📌 TOPINDIATOURS Hot crypto: South Korea’s Crypto Regulation Delayed as Stablecoin

South Korea’s next major step toward comprehensive crypto regulation has been pushed into 2026, as regulators remain divided over how tightly stablecoin issuance should be controlled.

While authorities broadly agree on imposing strict investor protection standards, a prolonged dispute over who should be allowed to issue stablecoins has stalled legislative progress.

According to a report from Yonhap News Agency, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) is drafting a wide-ranging Digital Asset Basic Act that would introduce robust safeguards for stablecoin users.

Regulators Propose Full Reserve Custody Rules for Stablecoin Issuers

Under the proposal, issuers would be required to hold reserve assets entirely in bank deposits or government bonds and entrust 100% of those reserves to licensed custodians such as banks.

The goal, regulators say, is to insulate investors from losses if a stablecoin issuer collapses.

By segregating reserves and placing them under third-party custody, authorities aim to prevent the spillover risks that have plagued poorly backed digital assets in past market failures.

Beyond stablecoins, the bill would significantly raise compliance standards across the crypto sector. Digital asset service providers would be subject to disclosure rules, advertising restrictions, and customer protection requirements similar to those in traditional finance.

In cases of hacks or system outages, firms could be held liable for damages even in the absence of negligence, mirroring liability standards applied to online retail platforms.

The draft law could also reopen the door to domestic token fundraising. Initial coin offerings (ICOs), banned in South Korea since 2017, may be permitted for local projects that meet strict disclosure and risk management criteria, marking a notable shift in policy.

Despite agreement on investor protections, stablecoin regulation remains the central point of contention.

The Bank of Korea has pushed for a model in which stablecoins are issued only by consortia controlled by banks, insisting that lenders hold at least a 51% ownership stake.

The central bank argues this approach is necessary to protect monetary stability and prevent systemic risks.

The FSC, however, has resisted setting a fixed ownership threshold. Officials have warned that limiting issuance to bank-led structures could sideline technology firms and slow innovation in payments and digital finance.

Regulators Propose Full Reserve Custody Rules for Stablecoin Issuers

The two bodies are also split on governance. The Bank of Korea favors creating a new licensing committee dedicated to stablecoin oversight.

However, the FSC maintains that an additional body would be unnecessary, noting that it already operates as a statutory regulator in coordination with the central bank and the Ministry of Economy and Finance.

This month, South Korea revealed that it is preparing one of its most aggressive crackdowns on cryptocurrency-related financial crime by expanding its travel rule requirements.

The new threshold covers transactions under 1 million won ($680), which until now allowed users to bypass identity checks by breaking transfers into smaller amounts.

The post South Korea’s Crypto Regulation Delayed as Stablecoin Rules Face Deadlock appeared first on Cryptonews.

🔗 Sumber: cryptonews.com

📌 TOPINDIATOURS Hot crypto: China’s Rich Are Repricing Property Against Bitcoin —

Affluent Chinese investors are increasingly questioning whether luxury real estate still deserves its long-held status as a safe store of value.

Viral discussions on Chinese social media now show ¥60–66 million ($414,000–$455,000) homes in Shenzhen Bay being weighed directly against Bitcoin, Nvidia stock, and BNB. Not as symbols of status, but as competing assets in a global portfolio.

Crypto vs Concrete: Why China’s Wealthy Are Questioning the Value of Owning Homes

The shift is striking, with Shenzhen Bay having long been considered one of mainland China’s most prestigious and resilient property markets. Yet recent posts suggest that even this enclave is no longer immune.

One widely shared account described touring a ¥66 million property while warning a friend that its value could fall to ¥30 million within three years. According to the post, prices in the area have already dropped by nearly 50%. Further downside is expected if a broader financial crisis hits.

“Houses themselves don’t have intrinsic value; buying a house must be viewed from an investment perspective,” the user wrote, citing commentary attributed to TRON founder Justin Sun. When placed into a broader asset pool alongside globally liquid instruments such as Bitcoin, Nvidia shares, and BNB, the conclusion, the poster argued, becomes “pretty clear.”

Other investors echoed the anxiety. One user admitted to taking on a ¥60 million mortgage in Shenzhen, saying they were unsure “whether to be happy or uneasy.”

“Indeed, took on a 60 million mortgage, Shenzhen CITIC City Opening Xinyue Bay. My mood doesn’t know whether to be happy or uneasy,” the user stated.

Another joked about becoming a “house slave.” They noted that only paying in full spared them the full psychological burden of debt. Still others urged caution, pointing to high mortgage rates, rising housing supply, and the risks of concentrating capital in a single illiquid asset.

Beyond price declines, the debate reflects deeper concerns about liquidity and political exposure. Investors argue that high-end properties have become increasingly difficult to exit quickly and are increasingly visible to regulators.

Buying a home worth ¥100 million or more can invite tax scrutiny and investigations. This adds layers of risk during periods of policy tightening. In contrast, crypto and global equities are viewed as easier to hedge, trade, and move across borders.

Hong Kong’s Property Premium Is About Freedom, Not Returns

This comparison also reframes why Hong Kong property continues to command a premium. According to one post, the appeal lies less in expected returns and more in “trading money for freedom.”

European real estate, which can offer residency or passport pathways for far less capital, was cited as another example of property serving mobility rather than prestige. Mainland luxury housing, by contrast, was portrayed as offering neither strong returns nor optionality.

Some investors likened the current housing market to China’s A-share equities. Domestic assets, they argued, tend to fall during geopolitical stress but fail to rally when global markets rise meaningfully.

Real estate, particularly in Shenzhen Bay, appears to exhibit this asymmetry. It is vulnerable during downturns, yet stagnant during risk-on periods.

The implications extend beyond property. Crypto is no longer being framed primarily as a speculative bet, but as a strategic tool for capital preservation and flexibility.

Younger investors, largely priced out of luxury housing, are opting out altogether. They favor digital assets and international equities, which offer clearer risk profiles and easier access.

Repricing luxury real estate against Bitcoin and global equities signals a structural shift in Chinese wealth management. As capital mobility becomes paramount and political scrutiny intensifies, liquid global assets are increasingly displacing property as the preferred vehicle for preserving value.

How regulators respond, and whether property prices stabilize, may shape China’s domestic markets. It could also influence the next phase of global crypto adoption in the country.

The post China’s Rich Are Repricing Property Against Bitcoin — and Housing Is Losing appeared first on BeInCrypto.

🔗 Sumber: www.beincrypto.com