South Korea moves to block USDT and USDC from corporate trading – Details

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-03-08Last updated on 2026-03-08

Abstract

South Korea's Financial Services Commission (FSC) is moving to exclude USD-based stablecoins like USDT and USDC from its upcoming corporate crypto trading guidelines. This decision aims to prevent indiscriminate investments in the early market stages and is partly due to the current legal framework not recognizing stablecoins as a valid external payment method. The proposed rules will allow eligible firms to invest up to 5% of their capital in crypto, but only in top assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum, traded through regulated exchanges. This aligns with South Korea's broader push to promote the Korean Won-pegged stablecoins and reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar, a trend also emerging in other countries like China and Russia.

South Korea is mulling banning USD-based stablecoins, especially Tether’s USDT and Circle’s USDC, from its upcoming corporate crypto rules.

According to a local publication, the country’s watchdog, the Financial Services Commission (FSC), will exclude dollar-denominated stablecoins from the ‘corporate virtual currency trading’ guidelines.

The report noted the move was designed to “prevent indiscriminate investments’ in the early stages of the market.

Additionally, the current legal framework, the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, does not treat stablecoins as a means of external payment. A recent push for the amendment of the Act to include stablecoins has yet to be ratified.

Even so, local firms had requested that stablecoins be included to help them hedge against exchange rate risks and drive faster settlements.

South Korea proposed crypto rules

For over nine years, South Korea’s crypto scene has mostly been dominated by individual retail investors. However, there has been strong institutional crypto adoption across the U.S., the E.U., and parts of Asia.

As such, South Korea has opted to set clear rules for local corporations seeking to engage in the sector.

These rules will be rolled out in the upcoming FSC’s corporate crypto trading rules.

Per the proposal, eligible firms will invest up to 5% of their capital in crypto. However, the investment will be restricted only to the top crypto assets, including Bitcoin [BTC] and Ethereum [ETH].

Besides, transactions will be conducted strictly through regulated exchanges such as Upbit and Bithumb.

That said, South Korea has been pushing for stablecoins denominated in Korean Won (KRW) since last year to reduce reliance on US dollar alternatives.

So, the need for monetary sovereignty could also be another key reason for excluding USDT and USDC. In fact, China and Russia have made similar moves, underscoring stablecoin adoption as a national security issue among key players.

Stablecoins, or digital currencies pegged to various traditional currencies, have grown to over $300 billion amid explosive global adoption. The crypto rails have made stablecoins a low-cost and fast way to send remittances and international payments.

Stablecoin activity in Asia

However, U.S dollar-based USDT and USDC control over 90% of the market share. But there’s a likely looming showdown as various jurisdictions position themselves to fight US dollar dominance.

Interestingly, Asia has emerged as a key stablecoin corridor, accounting for 60% ($245 billion) of total activity in 2025. Asia-originated activity is primarily driven by Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan. But most of these countries are pushing to secure their turf from U.S dollar stablecoins.

It remains to be seen how these proposed foreign stablecoins will compete with USDC and USDT in the near future.


Final Summary

  • South Korean regulators and lawmakers are considering excluding USDT and USDC from corporate crypto trading guidelines
  • Broader Asia dominated global stablecoin activity, driving $245B in 2025, but individual countries are pushing for stablecoins pegged to their local currencies.

Related Questions

QWhy is South Korea considering banning USDT and USDC from corporate crypto trading?

ASouth Korea is considering this ban to prevent indiscriminate investments in the early stages of the market, and because the current Foreign Exchange Transactions Act does not treat stablecoins as a means of external payment. Additionally, the country is pushing for monetary sovereignty by promoting stablecoins denominated in the Korean Won (KRW).

QWhat is the maximum percentage of capital that eligible South Korean firms can invest in crypto under the new proposal?

AEligible firms will be allowed to invest up to 5% of their capital in crypto, but this investment will be restricted to top crypto assets like Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH).

QWhich regulated exchanges will be used for corporate crypto transactions in South Korea?

ACorporate crypto transactions will be conducted strictly through regulated exchanges such as Upbit and Bithumb.

QWhat percentage of global stablecoin activity did Asia account for in 2025, according to the article?

AAsia accounted for 60% of total global stablecoin activity in 2025, which amounted to $245 billion.

QWhat are the two main reasons cited for the push towards local currency stablecoins in various countries?

AThe two main reasons are to reduce reliance on U.S. dollar alternatives and to address stablecoin adoption as a matter of national security, as seen in the moves by countries like China and Russia.

Related Reads

Has Hook Summer Really Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Narrative of Uniswap v4

"Hook Summer" Arrives? Sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite Uniswap v4 Narrative Amidst a slight market recovery, attention within the Ethereum ecosystem has shifted to Meme coins built on Uniswap v4's Hook protocol. Following ASTEROID, tokens like sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD have become market focal points, with market caps ranging from millions to tens of millions, bringing concentrated liquidity to a narrative-dry market. Uniswap v4 Hooks are "plugin smart contracts" that allow developers to inject custom logic at key points in a liquidity pool's lifecycle (initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps, etc.), making the AMM programmable. Recent representative projects include: * **sato**: Market cap peaked over $38M; uses a v4 curve mechanism for minting/burning, locking ETH as reserve. * **sat1**: Market cap briefly exceeded $10M, positioning as an "optimized sato," but later declined significantly. * **Lo0p**: Market cap neared $6.6M; a "lending AMM protocol" allowing users to borrow ETH against deposited LO0P tokens without immediate selling pressure. * **FLOOD**: Market cap approached $6M; channels trading reserves into Aave v3 to generate yield, which is retained in the pool. The emergence of these Hook-based tokens could drive long-term growth for the Uniswap ecosystem by attracting users and liquidity to v4 pools. Combined with Uniswap's activated fee switch (partially used to burn UNI), the long-term outlook for UNI appears positive. However, short-term UNI price appreciation is not directly guaranteed. Factors include the sustainability and lifecycle of these new tokens, their price volatility, overall market conditions, and regulatory pressures. Currently, Uniswap v4's TVL ($595M) lags behind v3 and v2, indicating Hook adoption still requires time to mature. In summary, the Hook ecosystem serves as "long-term nourishment" for UNI, but acts more as a "catalyst" than a direct "booster" in the short term. Note: These are early-stage experimental tokens and may carry unknown risks.

marsbit28m ago

Has Hook Summer Really Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Narrative of Uniswap v4

marsbit28m ago

Has Hook Summer Truly Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Uniswap v4 Narrative

With the broader market showing signs of recovery, a new wave of interest has emerged around Ethereum-based meme coins. Following ASTEROID, tokens like sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD, built upon the Uniswap v4 Hook protocol, are capturing market attention. Their market capitalizations range from millions to tens of millions of dollars, injecting much-needed focused liquidity into a market lacking narratives. This article explores whether this trend signifies an incoming "Hook Summer" and its potential impact on UNI's price. Hooks are essentially plug-in smart contracts for Uniswap v4 liquidity pools, allowing developers to inject custom logic at key points in a pool's lifecycle (like initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps). This transforms the AMM into programmable building blocks. Key highlighted projects include: * **sato**: Peaked over $38M market cap. It utilizes a v4 curve for minting/burning; buying locks ETH as reserve to mint new tokens, while selling redeems ETH from the reserve and burns tokens. * **sat1**: Market cap briefly exceeded $10M, promoted as an "optimized sato," but later declined significantly. * **Lo0p**: Reached nearly $6.6M. It's a lending AMM protocol where buying LO0P tokens locks them as collateral, allowing users to borrow ETH from the pool reserve at 40% LTV, aiming to improve capital efficiency for idle ETH in LPs. * **FLOOD**: Peaked near $6M. Its mechanism directs asset reserves from buys into Aave v3 to generate yield, with fees and interest retained in the pool to potentially influence the token's price long-term. In the long term, the development of the Hook ecosystem can attract users and liquidity to Uniswap v4, benefiting UNI's fundamentals—especially combined with the recent activation of the protocol fee switch, where a portion of fees is used to burn UNI. However, in the short term, these Hook-based tokens are unlikely to directly drive significant UNI price appreciation. Their impact is moderated by factors like token sustainability, price volatility, and broader market and regulatory conditions. Currently, Uniswap v4's TVL ($595M) still trails behind v2 and v3, indicating adoption and growth will take time. The article concludes that while the Hook ecosystem provides long-term "nourishment" for UNI, its short-term role is more of a "catalyst" than a "booster." Readers are cautioned that these are early-stage experimental tokens and may carry unknown risks.

Odaily星球日报41m ago

Has Hook Summer Truly Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Uniswap v4 Narrative

Odaily星球日报41m ago

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I Would Sell Bitcoin, But Never a Net Sale

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Said We'd Sell Bitcoin, But Never Be a Net Seller In a recent podcast, MicroStrategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor clarified the company's stance on potentially selling Bitcoin. Following MicroStrategy's earnings call statement about being prepared to sell BTC to fund dividends for its STRC (Strategic) credit product, Saylor emphasized the distinction between selling and being a "net seller." Saylor explained the core business model: MicroStrategy sells credit instruments like STRC and uses the proceeds to buy Bitcoin, which is viewed as "digital capital" expected to appreciate around 30-40% annually. A portion of these capital gains can then be used to pay the dividends on the credit products. He stressed that even if the company sells some Bitcoin for dividends, it simultaneously buys much more with new credit issuance. For example, after raising $3.2 billion from STRC sales in April, the dividend obligation was only $80-90 million, making the company a net buyer. The clarification aims to counter market narratives questioning the value of Bitcoin on MicroStrategy's balance sheet if it were never sold, and to dismiss claims of a "Ponzi scheme." Saylor reiterated his personal philosophy for investors: "Don't be a net seller of bitcoin" and ensure your Bitcoin holdings increase each year. Saylor also discussed Bitcoin's role as the foundation for "digital credit," noting that STRC has become the largest and most liquid preferred stock issue in the U.S., offering high risk-adjusted returns (Sharpe ratio). He highlighted Bitcoin's deep liquidity, stating that even large purchases by MicroStrategy do not move the market significantly, which is driven by macro factors, geopolitical tensions, and capital flows from ETFs and credit products. Finally, Saylor reflected on his early inspiration from sci-fi books, which motivated his path to MIT, and maintained his fundamental thesis on Bitcoin remains unchanged: it is superior digital capital enabling superior digital credit.

链捕手45m ago

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I Would Sell Bitcoin, But Never a Net Sale

链捕手45m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片