解读香港交易所牌照咨询文件:什么类型的虚拟资产可被纳入交易?

Panews2023-02-20 tarihinde yayınlandı2023-02-27 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

香港证监会公布的300余页,20多万字的相关咨询文件,主要向香港业界咨询10个问题。交易所上线代币需符合有关准则,散户可交易大市值虚拟资产。

上周市场传言香港将为虚拟资产交易平台发放面向散户的牌照,业内人士向PANews证实证监会将在本周发放咨询文件。2月20日(周一),香港证监会如期就有关监管虚拟资产交易平台的建议展开咨询,咨询将于3月31日结束,以配合在6月1日可以正式生效新的发牌制度。

根据香港证监会公布的300余页,20多万字的相关咨询文件,主要向香港业界咨询10个问题:

1、是否赞同持牌平台营运者应获准向零售投资者提供服务?
2、对于有关一般代币纳入准则及特定代币纳入准则的建议,你是否有任何意见?
3、如证监会有意允许零售投资者使用持牌虚拟资产交易平台,那么从投资者保障的角度来看,你认为应要实施什么其他规定?
4、对于允许结合使用第三者保险及持牌平台营运者或与其属同一公司集团旗下法团拨出的资金的建议,你是否有任何意见?你是否有任何其他建议?
5、对于持牌平台营运者应如何划拨该等资金,你是否有任何提议(例如,拨入持牌平台营运者的公司帐户,或设定代管安排) ?请详细说明你所建议的安排,及有关安排所提供的保障如何能提供与第三者保险相同的保障水平。
6、对于哪些技术方案能够有效地纾减与保管客户虚拟资产(尤其是以线上储存方式持有虚拟资产)有关的风险,你是否有任何提议?
7、如持牌平台营运者可提供虚拟资产衍生工具交易服务,你会建议采纳哪一种业务模式?你建议推出哪类虚拟资产衍生工具供投资者买卖?目标将会是哪类投资者?
8、对于如何在将《虚拟资产交易平台条款及条件》中的其他规定纳入《虚拟资产交易平台指引》内的同时对其加以改良,你是否有任何意见?
9、对于《适用于持牌法团及获证监会发牌的虚拟资产服务提供者的打击洗钱指引》第12章当中有关虚拟资产转帐的规定或任何其他规定,你是否有任何意见?请说明你的看法。
10、你对《证监会纪律处分罚款指引》是否有任何意见?请说明你的看法。

上述10个问题中,最受市场关注的莫过于,是否允许交易平台面向散户投资者,以及散户可以参与哪些资产的交易,并且可以交易哪些衍生品。其他的问题涉及运营的细节、安全保护和反洗钱,如第三方保险、资产保管的技术方案等。

证监会将发放虚拟资产牌照,有意允许面向散户

文件指出,虚拟资产市场波动不定及FTX倒闭,不但显露了因虚拟资产的生态系统内及虚拟资产市场与传统金融体系之间的相互联系日趋紧密而带来的风险,还凸显了对虚拟资产业施行有效监管及监察的重要性。

而此前香港根据《证券及期货条例》下的现行制度,只有向客户提供证券型代币交易服务的虚拟资产交易平台,才属于证监会的监管范围,也意味着证监会此前并无权利向仅提供非证券型代币交易服务的虚拟资产交易平台发牌或进行监管。

随后香港特区政府于2020年11月发表了一份咨询文件,征询公众对于建议在《打击洗钱及恐怖分子资金筹集条例》下建立虚拟资产服务提供者发牌制度的意见。政府建议,在香港提供非证券型代币交易服务的中央虚拟资产交易平台(即中心化交易所)应获证监会发牌并受其监管。

但因为虚拟资产的发牌框架属于新概念,证监会当时认为,即使该制度已设有保障投资者的妥善防护措施,但为求更加审慎,应至少在初步阶段限制《证券及期货条例》下的持牌虚拟资产交易平台仅可为专业投资者提供服务。所以此前,香港一直对牌照发放的十分谨慎,仅OSL在2020年以及Hahskey在2022年年获得了交易所的牌照,且仅限于向专业投资者提供服务。

在去年10月31日,香港发布《有关虚拟资产发展的政策宣言》,释放对虚拟资产的开放和友好态度,也释放了面向散户投资者提供服务的风声,并称证监会正在允许零售投资者(散户)买卖虚拟资产展开公众咨询。

从文件中可以发现,尽管是公开咨询,但证监会实际上有意面向散户提供服务。文件中提到,不少人认为,拒绝零售投资者使用持牌虚拟资产交易平台可能会变相对投资者造成损害,因为这或会驱使他们转用可轻易在网上接触而不受监管的海外虚拟资产交易平台来进行交易;而任何这些不受监管的虚拟资产交易平台一旦倒闭,零售投资者将难以追讨任何损失。这从FTX的倒闭事件就可见一斑。

证监会还补充到,在2022年1月,证监会首度容许零售投资者接触在传统交易所买卖的少数受规管虚拟资产相关衍生产品。随后在2022年10月就虚拟资产期货交易所买卖基金(虚拟资产期货ETF )设立了认可制度,而至今为止,证监会已根据该制度认可了三只虚拟资产期货ETF,三星比特币期货主动型ETF今年1月在港交所上市,南方东英于去年12月份在香港上市比特币和以太坊期货ETF。

因此,零售投资者在香港已能通过合规产品以间接方式接触虚拟资产。所以无论从实际情况和监管趋势,面向散户已经证监会不得不允许的变化,这样才能让监管化被动为主动。

用户需进行风险评估后才可交易

虽然香港证监会建议允许各类投资者(包括零售投资者)使用由持牌虚拟资产交易平台营运者提供的交易服务, 但前提是在一系列妥善投资者保障措施之下。

持牌平台营运者在向投资者提供任何服务前,须对投资者进行知识评估。若客户未能通过该评估,营运者只可在向该客户提供培训后,才向其提供服务。营运者应评估客户的风险承受水平及风险状况,并据此为客户厘定风险状况,以及评估客户是否适合参与虚拟资产的交易。营运者亦应为每名客户设定上限,以在参照客户的财政状况及个人情况的前提下,确保客户就虚拟资产所承担的风险根据平台营运者的判断是合理的。该上限应予定期检视,以确保其仍属适当。

这意味着未来香港居民在注册后还需要做一次风险评估测试,才能正式交易。值得一提的是,在非正式咨询中,有提议为零售投资者在各虚拟资产交易平台的虚拟资产风险承担最高金额,设定统一的硬性上限。但考虑到每个人的财务状况不一,因此证监会建议让平台根据合适的制度,评估其客户的风险承受水平及风险状况。

上线代币需符合有关准则,散户可交易大市值虚拟资产

证监会建议,持牌平台营运者应设立一个代币纳入及检讨委员会,以负责订立、实施及执行有关将虚拟资产纳入以供买卖的准则,就任何建议的硬分叉( hard fork ) 或空投( airdrop )、发行人业务的任何重大改变或任何针对发行人的监管行动而通知持牌平台营运者的责任。

代币纳入及检讨委员会至少应由主要负责管理主要业务、合规、风险管理及资讯科技的高级管理层成员组成。代币纳入及检讨委员会应至少每月向董事会汇报,而汇报内容应至少包含可供零售客户买卖的虚拟资产的详情及其他注意到的问题。

证监会希望强调,虚拟资产本身并不受证监会的监管,从未审核亦未曾审阅虚拟资产的要约及推广文件。鉴于此,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。

持牌平台营运者对于在纳入虚拟资产以供买卖之前就虚拟资产进行合理的尽职审查,及确保它们符合代币纳入准则方面,负有最终责任。持牌平台营运者亦应持续地监察获纳入的虚拟资产,并确保它们持续地符合有关准则。应考虑的因素包括: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,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;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;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,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。

除一般的代币纳入准则外,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,除了遵守上述一般的纳入准则,还需要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(且至少一个是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。

按照这个准则,BTC和ETH明确符合要求,可以面向散户投资者,其他的加密资产还有待进一步研究。

需维持不少于500万港元的缴足股本,设立保险制度

根据文件要求平台营运者须时刻维持不少于500万港元的缴足股本(即“缴足股本最低数额" ) 。台营运者应时刻在香港实益拥有具有充分流通性的资产,例如现金、存款、国库券及存款证(但非虚拟资产),其金额应相等于平台营运者按持续基准计算至少12个月的实际营运开支。

此外还提到,平台营运者应在私人密钥管理方面设立并实施严格的内部监控措施及管治程序,借以确保安全地产生、储存及备份所有加密种子及私人密钥。种子及私人密钥均在香港储存。

持牌平台营运者应设有经证监会核准的补偿安排,就与保管客户虚拟资产有关的风险 (例如平台遭黑客攻击的事件,或持牌平台营运者或其有联系实体违约) 提供适当程度的保障。关于投资者保护保险规定,证监会建议:

a)持牌平台营运者就与保管客户虚拟资产有关的风险应设有经证监会核准的补偿安排。

b)持牌平台营运者应每日监察其所保管的客户虚拟资产的总值,确保遵守有关的补偿规定。

c)持牌平台营运者如为遵从有关规定而拨出自身的资金或与其属同一公司集团的法团的资金,便应确保该等资金乃以信托方式持有并指定作有关用途。该等资金亦应从持牌平台营运者、其有联系实体或与持牌平台营运者属同一公司集团的法团的资产分隔出来。

将在牌照生效后公布交易所名单

2023 年 6 月 1 日起,任何在香港经营其业务或是向香港投资者积极推广其服务的虚拟资产交易平台,如并无有效牌照,即属违反《打击洗钱条例》下的虚拟资产服务提供者制度中的发牌规定,除非符合参与过渡安排的资格。

证监会建议订立为期 12 个月的过渡期,以便《证券及期货条例》下的持牌平台营运者遵守与其现有客户或其现时销售的虚拟资产有关的规定。待《虚拟资产交易平台指引》、 《适用于持牌法团及获证监会发牌的虚拟资产服务提供者的打击洗钱指引》及其他指引的规定作最后定稿后,会提供过渡安排细节。

虚拟资产交易平台必须是原有平台,且在 2023 年 6 月 1 日前已于香港营运并设具意义且实质的业务,方合资格参与过渡安排。在符合《打击洗钱条例》条件后才可于 2023 年 6 月 1 日至 2024 年 5 月 31 日内继续在香港营运。具体考虑因素包括是否于香港成立发团、是否在香港有实体办公室、香港员工是否有中央管理或控制权、关键人员是否驻于香港、运作是否已投入服务并于香港拥有大量的客户及交易活动。

原有虚拟资产交易平台如要符合资格参与当作为获发牌的安排,必须在 2023 年 6 月 1 日至 2024 年 2 月 29 日期间(即由 2023 年 6 月 1 日起计九个月内)内,根据《打击洗钱条例》下的虚拟资产服务提供者制度在网上提交牌照申请。

在紧接 2023 年 6 月 1 日前并非于香港营运的虚拟资产交易平台,仅可在根据《打击洗钱条例》下的虚拟资产服务提供者制度获正式发牌后,方可于香港经营其业务或积极地 向香港投资者推广其服务。进行任何无牌活动乃属刑事罪行。

过渡期内,公众可能难以分辨某一虚拟资产交易平台是否合法营运。为了消除有关疑虑,证监会拟在其网站上发布数份名单,以告知公众有关虚拟资产交易平台的不同监管状况。证监会希望透过公布这些名单,阻吓未获发牌或被要求结业的虚拟资产交易平台向公众提供服务。

İlgili Okumalar

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Bitcoin prices declined 13% this week, reversing the recent rebound and signaling a likely transition into the later stages of a bear market. Key on-chain metrics deteriorated, with the short-term holder cost basis falling below the Realized Price—a pattern last seen in early 2022, characteristic of bear market maturity. The rally to ~$82k proved to be a bear market bounce, as evidenced by the 90-day realized profit/loss ratio failing to sustain above the bullish threshold of 2. Daily realized losses surged to $1.35B, including significant selling from long-term holders who accumulated near cycle tops, indicating ongoing supply redistribution. Price was rejected almost precisely at the aggregate US spot ETF cost basis of ~$83k, turning that level into resistance and leaving the average ETF investor underwater again. Spot market selling pressure intensified, with the 7-day volume delta turning significantly negative to its weakest level since February. While a major long liquidation event cleared over $400M in leverage, spot demand has not yet stepped in to absorb the resulting supply. Options markets continue pricing in higher future volatility (elevated volatility risk premium) and maintain a skew toward put options, reflecting persistent demand for downside protection, though not yet panic. Overall, market structure remains fragile. Sustained recovery likely requires a reclaim of the ETF cost basis, a shift back to positive spot demand, and a slowdown in realized loss-taking. Until then, the market risks further downside or extended consolidation within the broader bear trend.

Foresight News19 dk önce

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Foresight News19 dk önce

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News37 dk önce

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News37 dk önce

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

MicroStrategy's Debt Risk: A Turning Point in the "Never Sell" Strategy As of June 3, 2026, MicroStrategy holds 843,706 bitcoins (valued at ~$53.1B) but faces significant financial obligations. Its capital structure includes $6.75B in convertible notes and $15.48B in perpetual preferred stock (led by the $8.5B STRC series), creating an annual payout burden of ~$1.71B. With software revenue at only ~$500M, interest and dividend obligations far exceed operating income. A critical shift occurred in late May 2026 when the company sold 32 bitcoins for ~$2.5M to cover dividends, breaking CEO Michael Saylor's long-standing "never sell" pledge. This symbolic move triggered a sharp decline in both Bitcoin's price and MSTR stock, reflecting market fears about cash flow sustainability. The core of the strain is the STRC perpetual preferred stock, designed as a "permanent loan" with no maturity date but requiring high monthly dividends (currently 11.5%). Its business model relies on a three-part cycle: issuing new STRC shares, using proceeds to buy more Bitcoin and fund a USD reserve, and using that reserve to pay dividends. This cycle depends on continuous investor demand for STRC and Bitcoin's price appreciation. Analysis shows Bitcoin needs to appreciate at least 2.3% annually to cover the $1.71B in yearly obligations at current holdings. With Bitcoin price down ~22% from March 2026 highs, this pressure has intensified. The company's $900M USD reserve can only cover about 7 months of payments if STRC issuance stalls. Key risks are not immediate bankruptcy or forced Bitcoin liquidation (as BTC is not collateral), but rather: 1) The erosion of MSTR's premium to its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV), which would cripple its ability to raise cheap capital; 2) A vicious cycle where stagnant Bitcoin prices reduce STRC demand, draining the USD reserve and forcing BTC sales, further depressing prices. The period from February 2027 to September 2028 is a crucial test, with over $5.9B in convertible notes facing put options or maturity. In essence, MicroStrategy has evolved from a simple Bitcoin holder into a complex financial entity acting like a "private Bitcoin bank," leveraging its BTC holdings to create layered financial products. Its survival depends on maintaining Bitcoin's price trend, its stock premium, and market appetite for its preferred shares. The recent token sale marks not a betrayal of its Bitcoin thesis, but an admission that the leveraged strategy must eventually be paid for.

marsbit48 dk önce

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

marsbit48 dk önce

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

Anthropic has published an article titled "When AI builds itself," discussing the emerging concept of "recursive self-improvement," where AI begins to actively participate in designing, training, testing, and optimizing its own subsequent versions. The company presents internal data showing that by May 2026, over 80% of code merged into its codebase was written by Claude, its AI model. Claude's capabilities have expanded to handling complex, open-ended engineering tasks, achieving a 76% success rate in such areas, and even contributing to research processes, such as optimizing code performance and conducting AI safety experiments. Anthropic outlines an evolution from human-driven development to AI-assisted workflows, culminating in the current stage where AI agents can autonomously write, run, and delegate code. The company cautions that the path toward a "closed loop," where AI continuously improves itself, is becoming visible. It calls for coordinated global mechanisms to potentially slow or pause frontier AI development to allow safety research and societal structures to catch up. However, the timing of this warning coincides with Anthropic's preparations for an IPO, framing the narrative not just as a safety concern but also as a demonstration of Claude's advanced capabilities and its integral role in accelerating Anthropic's own R&D—creating a potential "flywheel" effect for competitive advantage. This contrasts with OpenAI's recent, more policy-oriented discussion of the same risks, highlighting the competitive dynamics in the AI industry as companies position themselves in both the technological and regulatory landscape.

marsbit1 saat önce

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

marsbit1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片