Hong Kong Professionals Association Urges Regulators To Ease Crypto Reporting Rules

bitcoinist2026-01-20 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-01-20 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

Hong Kong Securities & Futures Professionals Association (HKSFPA) has urged regulators to ease certain aspects of the OECD’s Crypto Asset Reporting Framework (CARF) and related amendments to Hong Kong’s Common Reporting Standard (CRS). While generally supportive, the association raised concerns about record-keeping obligations for dissolved entities and uncapped penalties for minor technical errors. It proposed appointing third-party custodians for dissolved firms and introducing penalty caps for unintentional errors. The group also recommended a simplified registration process for crypto service providers with no annual filings. Hong Kong is among 76 jurisdictions committed to implementing CARF by 2028 as part of its broader strategy to become a global crypto hub.

A Hong Kong industry group has urged the city’s regulators to ease aspects of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) crypto reporting rules ahead of its implementation.

Association Pushes To Soften CARF Requirements

On Monday, the Hong Kong Securities & Futures Professionals Association (HKSFPA) released a response to the implementation of the OECD’s Crypto Asset Reporting Framework (CARF) and the related amendments made to Hong Kong’s Common Reporting Standard (CRS).

In their official response, the association shared its concerns about certain elements of the CARF and CRS amendments, warning that they could create operational and liability risks for market participants.

Notably, the HKSFPA affirmed that it mostly supports the proposals, but urged regulators to ease the record-keeping requirements for dissolved entities. “We generally agree with the six-year retention period to align with existing inland revenue and CRS standards,” they explained, “but we have concerns regarding the obligations placed on individuals post-dissolution.”

The industry group argued that holding directors or principal officers personally liable for record-keeping after dissolution poses significant practical challenges, noting that former officers of dissolved companies may lack the resources, infrastructure, and legal standing to maintain sensitive personal data of former clients.

As a result, they suggested the government “allow for the appointment of a designated third-party custodian (such as a liquidator or a licensed corporate service provider) to fulfill this obligation, rather than placing indefinite personal liability and logistical burden on former individual officers.”

Moreover, the association also cautioned that the proposed uncapped per-account penalties for minor technical errors. They asserted that this could lead to “disproportionately astronomical fines for systemic software errors affecting thousands of accounts where there was no intent to defraud.”

To solve this, they proposed a “reasonable cap” on total penalties for unintentional administrative errors or first-time offenses to ensure that the per-account calculation “is reserved for cases of willful negligence or intentional evasion.”

Additionally, the group suggested a “lite” registration or a simplified annual declaration process for Reporting Crypto-Asset Service Providers (RCASPs) that anticipate filing Nil Returns, to reduce administrative costs while still satisfying the Inland Revenue Department’s oversight requirements.

Hong Kong’s Crypto Hub Efforts

Notably, Hong Kong is among the 76 markets committed to implementing the upcoming crypto reporting framework, which is the OECD’s new global standard for exchanging tax information on crypto assets.

The CARF is designed to prevent tax evasion by bringing crypto users across borders under global tax transparency rules, similar to the OECD’s existing CRS for traditional finance. Hong Kong will be among the 27 jurisdictions that will begin their first cross-border exchanges of crypto reporting data in 2028.

Over the past few years, Hong Kong financial authorities have been actively working to develop a comprehensive framework that supports the expansion of the digital assets industry, part of its strategy to become a leading crypto hub in the world.

As reported by Bitcoinist, the city is exploring rules to allow insurance companies to invest in cryptocurrencies and the infrastructure sector. The Hong Kong Insurance Authority recently proposed a framework that could channel insurance capital into cryptocurrencies and stablecoins.

Moreover, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) is expected to grant the first batch of stablecoin issuer licenses in the first few months of the year. The HKMA enacted the Stablecoins Ordinance in August, which directs any individual or entity seeking to issue a stablecoin in Hong Kong, or any Hong Kong Dollar-pegged token, to obtain a license from the regulator.

Multiple companies have applied for the license, with over 30 applications filed in 2025, including logistics technology firm Reitar Logtech and the overseas arm of Chinese mainland financial technology giant Ant Group.

Bitcoin (BTC) trades at $92,994 in the one-week chart. Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView

İlgili Sorular

QWhat is the main concern raised by the Hong Kong Securities & Futures Professionals Association (HKSFPA) regarding the OECD's Crypto Asset Reporting Framework (CARF)?

AThe HKSFPA is concerned that certain elements of CARF and related CRS amendments could create operational and liability risks for market participants, particularly regarding record-keeping requirements for dissolved entities and uncapped penalties for minor technical errors.

QWhat specific suggestion did the HKSFPA make to address the record-keeping burden on dissolved entities?

AThe association suggested allowing the appointment of a designated third-party custodian (such as a liquidator or licensed corporate service provider) to fulfill record-keeping obligations instead of placing indefinite personal liability on former individual officers.

QHow did the HKSFPA propose to handle penalties for unintentional administrative errors in crypto reporting?

AThey proposed implementing a reasonable cap on total penalties for unintentional administrative errors or first-time offenses, reserving per-account penalty calculations for cases of willful negligence or intentional evasion.

QWhen will Hong Kong begin its first cross-border exchanges of crypto reporting data under CARF?

AHong Kong will begin its first cross-border exchanges of crypto reporting data in 2028, as one of the 27 jurisdictions committed to implementing the framework.

QWhat recent regulatory development in Hong Kong involves stablecoin issuance?

AThe Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) enacted the Stablecoins Ordinance in August, requiring any individual or entity seeking to issue a stablecoin in Hong Kong to obtain a license, with the first batch of licenses expected to be granted in early 2025.

İlgili Okumalar

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit3 dk önce

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit3 dk önce

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit1 saat önce

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit1 saat önce

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbit1 saat önce

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

marsbit1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片