Hong Kong Rolls Out First Regulations for Its Burgeoning Cryptocurrency Market
While Hong Kong is attempting to transform itself into a crypto-hub, its new laws regulating the cryptocurrency market may not be a precursor to how the countries will regulate in the future.
November 07, 2018 at 12:00 PM
3 minute read
Virtual currencies in Hong Kong used to be a little like the Wild West, only with freely operating private equity funds instead of cowboys. Now, groups that invest more than 10 percent of their assets in virtual currencies will have to be licensed by Hong Kong's Securities and Futures Commission (SFC).
Last week, Hong Kong rolled out its first regulations aimed at governing its burgeoning cryptocurrency market. The new rules don't represent a radical shift in the way laws have traditionally viewed cryptocurrency or the underlying blockchain technology but instead seem like an attempt to fold investment firms and the platforms they utilize into the existing order.
“Instead of creating a new regulatory framework or trying to categorize virtual assets, the SFC has taken the approach of extending regulation to firms that are already within its regulatory remit, particularly on the asset management side,” Etelka Bogardi, a partner with Norton Rose Fulbright, said.
According to Bogardi, the SFC has frequently expressed concern around investor protection risks, the possibilities of which only become more pronounced as a number of crypto exchanges have begun to set up shop in Hong Kong.
A few of those risks are inherent to the nature of a virtual market, such as a lack of liquidity and difficulties in valuation, while others hinge on player conduct, such as cyberattacks, and conflicts of interest
“Some of these can be addressed by regulation, others will require innovation from the industry, such as developing institutional custody solutions,” Bogardi said.
Either way, firms managing portfolios that invest in virtual assets will have to contend with licensing conditions imposed by the SFC, while trading platforms may be brought into a regulatory sandbox.
But similar to how attorneys working in the privacy or cybersecurity spheres have to navigate conflicting state or international laws, Hong Kong might not serve as an exact model for how other countries will approach regulating cryptocurrencies moving forward.
“Much depends on how active the cryptocurrency market is in each jurisdiction, what the appetite of legislators is to create freestanding frameworks and which part of the financial system is particularly active in this field,” Bogardi said.
In the case of Hong Kong, the regulations are tailored toward furthering its aspirations to develop into a cryptocurrency hub. Implementing strictures that make the investors, asset managers and hedge funds that continue to roll into the country feel slightly less unmoored could go a long way in that direction.
“I would say this is good news for institutional players who have been hamstrung by the regulatory grey areas in relation to these asset classes. There will be consolidation, and the more serious players will survive and thrive,” Bogardi said.
Still, lawyers representing (or hoping to represent) those players may find themselves having to rely on overseas partners to help clients navigate Hong Kong's cryptocurrency terrain.
“It will be even more important to get local law advice for offshore clients who participate in the cryptomarket in Hong Kong, whether as an exchange looking to onboard clients in Hong Kong, or an asset manager or other institutional investor,” Bogardi said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1US DOJ Threatens to Prosecute Local Officials Who Don't Aid Immigration Enforcement
- 2Kirkland Is Entering a New Market. Will Its Rates Get a Warm Welcome?
- 3African Law Firm Investigated Over ‘AI-Generated’ Case References
- 4Gen AI and Associate Legal Writing: Davis Wright Tremaine's New Training Model
- 5Departing Attorneys Sue Their Former Law Firm
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250