香港证监会咨询细节:上币标准有哪些?过渡期要求?衍生品不被允许?

吴说区块链Опубликовано 2023-02-21Обновлено 2023-02-21

Введение

2月20日香港证监会就有关监管虚拟资产交易平台的建议展开咨询。在长达100多页的咨询文件中,有哪些内容值得关注?

2月20日香港证监会就有关监管虚拟资产交易平台的建议展开咨询。根据将于2023年6月1日生效的新发牌制度,所有在香港经营业务或向香港投资者积极进行推广的中央虚拟资产交易平台,将需获证监会发牌。在长达100多页的咨询文件中,有哪些内容值得关注?

1、

随着《2022 年打击洗钱及恐怖分子资金筹集(修订)条例草案》在 2022 年 12 月获立法会通过,专为提供非证券型代币交易服务的中央虚拟资产交易平台而设的全新发牌制度将在 2023 年 6 月 1 日生效。待新制度实施后,所有在香港经营业务或向香港投资者积极推广其服务的中央虚拟资产交易平台,不论它们有否提供证券型代币交易服务,将需获证监会发牌并受其监管。

2、

由于虚拟资产市场波动不定及FTX倒闭,各主要司法管辖区正将监管方针从宽松(即从打击洗钱或支付角度进行监管)转为较全面(即从投资者保障角度进行监管)。

3、

平台营运者应透过一家全资拥有的附属公司以信托方式持有客户款项及客户虚拟资产。平台营运者应确保储存在线上钱包内的客户虚拟资产不多于 2%。平台营运者不应存入、转移、借出、质押、再质押或以其他方式买卖客户虚拟资产,或就客户虚拟资产产生任何产权负担。其亦须备有保险,而其保障范围应涵盖保管客户虚拟资产所涉及的风险。

平台营运者不应从事自营交易或自营的庄家活动,并且应设有用来管限雇员就虚拟资产进行交易的政策,以消除、避免、管理或披露实际或潜在利益冲突。

平台营运者应在每个历月结束后两个星期内及在证监会提出要求时,就其业务活动每月向证监会提供报告。

4、

证监会已根据该制度认可了三只虚拟资产期货ETF。因此,零售投资者在香港已能透过受规管产品以间接方式接触虚拟资产。

证监会希望强调,虚拟资产本身并不受证监会的监管,意即证监会从未审核亦未曾审阅虚拟资产的要约及推广文件。证监会拟采取更审慎的方针,即引入持牌平台营运者在厘定可否向零售客户提供某特定虚拟资产时须遵从的一系列客观准则,包括:

a) 虚拟资产的管理层或开发团队的背景;

b) 虚拟资产在平台营运者提供交易服务的各个司法管辖区的监管状况,及其监管状况会否亦影响平台营运者的监管责任;

c) 虚拟资产的供求、市场成熟程度及流通性,包括其市值,平均每日成交量,往绩纪录(例如已发行至少 12 个月,惟不包括证券型代币),其他平台营运者是否亦就该虚拟资产提供交易,有没有相关交易组合(例如法定货币兑虚拟资产),及该虚拟资产在哪些司法管辖区可供买卖;

d) 虚拟资产的技术层面,包括其区块链规程的安全基础设施,区块链和网络的大小(特别是对常见攻击(例如 51%攻击)的抵御能力),共识算法的类型,及与涉及虚拟资产及其支援区块链的代码缺陷、违规事项和其他威胁有关的风险,或适用于它们的作业手法和规程;

e) 发行人所发出的虚拟资产推广材料,其内容应为准确及不具误导性;

f) 虚拟资产的开发情况,包括其白皮书(如有)所载任何与其有关的项目的结果,及过往与其历史和开发情况有关的任何重大事件;

g) 虚拟资产的市场风险,包括虚拟资产持仓高度集中或由少数个人或实体所控制、价格操纵和欺诈,及较广泛或较狭窄采纳该虚拟资产对市场风险的影响;

h) 与虚拟资产相关的法律风险,包括与其发行、分销或使用有关的任何待决或潜在的民事、监管、刑事或执法行动;及

i) 虚拟资产所提供的效用,所促成的崭新用例,或所展示的技术、结构或加密经济创新是否看来具有欺诈或极为不当的成分。

5、

持牌平台营运者如有意向零售客户提供虚拟资产,亦应确保所挑选的虚拟资产属于合资格的大型虚拟资产,并符合下列特定代币纳入准则。“合资格的大型虚拟资产”指获纳入由至少两个独立指数提供者19所推出的至少两个“获接纳的指数”中的虚拟资产。

“获接纳的指数”指具有清楚界定的目标的指数,以衡量在市场上最大型的虚拟资产20的表现,并且符合以下准则:

a) 该指数应是可供投资的,意味着有关的成分虚拟资产应具备充足的流通性。

b) 该指数应以客观方式计算,并以规则为本。

c) 指数提供者应具备所需的专业知识及技术资源,以便建构、维持和检讨指数的编制方法及规则。

d) 指数的编制方法及规则应以文件妥为记录,而且贯彻一致及具备透明度。持牌平台营运者应确保在两个指数中至少有一个由在发布传统非虚拟资产金融市场的指数方面具有经验的指数提供者所推出,例如曾推出获证监会认可指数基金跟踪的指数的指数提供者。

6、

根据《证券及期货条例》下的现行制度,持牌平台营运者不得就虚拟资产期货合约或相 关衍生工具进行销售、交易或买卖。

证监会理解,业界对销售虚拟资产衍生工具兴趣渐浓,尤其是希望可向机构投资者销 售。证监会明白,虚拟资产衍生工具作为促进虚拟资产领域与传统金融市场之间连系的介面,有着重要的角色,尤其是能让机构投资者更有效地对冲风险。

尽管如此,证监会希望透过是次咨询,更清楚地了解持牌平台营运者可能首先采取的业务模式和销售的虚拟资产衍生工具种类,以及市场需求,继而进行独立检讨并据此制订政策。

7、

计划申领牌照的虚拟资产交易平台(包括原有平台)的营运者应开始检视及修改有关系统及监控措施,为新制度作好准备。至于无意申领牌照的营运者,则应着手预备以有序方式结束其于香港的业务。

过渡安排(即不违反安排及当作为获发牌的安排)旨在为现时在香港营运的虚拟资产交易平台提供合理足够的时间,以便申领牌照或以有序方式结业。

虚拟资产交易平台必须是原有平台(即在 2023 年 6 月 1 日前已于香港营运并设有具意义且实质的业务),方合资格参与过渡安排。合资格交易平台将包括现时根据《证券及期货条例》获发牌的平台营运者,以及根据《证券及期货条例》下的现行制度已于香港就非证券型代币展开虚拟资产交易平台业务的虚拟资产交易平台申请人。合资格参与过渡安排的虚拟资产交易平台必须符合《打击洗钱条例》附表 3G 所载列的条件,才可于不违反期间(即 2023 年 6 月 1 日至 2024 年 5 月 31 日)内继续于香港营运,并将由 2024年 6 月 1 日起受限于当作为获发牌的安排。

8、

平台营运者须时刻维持不少于 5,000,000 港元的缴足股本。

Похожее

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

AI Bubble: Where It Really Is and Who's Swimming Naked This analysis dissects the AI industry not as a single entity but as a five-layer pyramid, arguing that bubbles are concentrated in specific tiers, not uniformly distributed. **Key Distinction from the 2000 Dot-com Bubble:** Unlike 2000, where companies had stock prices before revenue, today's leading AI players have massive, contract-backed revenue driving their valuations. Core infrastructure demand is real, with every GPU running at full capacity for paying customers. **The Five-Layer Pyramid & Bubble Assessment:** * **L0 (Fab/Manufacturing) & Top L4 (Leading AI Apps): NO BUBBLE.** Companies like TSMC, NVIDIA, major cloud providers (Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon), and top AI labs have real revenues and orders. Supply is tightly constrained by TSMC's disciplined capacity control and physical limits like power/land for data centers, preventing a supply glut. * **L1 (Memory): BATTLEGROUND.** Sky-high HBM margins could signal a new structural cycle or a classic "boom before bust." The oligopoly of three major players may enforce supply discipline, making this a high-stakes bet. * **L2 (Interconnect/Optical Modules): BUBBLE TERRITORY.** Companies like Lumentum and AAOI have seen stock surges (4-10x) far outpacing revenue growth. This hardware segment has lower physical barriers to expansion than fabs, allowing speculation. It mirrors the 2000 bubble's epicenter—optics. * **L3 (Infrastructure/"GPU Landlords"): VULNERABLE.** GPU leasing companies profit from the current compute shortage but own no long-term moat. Their business model relies on a temporary bottleneck that will ease as big tech expands and new tech (e.g., potential space-based data centers) emerges. * **L4 Long Tail (VC-backed Startups): STRONG BUBBLE SIGNALS.** VC funding concentration in AI is twice that of the 1999 peak. Many startups with little revenue use the valuation logic of successful giants to justify their own, creating high risk of a "valuation crunch" when funding dries up. **Critical Risks to Monitor:** 1. **GPU Depreciation & Accounting:** Companies extending the assumed useful life of GPUs artificially boost profits. The true economic life depends on future generational leaps from NVIDIA. 2. **"GPU Credit" & Off-Balance-Sheet Leverage:** Emerging structures where shell companies borrow to buy GPUs and lease them out (with chipmakers sometimes investing) move debt off major balance sheets. This echoes the "vendor financing" of 2000 and the securitization risks of 2008, though currently small-scale. 3. **TSMC Abandoning Caution:** If the primary supply bottleneck (TSMC's conservative capacity planning) breaks, runaway supply could trigger a bust. 4. **Algorithmic Efficiency Breakthrough:** A major leap in software efficiency could drastically reduce the need for raw compute hardware, undermining the investment thesis. **Conclusion:** The AI boom is expensive and has frothy areas, but its core is underpinned by real demand and physical supply constraints. The bubble risk is layered: most present in optical components, GPU leasing, and the long-tail startup ecosystem, while the foundational chip manufacturing and leading application layers remain relatively solid—for now.

marsbit9 мин. назад

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

marsbit9 мин. назад

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

"Standing in the Light: Understanding the Optical Module and CPO Industry Chain" This article analyzes the critical role of optical communication technology, specifically optical modules and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO), as the "nervous system" for modern AI data centers. With exponential growth in AI computational demands (e.g., NVIDIA's Vera Rubin architecture), traditional electrical interconnects using copper cables face severe bottlenecks in bandwidth, power consumption, and signal integrity over distance. The core function of an optical module is to act as a "translator," converting electrical signals from chips into optical signals for transmission over fiber (and vice-versa). Key internal components include lasers, modulators, photodetectors, drivers, and DSP chips. The industry is currently transitioning from 800G to 1.6T modules. However, the future lies in CPO. This next-generation technology integrates the optical engine directly with the switch ASIC/XPU on the same package substrate, drastically reducing power consumption (by ~3.5x according to NVIDIA), overcoming bandwidth density limits, and minimizing signal attenuation compared to traditional pluggable modules. Key challenges for CPO include advanced packaging capacity (dominated by TSMC), thermal management, repairability, and standardization. The article details the broader technology landscape, including Near-Packaged Optics (NPO, a pragmatic intermediate step), Linear-drive Pluggable Optics (LPO), Optical I/O (OIO for chip-level integration), and Optical Circuit Switches (OCS). A comprehensive CPO industry chain is mapped, highlighting shifting power dynamics: * **Architecture Definers:** NVIDIA, Broadcom, and Marvell now hold greater influence. * **Advanced Packaging & Manufacturing:** TSMC is central; Fabrinet is a key EMS player. * **Lasers ("The Heart"):** A strategic bottleneck. EML lasers are led by Lumentum and Coherent (both receiving major NVIDIA investments). CW lasers, favored for CPO/silicon photonics, see strong Chinese players like Source Photonics and Sicoya. * **Silicon Photonics Chips:** The mainstream path for CPO engines, with key players like Broadcom, Intel, Marvell, and China's Accelink. * **Fiber Connectivity Components:** A major new, high-growth market created by CPO, including Fiber Array Units (FAU), Polarization-Maintaining Fiber (PMF), and MPO connectors. Companies like Tianfu Communication and US Conec are leaders. * **Fiber & Cable:** Experiencing a super-cycle (e.g., Corning, Yangtze Optical Fiber). * **PCB/Substrates:** Requiring advanced materials (e.g., Shengyi Tech). * **DSP & SerDes:** Functions are integrated into switch ASICs in the CPO era (e.g., Broadcom, Astera Labs). * **Optical Module Makers:** Transitioning from standalone module suppliers to providers of optical engines and NPO/LPO solutions while riding the current pluggable boom (e.g., Zhongji Innolight, Eoptolink). The investment timeline is segmented: Short-term (2026-2027) features the "last feast" for pluggable modules and CPO's initial rollout. Medium-term (2027-2029) will see CPO expand and NPO peak. Long-term (2029-2032+) involves CPO/OIO penetration into intra-rack scaling. In conclusion, optical interconnects are fundamental to AI infrastructure. The competitive landscape sees US firms leading in architecture and high-end chips, TSMC in advanced packaging, and Chinese firms holding strong positions in modules, connectivity components, CW lasers, and fiber/cable. The future belongs to companies that can navigate the technological shift from "selling shovels" (modules) to "building highways" (CPO/OIO infrastructure).

marsbit19 мин. назад

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

marsbit19 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片