South Korean Authorities Exclude Stablecoins From Corporate Crypto Investments – Details

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-03-08Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-08

Introduzione

South Korean financial regulators, led by the Financial Services Commission (FSC), are preparing to exclude stablecoins like USDT and USDC from the list of cryptocurrencies that publicly listed companies will be allowed to invest in. This decision is based on the country’s Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, which does not recognize stablecoins as legal external payment instruments. Allowing corporate investment in such assets could enable firms to bypass foreign exchange controls by making overseas payments directly via blockchain. The new guidelines will initially permit investments only in the top 20 non-stablecoin cryptocurrencies by market cap, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, with exposure potentially capped at 5% of a company’s capital. This marks a shift from South Korea’s earlier restrictive stance on corporate crypto trading, reflecting a gradual reopening of the market to institutional participants under tighter oversight.

South Korean authorities are reportedly moving to exclude stablecoins from an incoming framework that will allow listed companies to invest in cryptocurrencies. The decision is reportedly tied to existing foreign exchange laws, but reflects a cautious approach in permitting institutional exposure to the digital asset market.

South Korea’s FSC Leaves Stablecoins Out of Corporate Options

According to a report by local media, Herald Economy, South Korea’s financial regulators are leaning toward omitting US dollar–pegged stablecoins such as USDC and USDT from the list of digital assets that corporations will be allowed to hold once the guidelines take effect.

The regulatory pathway being designed by the nation’s Financial Services Commission (FSC) is aimed at allowing publicly listed companies to invest in cryptocurrencies. However, regulators believe that including stablecoins in the approved investment list would conflict with the existing legal framework over cross-border payments.

For context, stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to maintain a stable value by being pegged to a fiat currency, most commonly the US dollar. Tokens such as USDT and USDC typically maintain a 1:1 value with the dollar and are widely used for trading, settlements, and cross-border payments due to non-existent volatility compared with traditional cryptocurrencies.

However, South Korean regulators argue that these tokens are currently not recognized within the country’s Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, a law enacted in 1998 and implemented in 1999 to regulate currency flows and international payments. The legislation requires cross-border transactions to pass through designated foreign exchange banks and does not recognize stablecoins as legitimate external payment instruments.

Therefore, allowing companies to invest in stablecoins could potentially enable firms to bypass the country’s foreign exchange control system by conducting overseas payments directly through blockchain networks. Notably, South Korean corporations involved in international trade have expressed hope for stablecoin inclusion to hedge exchange-rate volatility and facilitate near-instant settlements. Nevertheless, the SFC appears inclined to maintain a conservative stance.

Corporate Crypto Access Expands, But With Limits

The proposed guidelines by the FSC will initially permit investments only in the top 20 non-stablecoin cryptocurrencies by market capitalization, including assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. Meanwhile, corporate exposure would potentially be capped within 5% of a company’s own capital, thus helping mitigate financial risks.

The move is part of a broader shift in South Korea’s digital asset policy. In 2017, authorities imposed strict restrictions on corporate participation in crypto trading amid concerns about speculation and money laundering. Nearly nine years later, regulators are gradually reopening the market to institutional investors under stricter oversight.

Meanwhile, the Asian country continues to refine its broader crypto regulatory framework. Bitcoinist recently reported that the FSC and the ruling party agreed to cap major shareholder stakes in domestic crypto exchanges to 20% in a bid battle governance risk and founder control.

Total crypto market cap valued at $2.27 trillion on the daily chart | Source: TOTAL chart on Tradingview.com

Domande pertinenti

QWhy are South Korean authorities excluding stablecoins from the list of approved corporate crypto investments?

ABecause stablecoins are not recognized as legitimate external payment instruments under South Korea's Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, and allowing corporate investment could enable firms to bypass the country's foreign exchange control system.

QWhich specific stablecoins are mentioned as being excluded from the corporate investment framework?

AUSDT (Tether) and USDC (USD Coin) are the specific dollar-pegged stablecoins mentioned.

QWhat is the primary reason cited by regulators for their cautious stance on stablecoins?

AThe primary reason is the conflict with existing foreign exchange laws, as stablecoins are not recognized within the country's Foreign Exchange Transactions Act which regulates cross-border payments.

QWhat are the proposed limits for corporate cryptocurrency investments under the new FSC guidelines?

AInvestments will initially be permitted only in the top 20 non-stablecoin cryptocurrencies by market cap, and corporate exposure will potentially be capped within 5% of a company's own capital.

QHow have South Korean corporations involved in international trade reacted to the exclusion of stablecoins?

AThey had expressed hope for stablecoin inclusion to hedge against exchange-rate volatility and facilitate near-instant settlements for international trade.

Letture associate

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

NEAR Returns to AI Origins: From Payroll Struggles to Blockchain, Now Focusing on AI Agents and Privacy NEAR Protocol's journey began not with grand blockchain ambitions, but from a practical hurdle: its AI startup founders, including Transformer paper co-author Illia Polosukhin, couldn't efficiently pay international developers in 2017. This led them to pivot and build a high-performance, scalable blockchain. After years navigating various crypto narratives like sharding and cross-chain interoperability, NEAR is now leveraging its AI roots to re-enter the AI arena. A key driver is its "NEAR Intents" layer, which abstracts complex cross-chain transactions. Users simply state their goal (e.g., swap BTC for ETH), and a solver network finds the optimal route. This system has processed over $20B in cross-chain volume, generating significant fee revenue. A major growth area is private transactions via "Confidential Intents/Swaps," which hide trade details until settlement to protect against MEV and front-running. Remarkably, private swaps recently accounted for over 40% of NEAR's transaction volume, highlighting strong demand but also potential regulatory scrutiny. With its AI-founder pedigree, NEAR is positioning itself at the intersection of blockchain, AI agents, and privacy, aiming to become infrastructure for the emerging agent economy while navigating the challenges of its rapid adoption.

marsbit2 h fa

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

marsbit2 h fa

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

In recent discussions, Vitalik Buterin has frequently emphasized the concept of "CROPS," a framework defining core values for Ethereum's development. CROPS stands for Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, and Security. Initially outlined in the Ethereum Foundation's "EF Mandate," it represents a commitment to user sovereignty, ensuring that the network resists external control, remains open, protects privacy, and prioritizes security. The relevance of CROPS extends beyond Ethereum's foundational principles, becoming crucial in the context of AI integration. As AI agents begin handling wallet operations and automated transactions, the risk increases that users may cede control over their digital assets, privacy, and intentions to centralized AI service providers. A "CROPS AI" would therefore emphasize local execution where possible, privacy-preserving remote model calls (e.g., using zero-knowledge proofs), and transparent, verifiable processes to maintain user agency. Vitalik highlights a significant convergence between "CROPS Ethereum access layer" and "CROPS AI." Both address the same fundamental challenge: how users can access powerful services—be it blockchain data via RPCs or AI models—without exposing sensitive information or relinquishing ultimate control. This intersection points toward a future digital entry point that is more private, secure, and user-controlled. Ultimately, CROPS is not merely an abstract ideal but a practical guidepost. It steers development—from protocol resilience and wallet design to AI agent safety—towards a future where users retain self-sovereignty even as digital systems grow more complex and powerful. In an era of accelerating AI adoption, these "slow variables" of censorship resistance, openness, privacy, and security may define Ethereum's enduring value.

marsbit2 h fa

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

marsbit2 h fa

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit3 h fa

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit3 h fa

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit3 h fa

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片