Tag Archives: regulating

Navigating the Murky Waters: The Philippines and Regulating Cryptocurrency

Navigating the Murky Waters: The Philippines and Regulating Cryptocurrency
The Philippines, a nation known for its vibrant culture and growing economy, is wading into the ever-evolving world of cryptocurrency. With the potential for both economic boon and lurking dangers, the Philippine government has set its sights on establishing a regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies by the end of 2024. This article will delve into the current state of cryptocurrency in the Philippines, explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of regulation, and offer a perspective on the path forward for this dynamic technology.

A Nation Embracing Crypto

The Philippines has emerged as a surprising leader in cryptocurrency adoption. According to a 2022 report by TripleA, a crypto research firm, 7 million Filipinos, or 6.13 of the total population, own some form of cryptocurrency.

This widespread adoption can be attributed to several factors. The Philippines has a large young population comfortable with technology, and Filipinos working abroad often use cryptocurrency for remittances, sending money back home faster and cheaper than traditional methods. Additionally, the lack of robust financial infrastructure in some areas makes cryptocurrency an attractive alternative for storing wealth and conducting transactions.

The Need for Regulation: Taming the Wild West

While the Philippines’ embrace of cryptocurrency is commendable, the current Wild West landscape poses significant challenges. The absence of regulations leaves investors vulnerable to scams, market manipulation, and hacking.

An article on Nikkei Asia reported that Philippines lacks digital literacy and cybercrime awareness and more than one-third of Filipinos surveyed had been scammed or encountered retail fraud online. In the same article, they mentioned about a study initiated by the Global Anti-Scam Alliance along with the tech security firm Gogolook based in Taiwan, gathered data from 20,000 individuals regarding their encounters with online shopping across various countries including Vietnam, China, Thailand, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Indonesia, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, and the Philippines. The Philippines reported the highest frequency of shopping scams, with a staggering 35.9% of respondents affected, outstripping China, which came in second at 27.2%. On the other end of the spectrum, South Korea registered the smallest percentage of such scams, with a mere 4.2% of participants reporting incidents.

The numbers of cryptocurrency scams can be worst as that lack public education. The anonymity associated with cryptocurrency transactions can facilitate money laundering and other criminal activities.

The Benefits of Regulation: Building a Sustainable Future

Regulation, if implemented thoughtfully, can usher in a new era for cryptocurrency in the Philippines. A well-defined regulatory framework would provide much-needed clarity and security for investors. Investors would be better protected from fraudulent activity, fostering trust and encouraging wider participation in the cryptocurrency market. Regulations could also establish Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) standards, deterring criminal activity and ensuring the integrity of the financial system.

In my humble opinion, regulators should focus on establishing clear guidelines for cryptocurrency exchanges and initial coin offerings (ICOs) while allowing for flexibility and adaptability in a rapidly evolving space. Additionally, the government should consider collaborating with industry experts and stakeholders to create a regulatory framework that is both effective and practical.

The Philippines can learn valuable lessons from countries that have already implemented cryptocurrency regulations. Singapore, for example, has established itself as a global hub for cryptocurrency by adopting a progressive regulatory approach. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has issued licenses to cryptocurrency exchanges and implemented KYC/AML standards, creating a safe and secure environment for investors. Similarly, Japan has legalized cryptocurrency as a legal tender, providing a clear legal framework for its use.

The Road Ahead: Challenges and Opportunities

The Philippines faces several challenges in its quest to regulate cryptocurrency. One major hurdle is the lack of a comprehensive legal framework for digital assets. The government will need to define cryptocurrencies and establish clear rules for their issuance, trading, and use. Additionally, the Philippines needs to build capacity within its regulatory agencies to effectively oversee the cryptocurrency market.

Despite these challenges, the Philippines has a unique opportunity to become a leader in responsible cryptocurrency regulation. By striking a balance between investor protection and fostering innovation, the Philippines can create a regulatory framework that attracts businesses and investors while safeguarding its financial system.

A Personal Perspective: Embracing the Future with Caution

As a practitioner who has closely followed the development of cryptocurrency, I believe that its potential for positive change is undeniable. However, I also recognize the inherent risks associated with this nascent technology. Regulation, if implemented strategically, can be a powerful tool to harness the power of cryptocurrency for good. The Philippines has the opportunity to become a model for other nations by creating a regulatory framework that is both effective and forward-thinking. The journey ahead will not be easy, but the potential rewards are significant. By embracing innovation while safeguarding its citizens, the Philippines can navigate the murky waters of cryptocurrency and emerge as a leader in the digital age.

In Conclusion

In the quest to harness the transformative power of cryptocurrency, the Philippines stands at a pivotal crossroads. The nation’s journey towards establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework by the end of 2024 is not merely a bureaucratic endeavor but a strategic move to secure its place in the global financial landscape. The widespread adoption of cryptocurrency among Filipinos reflects a society that is both innovative and adaptive, yet the absence of regulation has left it vulnerable to the darker elements of the digital frontier.

The need for regulation is clear: to protect investors, to deter criminal activity, and to establish the Philippines as a reputable and secure environment for the burgeoning crypto economy. The benefits of such regulation are manifold, promising to bring stability, trust, and growth to a market that is currently akin to the Wild West. By learning from the successes and failures of other nations, the Philippines can craft a regulatory framework that is both robust and flexible, capable of evolving with the rapid pace of technological change.

As we look to the future, the Philippines’ approach to cryptocurrency regulation will undoubtedly serve as a case study for other nations grappling with similar challenges. With thoughtful regulation, the Philippines can mitigate the risks and unlock the full potential of this revolutionary technology. The journey will require diligence, collaboration, and a steadfast commitment to the principles of transparency and integrity. If successful, the Philippines will not only navigate the murky waters of cryptocurrency but also chart a course for others to follow, emerging as a beacon of progress in the digital age.

 

Source: https://www.benzinga.com/24/06/39338078/navigating-the-murky-waters-the-philippines-and-regulating-cryptocurrency

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

www.anndy.com
j j j

How the EU is regulating crypto-assets with MiCAR and why you should care

How the EU is regulating crypto-assets with MiCAR and why you should care

The EU has recently adopted the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR). This groundbreaking legislation aims to provide a clear and consistent framework for regulating crypto-assets and related services in the EU. MiCAR will apply from the end of 2024, with some provisions applying from mid-2024.

MiCAR defines crypto-assets as “a digital representation of value or rights which may be transferred and stored electronically, using distributed ledger technology or similar technology.” This definition covers various types of crypto-assets, such as cryptocurrencies, tokens, stablecoins, and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). It excludes crypto-assets already regulated under existing EU financial services legislation, such as financial instruments, deposits, electronic money, or insurance products. I agree with this definition, as it is broad and neutral enough to capture the diversity and innovation of crypto-assets while also respecting the existing regulatory frameworks for other types of assets.

Furthermore, it classifies crypto-assets into three main categories: e-money tokens (EMTs), asset-referenced tokens (ARTs), and other tokens. EMTs are crypto-assets pegged to one official currency, such as Tether or USD Coin. ARTs are crypto-assets backed by a pool of assets, such as fiat currencies, commodities, or other crypto-assets. Other tokens are crypto-assets that have various purposes and characteristics, such as utility tokens, payment tokens, or governance tokens.

As mentioned above, MiCAR also introduces the concept of significant tokens for EMTs and ARTs, which are subject to additional requirements due to their potential impact on financial stability or monetary policy. The European Banking Authority (EBA) will identify and monitor significant tokens based on criteria such as the number of users, transaction values, interconnectedness with the financial system, or innovation or complexity of the token. I think this classification is reasonable and valuable, as it reflects the different functions and risks of crypto-assets while also allowing for some flexibility and adaptation. Personally, when I spoke to EU-based bankers who are considering ESG-related crypto funds, they mentioned that MiCAR should also consider the environmental and social impact of crypto-assets, especially those that consume a lot of energy or resources or those that may affect human rights or privacy. I did not comment on that, but I am well aware of their “crypto agenda”. Additionally, I also think that they should actively involve other stakeholders, such as consumers, investors, or developers, in identifying and monitoring significant tokens, as they may have valuable insights and feedback.

MiCAR imposes different authorization and supervision requirements for crypto-asset issuers and crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), depending on the type and significance of the crypto-asset. Crypto-asset issuers offer crypto-assets to the public or seek their admission to trading on a trading platform for crypto-assets. CASPs provide or perform services or activities related to crypto-assets, such as custody, exchange, execution, advice, or portfolio management. Crypto-asset issuers of EMTs and ARTs must obtain authorization from the competent authority of their home member state before offering or admitting such tokens to trading. They must also prepare and publish a white paper that discloses essential information about the crypto-asset project, such as the features, rights, and obligations of the crypto-asset, the risks and costs involved, the governance and technical arrangements, and the identity and contact details of the issuer. Do note that they do not need authorization but must comply with the white paper requirement and other general obligations.

CASPs must obtain authorization from the competent authority of their home member state before providing or performing any crypto-asset services or activities. They must also comply with prudential requirements, the conduct of business rules, safeguarding requirements, and anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) obligations. I support these requirements, as they aim to ensure the transparency, accountability, and responsibility of crypto-asset issuers and CASPs and protect the interests and rights of consumers, investors, and the public. On top of this, I think that MiCAR should also provide some incentives and benefits for crypto-asset issuers and CASPs that comply with these requirements, such as lower fees, faster processing, or broader access. I also think that MiCAR should promote cooperation and coordination among the competent authorities of different member states and other international regulators and organizations to avoid duplication, inconsistency, or conflict.

MiCAR also provides some transitionary provisions and exemptions for crypto-asset issuers and CASPs already operating in the EU before the application date of MiCAR. For example, those authorized or registered under national regimes in one or more member states may continue to operate in those member states until mid-2025 without obtaining authorization under MiCAR. However, they must comply with the relevant national rules and regulations and apply them by mid-2024 if they wish to operate in the EU after mid-2025.

They also established a pilot regime for distributed ledger technology (DLT) market infrastructures, which are a new type of market participants that use DLT to provide trading and settlement services for crypto-assets that qualify as financial instruments. The pilot regime aims to test the use of DLT in trading and post-trading crypto-assets while ensuring high investor protection and market integrity. The pilot regime will apply for five years from the application date of MiCAR, with a possibility of extension. These provisions are good in my opinion, as they recognize the diversity and maturity of the existing crypto-asset market in the EU and can provide a smooth and gradual transition to the new regulatory framework. They should also ensure a fair and equal treatment of all crypto-asset issuers and CASPs, regardless of origin, size, or status, and avoid creating undue advantages or disadvantages for some over others. If they can encourage and support the participation and experimentation of different actors and stakeholders in the pilot regime, such as incumbents, newcomers, or innovators, and foster a collaborative and inclusive environment for the development and adoption of DLT. This will be a big plus for them.

MiCAR does not apply to crypto-assets issued or guaranteed by central banks, member states, third countries, or public international organizations. It also does not apply to crypto-asset services or activities provided or performed by central banks or other public authorities in performing their public tasks or functions. These exemptions aim to preserve the monetary sovereignty and policy of the EU and its member states and facilitate the development of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and other public initiatives in the crypto-asset space. While I understand these exemptions, as they reflect the special and privileged status of central banks and public authorities and their role and responsibility in the monetary and financial system. However, I think MiCAR should also ensure a close and constructive dialogue and cooperation between the public and the private sectors and foster a balanced and complementary relationship between the traditional and innovative forms of money and finance. I also think that MiCAR should monitor and assess the impact and implications of CBDCs and other public initiatives on the crypto-asset market and address any potential issues or challenges that may arise.)

I also want to highlight that there are also some implications for investment firms and the travel rule, which are relevant to the crypto-asset market. Investment firms are those who provide or perform investment services or activities on a professional basis, such as execution of orders, portfolio management, or investment advice. The travel rule is a requirement that obliges financial institutions to exchange certain information about the originator and the beneficiary of a funds transfer, such as their names, addresses, account numbers, and transaction amounts.

They allow investment firms that are authorized under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2014/65/EU (MiFID II) to provide or perform crypto-asset services or activities in relation to crypto-assets that qualify as financial instruments without obtaining additional authorization under MiCAR. However, they must comply with the relevant MiFID II rules and regulations, as well as some specific requirements under MiCAR, such as the safeguarding and AML/CTF obligations. Investment firms that wish to provide or perform crypto-asset services or activities concerning crypto-assets that do not qualify as financial instruments must obtain authorization and comply with its rules and regulations.

The travel rule applies to crypto-asset transfers, which are any transactions resulting in the change of ownership of one or more crypto-assets from one person to another. MiCAR requires CASPs that are involved in crypto-asset transfers to exchange certain information with other CASPs, such as the name and account number of the originator and the beneficiary, the amount and type of crypto-asset transferred, and the date and time of the crypto-asset transfer. The CASPs must ensure that the information is accurate, complete, secure, and confidentially transmitted. They must also keep records of the information for at least five years. They must implement the travel rule by mid-2024, the same date as applying the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) standards on virtual assets and virtual asset service providers.

They aim to establish a level playing field and a single market for crypto-assets and related services within the EU. This is achieved by harmonizing and simplifying the current national regulatory frameworks, thereby eliminating regulatory fragmentation and uncertainty. They also acknowledge the need for a degree of regulatory flexibility and discretion at the national level, which opens the door to regulatory arbitrage and competition among EU member states in specific areas. Some of the leading EU jurisdictions for MiCAR compliance and regulatory arbitrage are France, Germany, and Malta. These jurisdictions have already adopted national regimes for crypto-assets and related services, which are solid, flexible, favorable, attractive, and clear and consistent. They also have supportive and innovative regulators, such as the AMF, BaFin, and MFSA, which have issued several guidance and recommendations on crypto-assets and related services. They also have robust and diversified crypto-asset ecosystems, with several established and emerging players. These jurisdictions are likely to maintain and enhance their leading positions in the crypto-asset market under MiCAR, as they have a competitive edge and a first-mover advantage over other member states.

To sum up, MiCAR is a landmark legislation shaping the future of crypto-assets in the EU. It will introduce legal certainty, consumer protection, market integrity, and financial stability and foster innovation and competition by enabling cross-border activities and passporting rights for crypto-asset issuers and CASPs within the EU.

They are visionary and ambitious legislation that reflects the importance and potential of crypto-assets and related services and that responds to the needs and expectations of the crypto-asset community and society at large. It is also a complex and dynamic legislation that requires constant monitoring and evaluation and may face some difficulties and uncertainties in its application and enforcement. I hope that MiCAR will be able to adapt and evolve with the changing and growing nature of crypto-assets and related services and that it will be able to achieve its objectives and benefits.

I look forward to seeing the development and implementation of this framework, and I hope it will contribute to the growth and maturity of the crypto-asset industry in the EU and beyond.

 

Source: https://www.financialexpress.com/business/digital-transformation-how-the-eu-is-regulating-crypto-assets-with-micar-and-why-you-should-care-3434243/

 

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

www.anndy.com
j j j

Regulating Cryptocurrencies

Regulating Cryptocurrencies

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently called for more regulation of cryptocurrencies, arguing that their rapid growth and potential impact on the global financial system make it imperative for governments to take action. While some may view this as an overreach of government authority, I believe that increased regulation is necessary to ensure the financial system’s stability and protect consumers.

The IMF’s concerns are not unfounded. Cryptocurrencies have grown tremendously in popularity over the past decade, with Bitcoin alone reaching a market capitalization of over $1 trillion at its peak. While some view cryptocurrencies as a way to decentralize financial systems and provide greater privacy, others have raised concerns about their potential for facilitating money laundering, terrorism financing, and other illicit activities.

Furthermore, the lack of regulation has contributed to the high volatility of cryptocurrencies, which can pose risks for both investors and the broader financial system. Cryptocurrencies are not backed by any government or financial institution, which means their value can fluctuate wildly based on market demand alone. This volatility makes cryptocurrencies a risky investment and can contribute to financial instability if large numbers of investors suddenly sell their holdings. In addition to these risks, there are concerns about cryptocurrencies’ environmental impact. The energy consumption required for mining cryptocurrencies is significant, and the carbon footprint of the industry is estimated to be comparable to that of a small country. As the world increasingly grapples with the urgent need to address climate change, the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is becoming harder to ignore.

Given these concerns, it is clear that some level of regulation is necessary to address the risks associated with cryptocurrencies. However, it is important to note that not all regulation is created equal. Heavy-handed regulation that stifles innovation and drives the industry underground is not the answer. Instead, we need smart, targeted regulation that addresses the specific risks associated with cryptocurrencies while allowing for industry innovation and growth.

One potential area for regulation is anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF) laws. Currently, these laws are often not well-suited to the unique characteristics of cryptocurrencies, which can make it difficult to track and prevent illicit activities. By updating AML and CTF laws to better address the risks posed by cryptocurrencies, governments can help ensure that the industry is not used as a tool for illicit activities. Another area for regulation is investor protection. Cryptocurrencies are a new and complex asset class, and many investors may not fully understand the risks involved. By requiring greater disclosure and transparency from cryptocurrency exchanges and other market participants, governments can help ensure that investors have the information they need to make informed decisions.

Lastly, there is the issue of environmental impact. While regulating the energy consumption of the entire cryptocurrency industry may be challenging, governments could require greater transparency from cryptocurrency miners and exchanges about their energy usage and carbon footprint. This could help incentivize the industry to move towards more sustainable practices.

Of course, there are also risks associated with increased regulation. One concern is that heavy-handed regulation could stifle innovation and drive the industry underground, making it even harder to regulate and control. Additionally, there is a risk that poorly designed regulations could increase the risks associated with cryptocurrencies by driving them into unregulated or offshore markets. However, these risks can be mitigated through smart, targeted regulation that takes into account the unique characteristics of cryptocurrencies. By working closely with industry participants and other stakeholders, governments can develop regulations addressing the risks associated with cryptocurrencies while allowing for innovation and growth.

In conclusion, the IMF’s call for more regulation of cryptocurrencies is not an overreach of government authority but rather a necessary step to ensure the stability of the financial system and protect consumers. While there are certainly risks associated with increased regulation, these can be mitigated through smart, targeted regulation that addresses the specific risks posed by cryptocurrencies.

I believe that the increased regulation of cryptocurrencies is necessary to ensure the financial system’s stability and protect consumers, and can be achieved through collaboration between governments and industry participants.

 

Source: https://www.epw.in/journal/2023/9/letters/regulating-cryptocurrencies.html

VOLUME_LVIII_09_04032023

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

www.anndy.com
j j j