all Bitcoin transactions by value. Check them out at bit go.com. Welcome back to Coin Desk live from Consensus 2024. I’m Jed Sasi here with my co hosts, Renato Mariati. Our next guest is the SEC commissioner Hester Pers. Welcome to the show. Thanks Jen. Great to be here. Of course, I’m gonna give you my disclaimer, which is my views are my own, not necessarily those of the SEC or my fellow commissioners. Well, it’s great to meet you, IRL much like Renato and I, we’ve only spoken on the Zoom call, so it’s great to be here in real life with you. Got to get your reaction to the conference. That theme over the last three days has really been policy and regulation here within these walls. Talk to us about the conversations you’ve been having. Well, I’m always sad to hear that the theme of a crypto conference is policy and regulation. I long for the day when the theme of a crypto conference is actually the technology. But, you know, I, I’ve had conversations similar to the ones I’ve had over the past several years, which is that we need to get the policy right, so that people can focus on the technology and there’s a lot of work to go still on that. There’s some positive shoots that we’re seeing in the, in the uh regulatory landscape. But we need to see more, you know, one thing that I’ve heard a lot about throughout the conference is concern from, you know, attendees here about regulation via enforcement, about the aggressive tact that the SEC has taken in enforcement matters. Does it concern you as a commissioner that so many in the industry are viewing the SEC as an adversary or, or as a obstacle to progress? No, it certainly does. And I mean, I, I think I’ve had some similar concerns um to what you’ve heard that we’re using enforcement as the primary way to make policy in this area. And that’s just not the most effective way, it’s not effective for the industry, but it’s also not effective for us as a regulator with limited resources. And so I think we really need to reset. Um, we need to engage people in policy making whose job is not enforcement, who’s, but whose job is actually policy making and that’s a different set of people at the SEC. It seems that there is at times, um, different approach taken by the SEC and CFTC. There’s been some differences of opinion about whether, for example, certain tokens are securities. Um, you know, is there a coordinating with the CFTC? And how do you see, um, potential, um, sharing of regulatory responsibility between those two agencies going forward? Yeah. I mean, crypto is not the first place where the CFTC and the SEC have had to have conversations and sometimes very difficult ones about where the jurisdictional lines lie. Um, but I was talking to someone yesterday and, and I think the person raised a really good point, which is that ultimately, it doesn’t matter whether the jurisdiction was with us or with the CFTC, we both work for the American people and so we really wanna get it right. Um, I personally have been involved in conversations around jurisdiction related to security based swaps and swaps under the Dodd Frank Act. And I think we can have similar conversations here. I was on stage yesterday with, um, Commissioner Messinger from the CFTC and I think she and I approach these issues very similarly. We’d like to sit down together, have round tables, talk about some of these issues. And so we could start doing that tomorrow. There’s, there’s no problem to that. And would some of those conversations be hard? Absolutely. But I think it could move us forward much faster than each agency working on it. On its own commissioner. I’ve heard from people around the conference that you’ve been really open to speaking with different projects and different folks while you are here, what are you learning from people at the conference? What kinds of questions are they asking you uh about the sec and regulation to come? I think people are constantly looking for, you know, some light at the end of the tunnel and hoping that we’ll get to a better place. Um But yesterday, for example, I put out uh a model for uh uh uh in innovation sandbox and I think that kind of thing would be interesting to a lot of people because it would allow them to start trying things here in the US. Um And, and it would be a streamlined approach and I think that’s what people are looking for. They wanna have a way to positively engage with the SEC. Um And, and, you know, this is again the same kind of theme that I’ve been hearing for a long time, which is we wanna work with you and we wanna come in, but we wanna know that this is gonna be a conversation that leads us to be able to actually do something in the marketplace in a way that’s consistent with the securities laws. You know, one obviously, one focus has been throughout this conference. At least that I’ve been hearing from market participants is about f 21 there. Hope for there to be a regulatory framework, obviously, that’s up to a uh a different branch of our government, the legislative branch. But why hasn’t the SEC used the authority? It does have to promulgate regulations in the meantime, so that there’s more certainty for the market. I mean, I think that’s such a great question because the, the, this is when Congress comes in often when, um and this is not only with respect to crypto, but sometimes the sec has authority and chooses not to use it. Um And Congress sort of nudges us and tries to encourage us to use our exempt of authority. Um I’m thinking in terms of small business capital formation, that’s another area where often we don’t, we don’t take the steps, we need to. So Congress comes in and says, all right, well, we’re gonna tell you, you have to do this and I think we’re seeing the same kind of thing happen with crypto. We had the opportunity to try to, to, to set out a productive regulatory approach. Congress finally said, ok, we’re gonna come in and we’re gonna outline this for you and I’m always grateful for Congress’s input. I mean, they’re, they’re my boss. And so it’s really nice to hear what, where they want authority to lie. Um But I do think we could have done some of the hard work and it’s unfortunate that we didn’t, what was the obstacle there in your view or can you, can you tell me, and I think there’s, there’s a view that the existing securities laws work just fine in this space and I, I came into the sec thinking that we didn’t need to make adjustments. Um, but as I learned more about the industry and about what people were trying to do, I realized there isn’t actually a great fit and there’s some adjustments that we need to make. And I think it’s, it’s a lack of willingness to sit down and have those serious conversations with seriously thinking, not only about the law and, and, and how the law has developed over time, but also about what people are actually trying to do and marrying those two things together. It’s, it’s actually quite a bit more complicated than I think many people are willing to acknowledge and that’s why we need to do the hard work. We have the expertise that the SEC to do that work. It just hasn’t been done. I asked the uh Texas State Regulator, this Renato told me earlier on the show that a lot of his clients are looking to go overseas because the lack of regulatory clarity here. Is this a conversation that you’re having behind the scenes at the SEC? Is this something that’s being discussed? How do we keep innovation here in the US? I mean, it’s certainly something that I’ve talked to a lot of folks in the industry about people who are either thinking about leaving the US or I talked recently to someone who said, you know what, I don’t want to leave the U SI, I will build my thing here, but I’m having to wait. Um, and that’s bad too. Right. We want people to be trying to push forward their ideas in terms of whether or not it’s a big concern. I’d say many people in Washington don’t really care that much about it because they don’t think that there’s a lot of value in the technology underlying this. And so, you know, to be fair to them, they’ve seen a lot of fraud in the name of crypto. And so maybe it would be better if it just doesn’t happen in the US if it happens outside and it’s hard to sort of pull those people back and say yes, there has been a lot of bad activity, but there’s also a core of something that is interesting. I’m, I’m a regulator, not a technologist, but I would like to see that play out in the United States. I would like the US to be the place that people when they think about, where do I wanna build a company or where do I wanna do my development? I want that to be in the US. Um And I think we have a lot of work to do to make that uh to make the US the most attractive place to be. Yeah, I think one of the more frustrating things for industry participants is that there’s not a uh an, an avenue by which they can come forward and say here, here’s what we are trying to do. Give us guidance. Are we compliant? Are we able to get a safe harbor or report ourselves and say this is the activity we’re doing? How can we do this in a legal manner? And at times even attempts to do so have been rebuffed. There’s been uh enforcement actions taken. Um You know, I is there any movement within the sec to try to provide more guidance to the industry or at least give a reprieve for industry participants that are trying to get some guidance uh on the front end. I mean, we haven’t made a lot of progress on that front. I will say though that the, the micro sandbox that I put out yesterday, I think could be a path to getting to more um positive interaction between the industry and between the sec in a way that also allows the public to, to see what’s going on. So it would be transparent um what people were doing and it would also give the sec staff time to work with these projects in a way that I think would be productive. So I hear that need and I, I think this is why I’ve been thinking about what could we do and this is the idea that I came up with. I welcome feedback on it. I put it out um, it’s on the SEC website. People can give me feedback, rip it apart. Tell me what doesn’t work. What would work? Tell us a little bit more about the sandbox that you published yesterday. So the idea is that you could, we, the SEC would, would decide which activities could qualify for the sandbox and we’d set ceilings on the number of customers in the dollar amount. Then projects could come in and it’s not limited to crypto but could certainly be used by uh crypto projects. You’d come in. You’d say here’s what we’re gonna do. Here are the conditions we operate under those conditions could be drawn from a foreign sandbox you’re participating in or they could be just conditions that you set yourself and then you put a notice out, you can start operating within 10 days. Um And then, then you’re working toward permanent relief that lasts for, that’s a two year uh sort of grace period there and then you’re working toward more permanent no action or exempt of relief. Um And so the idea is you wouldn’t want to put forth meaningless conditions because you’re trying to prove to the sec that you have uh uh an approach that will be protective of investors in the markets, but also will allow you to be commercially successful. So that’s the idea. It gives you, it gives you a platform to have a good solid discussion with the staff and to produce some data as you’re going along about how well, whatever you’re trying to do is working. Right. It sounds like it’s actually trying to do what I was suggesting a moment ago. In other words, giving a pathway for people in the industry to engage with sec staff and try to develop a path forward for themselves that gives them some, some, at least some certainty in the short term that they’re not going to be facing an enforcement action in the midst of doing so. Exactly. Now, one thing I have to say that is I, I admire is the fact that you’re here, not only a consensus which I think is important because you’re sort of showing the industry that they can meet their regulator and you’re coming into an environment where there’s a lot of questions and concerns, but you’re actually here on coin desk TV, as well answering our questions. I really appreciate that. What is the biggest thing you’ve learned from talking to folks here at the conference, um, and getting, you know, in terms of a different perspective on what’s going on in the ground. I mean, I’ve been having these conversations with people for a long time, but every time I come to a conference like this where I’m meeting with people who are, who are developing things and wanna wanna build things. It really does kind of make my heart stop a little bit and realize to be in the what, what it must be like to be in the shoes of those people who have this idea, they’re just trying to do something that’s technically interesting. And always in the back of their mind, is this question of, is this something that’s gonna cross the cross a line at the sec, either today or five years from now or 10 years from now. And that kind of uncertainty is really detrimental to innovation. And so every time I meet with people that, you know, I get that pit in my stomach because I feel what it must be like to be in their shoes if we come back to the sandbox. Now, I know that um there have been other regulatory sandboxes proposed over the years. What needs to happen for this to be something that the industry can actually participate in the United States. What does that road map look like? So what I see is the road map is um if I could get my colleagues to agree to this, we could put this out um as a basically a proposed rule. So it would be a rule that would set this, this new sandbox up. We’d identify in that initial rule making proposal, the activities that we wanted to initially uh include. And we could ask for input on other activities to be included. And we’d also ask for input on the, on the ceilings of, of, you know, the activity limits, we’d get that feedback. Um And then we could put it into place. So this is not something that we could turn on tomorrow, but I think realistically we could have it up and running in six months. What is the biggest misconception that people in the, in this space have about the sec? Now that you’ve been, you’ve been spending all this time talking to people here. I mean, I think there are a lot of, it’s, it’s interesting that people in this industry know a lot more about the sec than they probably uh ever dreamed they would. But there are a lot of really unusual features of this agency. We, we’re a five member commission that means that it takes a majority to uh make a change. Um I think that some of that is a little mysterious, a lot of actions are actually taken at the staff level on delegated authority. That’s something that’s also a little puzzling to people. Um And then I think always another big thing is that people think that the sec is sitting thinking about crypto all the time. In reality, we have so many other issues on the agenda. And so this is just 11 issue that we think about. Uh that’s, that’s always a little surprising to people. I think I gotta ask you about the approval of the spot Ether ETF, you can’t be here and that not ask about what happened. It really felt like nothing was gonna happen. There was sudden movement at the agency, a lot of speculation going on about what was happening behind closed doors. What happened? I mean, I think that it’s not that surprising of a development when you think about the, the legal history that we, the recent legal history that we had with, um, being told that our approach to the Bitcoin ETP was not consistent with the law. Um And then when you, you line up the, the Eetp alongside the Bitcoin Etp, the facts are very similar. I wouldn’t want to have us have a similar legal opinion coming out of a judicial opinion coming out of the court. So from my perspective, we didn’t really have a whole lot of choice just as we didn’t have a whole lot of choice on the Bitcoin Etp. I know the timing people were wondering what would happen and when it would happen, but realistically, we didn’t have that many options. We saw, uh Ether staking removed from some of the applications. Is that an indication into maybe how the SEC might be looking at staking in the future that I can’t comment on. All right, Commissioner P. Thank you so much for joining us here. Uh We hope you enjoy the rest of the conference. Thank you both for having me take care. That was SEC Commissioner Hester Purse.

Fuente

We are the editorial team of Blockchainbulletin, where seriousness meets clarity in cryptocurrency analysis. With a robust team of finance and blockchain technology experts, we are dedicated to meticulously exploring complex crypto markets with detailed assessments and an unbiased approach. Our mission is to democratize access to knowledge of emerging financial technologies, ensuring they are understandable and accessible to all. In every article on Blockchainbulletin, we strive to provide content that not only educates, but also empowers our readers, facilitating their integration into the financial digital age.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Información básica sobre protección de datos Ver más

  • Responsable: Miguel Mamador.
  • Finalidad:  Moderar los comentarios.
  • Legitimación:  Por consentimiento del interesado.
  • Destinatarios y encargados de tratamiento:  No se ceden o comunican datos a terceros para prestar este servicio. El Titular ha contratado los servicios de alojamiento web a Banahosting que actúa como encargado de tratamiento.
  • Derechos: Acceder, rectificar y suprimir los datos.
  • Información Adicional: Puede consultar la información detallada en la Política de Privacidad.

Regulation

Crypto community gets involved in anti-government protests in Nigeria

BlockChainBulletin Staff

Published

on

Crypto Community Engages in Nigeria's Governance Protests

Amid the #EndBadGovernanceInNigeria protests in Nigeria, a notable shift is occurring within the country’s cryptocurrency sector. As the general public demands sweeping governance reforms, crypto community leaders are seizing the opportunity to advocate for specific regulatory changes.

Rume Ophi, former secretary of the Blockchain Stakeholders Association of Nigeria (SiBAN), stressed the critical need to integrate crypto-focused demands into the broader agenda of the protests.

Ophi explained the dual benefit of such requirements, noting that proper regulation can spur substantial economic growth by attracting investors and creating job opportunities. Ophi noted, “Including calls for favorable crypto regulations is not just about the crypto community; it’s about leveraging these technologies to foster broader economic prosperity.”

Existing government efforts

In opposition to Ophi’s call for action, Chimezie Chuta, chair of the National Blockchain Policy Steering Committee, presents a different view. He pointed out The Nigerian government continued efforts to nurture the blockchain and cryptocurrency industries.

According to Chuta, the creation of a steering committee was essential to effectively address the needs of the crypto community.

Chuta also highlighted the creation of a subcommittee to harmonize regulations for virtual asset service providers (VASPs). With the aim of streamlining operations and providing clear regulatory direction, the initiative involves cooperation with major organizations including the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). “Our efforts should mitigate the need for protest as substantial progress is being made to address the needs of the crypto industry,” Chuta said.

A united call for support

The ongoing dialogue between the crypto community and government agencies reflects a complex landscape of negotiations and demands for progress.

While actors like Ophi are calling for more direct action and the inclusion of crypto demands in protest agendas, government figures like Chuta are advocating for recognition of the steps already taken.

As protests continue, the crypto community’s push for regulatory reform highlights a crucial aspect of Nigeria’s broader fight to improve governance and economic policies. Both sides agree that favorable regulations are critical to the successful adoption and implementation of blockchain technologies, signaling a potentially transformative era for Nigeria’s economic framework.

Read also : OKX Exchange Exits Nigerian Market Amid Regulatory Crackdown

Fuente

Continue Reading

Regulation

Cryptocurrency Regulations in Slovenia 2024

BlockChainBulletin Staff

Published

on

Cryptocurrency Regulations in Slovenia 2024

Slovenia, a small but highly developed European country with a population of 2.1 million, boasts a rich industrial history that has contributed greatly to its strong economy. As the most economically developed Slavic nation, Slovenia has grown steadily since adopting the euro in 2007. Its openness to innovation has been a key factor in its success in the industrial sector, making it a prime destination for cryptocurrency enthusiasts. Many believe that Slovenia is poised to become a powerful fintech hub in Europe. But does its current regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies support such aspirations?

Let’s explore Slovenia’s cryptocurrency regulations and see if they can propel the country to the forefront of the cryptocurrency landscape. My expectations are positive. What are yours? Before we answer, let’s dig a little deeper.

1. Cryptocurrency regulation in Slovenia: an overview

Slovenia is renowned for its innovation-friendly stance, providing a supportive environment for emerging technologies such as blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Under the Payment Services and Systems Act, cryptocurrencies are classified as virtual assets rather than financial or monetary instruments.

The regulation of the cryptocurrency sector in Slovenia is decentralized. Different authorities manage different aspects of the ecosystem. For example, the Bank of Slovenia and the Securities Market Agency oversee cryptocurrency transactions to ensure compliance with financial laws, including anti-money laundering (AML) and terrorist financing regulations. The Slovenian Act on the Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (ZPPDFT-2) incorporates the EU’s 5th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (5MLD) and aligns with the latest FATF recommendations. All virtual currency service providers must register with the Office of the Republic of Slovenia.

2. Cryptocurrency regulation in Slovenia: what’s new?

Several notable developments have taken place this year in the cryptocurrency sector in Slovenia:

July 25, 2024:Slovenia has issued a €30 million on-chain digital sovereign bond, the first of its kind in the EU, with a yield of 3.65%, maturing on 25 November 2024.

May 14, 2024:NiceHash has announced the first Slovenian Bitcoin-focused conference, NiceHashX, scheduled for November 8-9 in Maribor.

3. Explanation of the tax framework for cryptocurrencies in Slovenia

The Slovenian cryptocurrency tax framework provides clear guidelines for individuals and businesses. According to the Slovenian Financial Administration, the tax treatment depends on the status of the trader and the nature of the transaction.

  • People:Income earned from cryptocurrencies through employment or ongoing business activities is subject to personal income tax. However, capital gains from transactions or market fluctuations are exempt from tax.
  • Companies:Capital gains from cryptocurrency-related activities are subject to a 19% corporate tax. Value-added tax (VAT) generally applies at a rate of 22%, although cryptocurrency transactions that are considered as means of payment are exempt from VAT. Companies are not allowed to limit payment methods to cryptocurrencies alone. Tokens issued during ICOs must follow standard accounting rules and corporate tax law.

4. Cryptocurrency Mining in Slovenia: What You Need to Know

Cryptocurrency mining is not restricted in Slovenia, but income from mining is considered business income and is therefore taxable. This includes rewards from validating transactions and any additional income from mining operations. Both individuals and legal entities must comply with Slovenian tax regulations.

5. Timeline of the development of cryptocurrency regulation in Slovenia

Here is a timeline highlighting the evolution of cryptocurrency regulations in Slovenia:

  • 2013:The Slovenian Financial Administration has issued guidelines stating that income from cryptocurrency transactions should be taxed.
  • 2017:The Slovenian Financial Administration has provided more detailed guidelines on cryptocurrency taxation, depending on factors such as the status of the trader and the type of transaction.
  • 2023:The EU adopted the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) Regulation, establishing a uniform regulatory framework for crypto-assets, their issuers and service providers across the EU.

Endnote

Slovenia’s approach to the cryptocurrency sector is commendable, reflecting its optimistic view of the future of cryptocurrencies. The country’s balanced regulatory framework supports cryptocurrency innovation while protecting users’ rights and preventing illegal activities. Recent developments demonstrate Slovenia’s commitment to continually improving its regulatory environment. Slovenia’s cryptocurrency regulatory framework sets a positive example for other nations navigating the evolving cryptocurrency landscape.

Read also : Hong Kong Cryptocurrency Regulations 2024

Fuente

Continue Reading

Regulation

A Blank Sheet for Cryptocurrencies: Kamala Harris’ Regulatory Opportunity

BlockChainBulletin Staff

Published

on

A Blank Sheet for Cryptocurrencies: Kamala Harris' Regulatory Opportunity

photo by Shubham Dhage on Unsplash

As the cryptocurrency landscape continues to evolve, the need for clear regulation has never been more pressing.

With Vice President Kamala Harris now leading the charge on digital asset regulation in the United States, this represents a unique opportunity to start fresh. This fresh start can foster innovation and protect consumers. It can also pave the way for widespread adoption across industries, including real estate agencies, healthcare providers, and online gaming platforms like these. online casinos ukAccording to experts at SafestCasinoSites, these platforms come with benefits such as bonus offers, a wide selection of games, and various payment methods. Ultimately, all this increase in adoption could propel the cryptocurrency market forward.

With this in mind, let’s look at the current state of cryptocurrency regulation in the United States, a complex and confusing landscape. Multiple agencies, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), have overlapping jurisdictions, creating a fragmented regulatory environment. This lack of clarity has stifled innovation as companies are reluctant to invest in the United States, fearing regulatory repercussions. A coherent and clear regulatory framework is urgently needed to realize the full potential of cryptocurrencies in the United States.

While the US struggles to find its footing, other countries, such as Singapore and the UK, are actively looking into the cryptocurrency sector by adopting clear and supportive regulatory frameworks. This has led to a brain drain, with companies choosing to locate in more conducive environments.

Vice President Kamala Harris has a unique opportunity to change that narrative and start over. Regulation of cryptocurrencies. By taking a comprehensive and inclusive approach, it can help create a framework that balances consumer protection with innovation and growth. The time has come for clear and effective regulation of cryptocurrencies in the United States.

Effective regulation of digital assets is essential to foster a safe and innovative environment. The key principles guiding this regulation are clarity, innovation, global cooperation, consumer protection, and flexibility. Clear definitions and guidelines eliminate ambiguity while encouraging experimentation and development to ensure progress. Collaboration with international partners establishes consistent standards, preventing regulatory arbitrage. Strong safeguards protect consumers from fraud and market abuse, and adaptability allows for evolution in response to emerging trends and technologies, striking a balance between innovation and protection.

The benefits of effective cryptocurrency regulation are multiple and far-reaching. By establishing clear guidelines, governments can attract investors and mainstream users, driving growth and adoption. This can, in turn, position countries like the United States as global leaders in fintech and innovation. Strong safeguards will also increase consumer confidence in digital assets and related products, increasing economic activity.

A thriving crypto industry can contribute significantly to GDP and job creation, which has a positive impact on the overall economy. Furthermore, effective regulation has paved the way for the growth of many businesses such as tech startups, online casinos, and pharmaceutical companies, demonstrating that clear guidelines can open up new opportunities without stifling innovation. This is a great example of how regulation can allay fears of regressive policies, even if Kamala Harris does not repeal the current progressive approach. By adopting effective regulation, governments can create fertile ground for the crypto industry to thrive, thereby promoting progress and prosperity.

Fuente

Continue Reading

Regulation

South Korea Imposes New ‘Monitoring’ Fees on Cryptocurrency Exchanges

BlockChainBulletin Staff

Published

on

South Korea Imposes New 'Monitoring' Fees on Cryptocurrency Exchanges

Big news! The latest regulatory changes in South Korea are expected to impact major cryptocurrency exchanges like Upbit and Bithumb. Under the updated regulations, these platforms will now have to pay monitoring fees, which could cause problems for some exchanges.

Overview of new fees

In the latest move to regulate cryptocurrencies, the Financial Services Commission announced on July 1 the revised “Enforcement Order of the Act on the Establishment of the Financial Services Commission, etc.” update “Regulations on the collection of contributions from financial institutions, etc.” According to local legislation newsThe regulations require virtual asset operators to pay supervisory fees for inspections conducted by the Financial Supervisory Service starting next year. The total fees for the four major exchanges are estimated at around 300 million won, or about $220,000.

Apportionment of costs

Upbit, which holds a dominant market share, is expected to bear more than 90% of the total fee, or about 272 million won ($199,592) based on its operating revenue. Bithumb will pay about 21.14 million won ($155,157), while Coinone and GOPAX will contribute about 6.03 million won ($4,422) and 830,000 won ($608), respectively. Korbit is excluded from this fee due to its lower operating revenue.

Impact on the industry

The supervision fee will function similarly to a quasi-tax for financial institutions subject to inspections by the Financial Supervisory Service. The new law requires any company with a turnover of 3 billion won or more to pay the fee.

In the past, fees for electronic financial companies and P2P investment firms were phased in over three years. However, the taxation of virtual asset operators has been accelerated, reflecting the rapid growth of the cryptocurrency market and increasing regulatory scrutiny.

Industry reactions

The rapid introduction of the fee was unexpected by some industry players, who had expected a delay. Financial Supervisory Service officials justified the decision by citing the creation of the body concerned and the costs already incurred.

While larger exchanges like Upbit and Bithumb can afford the cost, smaller exchanges like Coinone and GOPAX, which are currently operating at a loss, could face an additional financial burden. This is part of a broader trend of declining trading volumes for South Korean exchanges, which have seen a 30% drop since the new law went into effect.

Fuente

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 BLOCKCHAINBULLETIN.ORG. All rights reserved. This website provides educational content and highlights that investing involves risks. It is essential to conduct thorough research before investing and to be prepared to assume potential losses. Be sure to fully understand the risks involved before making investment decisions. Important: We do not provide financial or investment advice. All content is presented for educational purposes only.