The government has been holding talks with the National Assembly for weeks to introduce the Digital Asset Basic Act, but discussions are struggling amid disagreements over a supervisory framework for stablecoins and limits on major shareholders' equity in virtual asset exchanges. The Financial Services Commission plans to submit the government's proposal to the National Assembly this month, but with key issues unsettled, the actual timing of the bill's introduction remains uncertain.
According to the political bloc on the 8th, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) is explaining the main points of the government's Digital Asset Basic Act proposal and gathering opinions from lawmakers' offices on the National Policy Committee. The specific method of submitting the bill and who will introduce it are said to be undecided. Inside and outside the National Policy Committee, some expect that even if the bill is introduced this year, it will be difficult to pass the National Assembly within the year.
What the National Assembly is concerned about is the management and supervision framework after stablecoins are issued. So far, discussions on the basic act have focused on who will issue stablecoins and what level of reserve assets and prudential requirements to impose on issuers.
However, some note that there has been relatively little discussion of measures to monitor and control the risk that they could be exploited for money laundering or illegal transactions at the actual distribution stage. A National Policy Committee official said, "Authorization of issuance and management of reserve assets are not enough. The key is how specifically the bill will lay out a supervisory framework that can detect unusual transactions and block money laundering during the distribution and transfer process after issuance."
Limits on major shareholders' equity in virtual asset exchanges are also a key issue. The Financial Services Commission (FSC) is reportedly strongly considering capping a specific shareholder's equity in an exchange at 20%. Since exchanges hold investors' assets and broker transactions, the aim is to prevent equity from becoming overly concentrated among a few major shareholders.
Opinions are divided on whether to also restrict the voting rights of shareholders who hold more than the equity cap. The Financial Services Commission (FSC) is said to be reviewing a plan, referencing ownership-dispersion rules under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, to bar voting rights on equity that exceeds the statutory cap. The bill may also include allowing the financial authorities to order the disposal of shares if the excess equity is not sold within a set period.
There is considerable pushback. Critics argue that virtual asset exchanges differ from traditional financial firms such as securities companies in business structure and market formation, so applying capital market regulations as is would be excessive. Others raise concerns that forcing a rapid change to established governance structures could spark management control disputes or market instability.
The Financial Services Commission (FSC) plans to craft compromises on each issue through National Assembly discussions, but it is difficult to pin down when the bill will be introduced. Even as talks on a basic act to bring the digital asset market into the regulatory framework have gained traction, there is broad agreement that much remains to be resolved, from issuance to distribution and supervision, and even the governance of exchanges.