Taiwan has become more aware of risks involving cryptocurrencies since the collapse of the FTX exchange late last year, and is following in the footsteps of Singapore and Hong Kong in keeping a keener eye on the crypto sector.
Last week, the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) announced guidelines for crypto service providers and exchanges, 10 days after confirming that it oversees crypto-related investments and transactions nationwide.
It said it has received instructions from the Executive Yuan to oversee the crypto sector’s development in Taiwan. It is to focus on establishing a self-regulating mechanism for service providers that allows members of the sector to monitor their own legal, ethical and security standards, rather than acting as an outside regulatory agency that monitors and enforces those standards.
The guidelines include the disclosure of information by crypto service providers, the review procedure for the listing and removal of crypto products, the separation of assets between service providers and clients, and the assurance of transparency and fairness.
Preventing money laundering, protecting consumers’ interests, maintaining information security, promoting institutional auditing, and managing so-called “hot” and “cold” crypto wallets are also part of the guidelines.
As the commission seems to have no intention to establish special legislation on the crypto sector, but aims to focus on protecting consumers and preventing money laundering, its regulatory approach should allow the local crypto sector room for further development and innovation.
Except for the review procedure for the listing and removal of products, which could have a greater effect on the sector, other guidelines, such as information disclosure, asset separation and money laundering prevention, are all basic requirements that firms in the sector should implement.
Another reason that the commission does not want to act as a comprehensive regulatory body is that it is not easy to govern the crypto sector, let alone require cooperation from offshore service providers or exchanges to comply with Taiwan’s regulatory framework.
In general, it is welcome news that the regulator supports growth in Taiwan’s crypto sector and wants to help build the necessary ecosystem here, as it is an opportunity for the sector to build trust with the public and push its innovations toward the mainstream.
However, if the details of its guidelines, which are slated to be published by the third quarter of this year, are too cumbersome, it would likely stifle the development of Taiwan’s crypto sector and push local investors toward offshore crypto platforms, which would be contrary to the commission’s original intention of protecting consumers in devising a regulatory framework.
Moreover, as innovative blockchain applications and non-fungible tokens continue to emerge, the regulator does need to retain the flexibility of development in the sector and allow it to continue moving forward.
While doing everything at once is not an option for the commission, it must at least reserve the power to inspect domestic crypto platforms when things go wrong. It also has to work with crypto firms to establish a mechanism for consumer protection.
At the same time, the commission needs to ask foreign firms to comply with Taiwan’s consumer protection and financial regulations. Most importantly, it must continue to review and adjust its regulatory measures on a rolling basis to ensure the sector’s long-term development.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS