South Korea Crypto Bill Stalls Amid Stablecoin Rule Disputes

TheNewsCryptoPubblicato 2025-12-30Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-12-30

Introduzione

South Korea's Digital Asset Basic Act, a key piece of cryptocurrency legislation, has been delayed into next year due to a policy deadlock among regulators. The primary disagreement centers on stablecoin regulations, specifically over which entities should be permitted to issue them. The Bank of Korea advocates for banks to be the primary, if not exclusive, issuers to protect monetary stability. In contrast, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) opposes rigid rules that could exclude non-bank fintech companies, arguing it would stifle competition and innovation. Further tensions exist over the oversight structure for these assets. Despite this regulatory slowdown, the country shows signs of a broader crypto thaw, including lifted investment restrictions for venture capital firms and Binance's re-entry into the market.

A major hurdle has been thrown in South Korea’s quest to give its digital assets regulatory oversight, as ministers are yet to agree on how to deal with stablecoins, delaying the proposed crypto legislation into next year.

According to Yonhap News Agency, there have been hold-ups in the progress of the Digital Asset Basic Act due to disagreements among financial regulators, and it remains an integral part of cryptocurrency reform in South Korea.

Stablecoin Rules Trigger Policy Deadlock

At the center of the delay sits a dispute over who should have the authority to issue stablecoins. The Financial Services Commission has led talks on drafting investor protection rules, driven by the rapid growth of stablecoin usage in domestic markets. However, consensus on issuer eligibility remains elusive.

The debate has intensified as South Korea looks to model parts of its framework on the US GENIUS Act, which introduced clearer reserve and compliance standards for stablecoin issuers. Under current proposals, issuers would need to fully back stablecoins with reserves held by qualified custodians such as commercial banks.

The Bank of Korea has taken a firm stance, arguing that banks should serve as the primary and possibly exclusive stablecoin issuers. Central bank officials say limiting issuance to bank-led groups would protect monetary stability and reduce systemic financial risk.

At the same time, however, the FSC challenged rigid rules on ownership when it decided that firms that are not banks should not be barred from the fintech industry. Excluding such firms may hamper competition and innovation in payments technology, which would be damaging to the South Korean vision to remain competitive in the fintech sector worldwide.

Oversight Structure Adds to Tensions

There are also disputes regarding governance. The BOK wants a separate committee to oversee and license issuers of stablecoins, whereas the FSC argues that it would be manageable within current administrative bodies without increasing bureaucracy.

Such issues have delayed the passage of the legislation, with the ruling Democratic Party now working on an overall cryptocurrency draft bill. Congressmen are working on packaging multiple proposals into one legislation that will end the impasse over the passage of the cryptocurrency regulatory law.

Beyond stablecoins, the draft legislation would tighten disclosure standards for digital asset service providers and strengthen customer protection requirements. Lawmakers have also reopened discussions around domestic initial coin offerings, which South Korea banned in 2017, signaling a potential policy shift.

Signs of a Broader Crypto Thaw

The regulatory slowdown comes even as South Korea shows signs of warming to the crypto industry. In September, authorities lifted restrictions that barred venture capital firms from investing in crypto companies, allowing them to apply for official venture certification.

In another notable development, Binance completed its acquisition of Gopax, marking its official return to the South Korean market after several years away.

Despite these positive signals, the lack of agreement on stablecoin regulation remains a thorn in policymakers’ sides. As regulators aren’t aligned over the issuer eligibility and oversight structures related to these digital assets, South Korea’s crypto reform agenda probably won’t move forward anytime soon.

Highlighted Crypto News Today

BlackRock’s BUIDL Crosses $2B in Assets as Tokenized Finance Gains Momentum

TagsCrypto BillCrypto LegalizationFSCSouth KoreaStablecoin

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main reason for the delay in South Korea's Digital Asset Basic Act?

AThe delay is primarily due to disagreements among financial regulators, particularly over how to deal with stablecoins, including disputes on issuer eligibility and oversight authority.

QWhich two major financial institutions are in disagreement over stablecoin issuance in South Korea?

AThe Bank of Korea (BOK) and the Financial Services Commission (FSC) are in disagreement. The BOK argues that only banks should issue stablecoins, while the FSC believes non-bank firms should not be excluded to foster competition and innovation.

QWhat US legislation is South Korea looking to model parts of its stablecoin framework on?

ASouth Korea is looking to model parts of its framework on the US GENIUS Act, which introduced clearer reserve and compliance standards for stablecoin issuers.

QWhat are some positive signs of South Korea warming to the crypto industry despite the regulatory delays?

APositive signs include lifting restrictions on venture capital firms investing in crypto companies, allowing them to apply for official venture certification, and Binance's completed acquisition of Gopax, marking its return to the South Korean market.

QBesides stablecoins, what other areas does the draft cryptocurrency legislation aim to address?

AThe draft legislation also aims to tighten disclosure standards for digital asset service providers, strengthen customer protection requirements, and reopen discussions around domestic initial coin offerings (ICOs), which were banned in 2017.

Letture associate

Bitcoin Withdrawals Continue: 8 Years of Storage in a Coldcard Cold Wallet Ended in Zero

Coldcard Hardware Wallet Hacked: Losses Mount Due to Vulnerable Seed Generation A critical vulnerability in Coldcard hardware wallets has led to a continued wave of fund thefts. According to Galaxy Research, the total stolen has reached 1,367.05 BTC (approx. $88.6 million) from 4,585 addresses, a significant increase from the initial 594.5 BTC reported on July 30, 2026. Most of the stolen funds remain on the attackers' addresses. The issue is not with the current firmware, which Coinkite has updated, but with seed phrases generated on vulnerable devices between March 2021 and the release of fixed firmware versions. Due to a programmer error, devices switched from using a hardware random number generator to the software-based Yasmarang generator, which was initialized with publicly accessible data like the chip's serial number. This made the seed phrases predictable through offline brute-force attacks, meaning wallets remain at risk until funds are moved to a new wallet generated with the patched firmware. Affected devices include Mk2/Mk3 with firmware 4.0.1–4.1.9 (and up to 5.0.3), Mk4/Mk5 up to version 5.6.0, and Q models up to 1.5.0Q. The only exceptions are seeds created with a high-entropy method like at least 50 independent dice rolls or a strong unique BIP-39 passphrase. All other owners must generate a new seed on the fixed firmware and transfer their assets. A case highlighting the human impact involves a 39-year-old long-term investor who lost 2 BTC (approx. $130,000) in minutes. He had accumulated the Bitcoin over eight years through physical labor, viewing it as a financial lifeline and a retirement plan in a country suffering from hyperinflation. His story underscores that even conservative "buy and hold in cold storage" strategies can be compromised by such underlying technical flaws. From a technical perspective, this incident echoes historical failures where weak random number generators undermined cryptographic security, challenging the assumption that offline storage is automatically foolproof.

cryptonews.ru5 h fa

Bitcoin Withdrawals Continue: 8 Years of Storage in a Coldcard Cold Wallet Ended in Zero

cryptonews.ru5 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片