# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Compliance

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Compliance", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

How the CLARITY Act Reshapes the Stablecoin Yield Economy

The CLARITY Act, recently advanced by the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, fundamentally reshapes the stablecoin yield economy by closing loopholes left by the earlier GENIUS Act. Its Section 404 expands the ban on "hold-to-earn" rewards to all Digital Asset Service Providers (DASPs) and their affiliates, prohibiting any passive, interest-like yield. Crucially, it introduces a legal distinction, permitting "use-to-earn" rewards based on actual activities like spending, trading, or staking. In anticipation of this regulatory shift, major Wall Street asset managers—Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, and JPMorgan—have launched a series of tokenized money market funds (e.g., BlackRock's BRSRV, JPMorgan's JLTXX) designed explicitly for stablecoin reserve assets. These products represent a new, compliant yield layer: the stablecoin issuer earns interest from the underlying tokenized fund, which can then be passed to users through redesigned activity-based rewards. This marks a paradigm shift from a "hold-to-earn" to a "use-to-earn" market. While pathways remain for exchanges to redesign rewards (Path A) and for DeFi protocols to offer yield (Path B), the tokenized reserve asset layer (Path C) emerges as the most robust and strategically positioned infrastructure. However, this concentration—exemplified by BlackRock's BUIDL fund backing over 90% of USDtb's reserves—introduces new systemic risks. The final outcome hinges on regulatory decisions, particularly the OCC's proposed 20% cap on tokenized assets in reserves, which will determine the scalability of this new financial infrastructure layer.

marsbit05/30 11:11

How the CLARITY Act Reshapes the Stablecoin Yield Economy

marsbit05/30 11:11

Kalshi and Coinbase Receive CFTC Approval, Ushering in the Most Regulation-Friendly Era for the Crypto Industry?

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) took two landmark actions on May 29. It approved Kalshi's application to list a Bitcoin perpetual futures contract and issued a no-action letter to Coinbase Financial Markets. This allows Coinbase to offer certain perpetual futures products to U.S. customers through a subsidiary, with digital assets permitted as collateral. These moves, coupled with a new CFTC policy statement, provide a clearer regulatory pathway for perpetual contracts in the U.S., moving them from a regulatory gray area. CFTC Chair Mike Selig stated this is a key step for U.S. crypto leadership but noted the policy is not yet permanent. The article explains that CFTC's previous reluctance stemmed from legal ambiguities, as perpetual contracts lack an expiration date. However, such contracts dominate global crypto derivatives, accounting for ~78% of centralized exchange volume in 2025, forcing U.S. regulators to adapt to competition from offshore platforms like Hyperliquid. The approvals offer two compliance paths: Kalshi's direct listing and Coinbase's model using foreign futures. This is expected to attract institutional capital back to regulated U.S. venues, stimulate the launch of more products like ETH perpetuals, and enhance U.S. competitiveness in the global crypto derivatives market. The author suggests this may signal a "regulatorily friendly" era for crypto.

marsbit05/30 07:31

Kalshi and Coinbase Receive CFTC Approval, Ushering in the Most Regulation-Friendly Era for the Crypto Industry?

marsbit05/30 07:31

The Truth About Global Payments, Exposed by Airwallex

Airwallex's founder, Jack Zhang, outlines the three primary paths in the global payments industry and explains why the company chooses the most demanding one: building its own global financial infrastructure. The article begins by highlighting a common industry problem: payment platforms appear homogenized on the surface, offering similar features like global acquiring and multi-currency accounts. However, their underlying capabilities differ vastly. Customers truly care about payment stability, compliance robustness, and reliable market entry support. Zhang identifies three strategic paths: 1. **Bypassing Traditional Systems (Web3/Crypto):** This path promises efficiency via stablecoins and blockchain settlement but struggles with mainstream adoption, significant regulatory friction, and a lack of competitive edge against established players, often leaving it with niche or non-compliant markets. 2. **Packaging Existing Infrastructure:** The most common route, where companies layer a modern interface over legacy banking and partner networks. While enabling fast expansion, it fails to solve core issues like dependency on correspondent banks and intermediary risk, merely postponing the need for solid foundations. 3. **Building Own Global Infrastructure:** The path chosen by Airwallex, Ant International, and others. It involves obtaining local licenses, establishing direct regulatory relationships, building local teams, and controlling the full technology stack. This "heavy" approach is slow and capital-intensive but aims to internalize complexity, providing customers with a "lighter" experience. The core argument is that for business clients, the highest cost isn't transaction fees but hidden risks like frozen accounts, payment delays, and regulatory shocks. By investing heavily in its own infrastructure, Airwallex seeks to absorb these complexities, offering customers greater stability, cost savings (beyond fees), and long-term certainty. This foundational investment, though initially slow, enables compound growth, as evidenced by Airwallex's accelerated revenue scaling. In conclusion, while shortcuts enable faster growth, mastering the most difficult aspects—owning the underlying infrastructure—creates durable value for customers and sustainable advantage for the payment provider.

marsbit05/28 16:10

The Truth About Global Payments, Exposed by Airwallex

marsbit05/28 16:10

The Truth About Global Payments, Revealed by Airwallex

The article discusses Airwallex's approach to global payments, highlighting the key challenges and different strategic paths in the industry. It begins by addressing common user questions about platform reliability, cryptocurrency payments, and the necessity of Airwallex's "heavy" infrastructure model. The core argument is that while many payment platforms appear similar on the surface—offering features like global acquiring and multi-currency accounts—their underlying capabilities differ drastically. The piece identifies three primary paths for global payment providers: 1. **Bypassing Traditional Infrastructure (Web3/Crypto):** This path promises efficiency through stablecoins and on-chain settlements but faces significant regulatory hurdles and offers little advantage over established players for mainstream use, often serving only niche or non-compliant markets. 2. **Aggregating/Packaging Existing Infrastructure:** The most common route, where companies layer a better user experience over legacy banking and partner networks. While fast to market, this approach does not solve fundamental issues like dependency on intermediaries, correspondent banking risks, and compliance fragility. 3. **Building Proprietary Global Infrastructure:** The path chosen by Airwallex and similar firms. This involves obtaining local licenses, building direct regulatory relationships, establishing local teams, and controlling the compliance and technology stack. This is the most difficult and capital-intensive route but aims to internalize complexity. Airwallex's strategy of "heavy" investment in its own infrastructure is framed not as inefficiency, but as a long-term bet to provide clients with greater stability, cost savings beyond fees, and certainty. The platform's "heaviness" absorbs risk and operational complexity, aiming to deliver a "lighter" experience for business customers. The article concludes that in global payments, while shortcuts enable faster growth, mastering the most difficult aspects—the underlying infrastructure—is what creates durable value for clients and sustainable competitive advantage.

链捕手05/28 16:02

The Truth About Global Payments, Revealed by Airwallex

链捕手05/28 16:02

End of the 'Gray Era' for Hong Kong and US Stock Trading Accounts: Where Can Your Money Go Now?

Hong Kong and US stock “grey account opening era” ends, where can your money go? In a coordinated regulatory crackdown starting May 22nd, Hong Kong's SFC and China's securities regulator have targeted the previously common but legally ambiguous practice of mainland Chinese investors opening accounts with Hong Kong brokers to trade Hong Kong and US stocks. The SFC issued a stern circular after a review of 12 brokerages, citing major deficiencies including inadequate due diligence, acceptance of suspicious or forged documents, and weak management of cross-border relationships. New requirements mandate mainland clients to submit a written declaration confirming their investment funds originate from *outside* mainland China, the account has never been closed for using suspicious documents, and agreeing to information disclosure. Brokers must immediately close accounts opened with suspicious documents and dormant accounts. Simultaneously, Chinese authorities launched a two-year campaign to rectify illegal cross-border securities activities. Key internet brokers like Futu, Tiger Brokers, and Longbridge are facing penalties, with existing accounts allowed only to sell/withdraw funds, not add new ones. The impact is immediate. Reports from social media and financial news outlets confirm that individuals traveling to Hong Kong to open accounts are now required to sign the new declaration. However, even after signing, applications are frequently rejected. The declaration shifts compliance responsibility to the client and acts as a filter, as most mainland investors' funds do not legally meet the "from outside China" criterion. Major brokers like Futu and Tiger have stopped accepting new mainland clients. A few, such as uSmart Securities, Fosun Wealth, and Cheerful Investment, still offer limited channels, but approvals have tightened significantly. Crucially, funding must now come exclusively from the investor's own bank account in Hong Kong or a qualified jurisdiction, blocking previous workarounds like using money changers or stablecoins. For mainland investors, compliant pathways still exist but are narrower. Individuals with overseas status (students, work visa holders) and verifiable offshore funds may still qualify. Official channels like Stock Connect, QDII, and the Cross-boundary Wealth Management Connect remain fully compliant options, albeit with product and quota limitations. On-chain alternatives exist but carry their own regulatory uncertainties and often exclude mainland users. The crackdown signals the end of the lax expansion period for Hong Kong brokers targeting mainland clients. While investment opportunities persist, the era of easy, low-compliance access is over. Investors must now carefully assess their eligibility and understand that signing the new declaration carries personal legal liability.

Odaily星球日报05/28 09:15

End of the 'Gray Era' for Hong Kong and US Stock Trading Accounts: Where Can Your Money Go Now?

Odaily星球日报05/28 09:15

Cross-strait Regulators Jointly Block Hong Kong Stock Account Openings: Where Can Your Money Go Now?

**Summary:** On May 22, 2026, financial regulators in mainland China and Hong Kong launched a synchronized crackdown targeting informal channels used by mainland investors to trade in Hong Kong and US stocks via Hong Kong-based securities firms. The Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) issued a stringent circular to licensed brokers, mandating stricter onboarding procedures for mainland clients. New requirements include a mandatory written declaration stating that all investment funds originate from *outside* mainland China and are from legal sources. The SFC also demanded the closure of accounts opened with suspicious documents and dormant accounts. Simultaneously, China's securities regulator, along with seven other ministries, initiated a two-year rectification plan, penalizing firms like Futu and Tiger Brokers for illegal cross-border operations. This effectively ends the previously common grey-area practice for mainlanders. Immediate impacts are evident. Social media reports show mainland investors traveling to Hong Kong for in-person account openings are now frequently denied after signing the new declaration, even at firms like uSMART that still accept applications. The declaration acts as both a compliance shield for brokers and a filter for clients. While major internet brokers have halted new mainland accounts, limited options remain. A few Hong Kong-licensed firms like uSMART, Fosun Wealth, and Cheerful still offer avenues, but approval is not guaranteed and hinges on proving offshore fund sources. Crucially, funding accounts must now be in the investor's own name at qualified Hong Kong or international banks, blocking previous informal methods like third-party transfers. For compliant access, official channels like Stock Connect, QDII, and the Cross-boundary Wealth Management Connect remain open. Individuals with verifiable overseas residency or status have better prospects. The crackdown signals the definitive end of the loosely regulated expansion period, forcing mainland investors toward stricter, fully compliant pathways for overseas asset allocation.

marsbit05/28 07:21

Cross-strait Regulators Jointly Block Hong Kong Stock Account Openings: Where Can Your Money Go Now?

marsbit05/28 07:21

活动图片