Cryptocurrency, which once aimed to democratize finance, finds itself operating across an increasingly fragmented landscape.
The sector’s former goals of global connectivity are now being drawn and quartered by a patchwork of jurisdiction-level regulations.
Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) released Tuesday (May 23) the Consultation Conclusions on the Proposed Regulatory Requirements for Virtual Asset Trading Platform Operators Licensed by the SFC, detailing the special administrative region’s rulebook ahead of a June 1 licensing regime for crypto.
Hong Kong has been taking strides to redevelop itself into a hub for cryptocurrencies, even as the digital asset sector and regulators butt heads elsewhere in Asia.
Crypto remains banned outright across mainland China.
Related: Hong Kong Unveils Rules For Crypto With Large Token Options
Separately, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), an association of organizations that regulate the world’s securities and futures markets that counts members from over 100 countries, unveiled Tuesday its own approach, and the first global regulatory view on regulating crypto assets and digital marketplaces.
The IOSCO’s proposal lists 18 policy recommendations that the Madrid-based association plans to finalize later this year.
“One of IOSCO’s goals is to promote greater consistency with respect to how IOSCO members approach the regulation and oversight of crypto-asset activities, given the cross-border nature of the markets, the risks of regulatory arbitrage and the significant risk of harm to which retail investors continue to be exposed,” the consultation report stated.
Meanwhile, in the U.S., the crypto environment is becoming sharper, if not clearer as regulators crack down on the sector following a string of embarrassing collapses and exposures of fraudulent activity last year.
Bank of America (BoA) analysts published a research report Friday (May 19) saying the upside value of digital assets is “capped.”
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand