Table of Content

1. Introduction
-Aave Clears Bad CRV Token Debt from Exploit Attempt
2. Background
3. Aave v3 Upgrade
4. Exploiter and Liquidator Profit
5. Summary

Aave Clears Bad CRV Token Debt from Exploit Attempt

Introduction

Decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol Aave has cleared the bad debt of 2.7 million Curve DAO tokens (CRV) resulting from a botched November trade by Mango Markets exploiter Avi Eisenberg, according to blockchain data on Etherscan. The move came after Aave’s community approved the procurement of the necessary CRV tokens using the ParaSwap decentralized exchange aggregator in a governance vote concluded on Tuesday, ahead of the activation of a major tech upgrade called Aave v3.

Background

In November, Avraham Eisenberg roiled Aave with a trading strategy that involved borrowing tens of millions of CRV tokens from the platform. After a sudden price spike due to a short squeeze, his position got liquidated, leaving Aave with bad debt in CRV that amounted to $1.6 million at the time. Notably, an analysis by DeFi data platform EigenPhi found that the liquidator of the bad debt pocketed some $1 million profit due to recent upswings in crypto markets which helped lead to a 98% gain in CRV since the start of 2021. Avi Eisenberg became famous in crypto circles after draining some $110 million worth of digital assets from Solana-based lending protocol Mango Markets with his “highly profitable trading strategy” and was subsequently charged with commodities fraud and manipulation late December 2020 in Puerto Rico.

Aave v3 Upgrade

The maneuver comes ahead of the activation of Aave’s major tech upgrade called Aave v3 which will bring improved user experience and new features such as staking rewards for AAVE token holders and support for additional assets like NFTs and non-Ethereum chains like Polkadot and Binance Smart Chain (BSC). As part of this upgrade, users will also be able to access new products such as flash loans, interest rates swaps and more efficient liquidity management tools for yield farming strategies on both Ethereum and other blockchains connected through bridges or parachains..

Exploiter And Liquidator Profit

>
Notably, an analysis by DeFi data platform EigenPhi found that while Avi Eisenberg caused significant losses for Aave during his exploit attempt – estimated at over $100 million – he only profited around $20 million while it was actually another party who pocketed most profits – estimated at over $80 million – as they were able to take advantage of higher prices during liquidation auctions following Ethereum’s recent bull run..

Summary >
Aave has cleared its bad debt resulting from Avi Eisenberg’s exploits with approval from its community ahead its upcoming tech upgrade where users can expect access to new products such as flash loans, interest rate swaps & more efficient liquidity management tools for yield farming strategies across multiple blockchains . An analysis showed that while Eisenberg caused significant losses for Aave during his exploit attempt he only profited around 20m whereas another party managed to pocket 80m in profits taking advantage higher prices during liquidation auctions following Ethereum’s recent bull run

Table of Content

• Stablecoin Regulation Is First on New Subcommittee’s To-Do List, Says Chairman
• Who Should Regulate?
• Important:

Stablecoin Regulation Is First on New Subcommittee’s To-Do List, Says Chairman

Rep. French Hill (R-Arkansas), chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion, said stablecoin legislation will be one of the top priorities for the newly formed U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee. Hill added that the committee plans to use its stablecoins draft as a model for how it will approach digital asset regulation moving forward.

Hill also said that in addition to pursuing regulations on stablecoins, the subcommittee aims to pursue a privacy statute federally and to do oversight hearings on both regulators and various actions taken by Congress last year regarding crypto regulations.

Who Should Regulate?

When asked whether the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) should be the primary regulator of spot crypto markets, Hill said „that’s not clear yet.“ He noted that this is something else that the subcommittee will work towards sorting out this year with help from both House and Senate agriculture and banking committees and the House Financial Services Committee.

According to Hill, what is critical to developing cryptocurrency in the broader market now is accurate and timely information which depends on having definitions in place for developers, consumers and investors so they know what is expected when engaging with digital assets.

Important:

Format the entire content in proper html and structure headings as < H2>, table of content as < H2 >and bulletpoints as < H2 >in html. Interlink the table of content to the headings.

Summery

• Stablecoin Legislation: Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) said stablecoin legislation will be one of top priorities for newly formed U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee.
• >Regulatory Oversight: „That’s not clear yet“ when asked whether SEC or CFTC should regulate spot crypto markets; subcommittee working with other committees to sort out.
• >Accurate Information: „Accurate [and] timely information“ needed for development; depends on having definition in place.

Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Proposed Regulations
III. The Implosion of Terra
IV. Global Regulatory Calls for Action
V. Necessary Global Cooperation
VI. Conclusion

Summary
• South Korea’s National Assembly is currently considering 17 crypto-related proposals in order to create the Digital Asset Basic Act (DABA).
• The DABA will provide regulatory guidelines for the growing Korean crypto industry and could be ready as early as June 2021.
• Regulating crypto country by country isn’t enough to prevent future collapses, so global cooperation is necessary in order to protect investors and ensure a safe market environment.

Introduction
South Korea is paving the way for comprehensive cryptocurrency regulation with its Digital Asset Basic Act (DABA), a legal framework that will provide regulatory guidance for the Korean crypto industry. The 300 members of South Korea’s National Assembly are currently debating 17 separate proposals aimed at protecting investors and creating fair trading conditions in this emerging asset class. This comes on the heels of several high-profile cryptocurrency collapses, including Terra, Three Arrows Capital, Celsius Network, Voyager Digital, Genesis and FTX – all of which have highlighted the need for better protections in this sector. In addition to DABA, other countries such as the European Union, United States, Hong Kong, India, Singapore and Japan are also considering various regulations aimed at protecting investors from fraud or manipulation while also promoting innovation within this space.

Proposed Regulations
The proposed regulations under consideration by South Korea’s National Assembly include: implementing reserve requirements at exchanges; ensuring fair trading; providing clarity on taxation; increasing transparency; enhancing consumer protection; preventing money laundering; imposing licensing requirements on exchanges; establishing penalties for violations related to cryptocurrencies like insider trading or market manipulation; and introducing measures to mitigate cyber security threats posed by digital assets such as ransomware attacks or hacks into wallets or exchanges. All of these proposals would ultimately culminate in DABA, which would help shape how cryptocurrencies are regulated in South Korea going forward.

The Implosion of Terra
The urgency with which lawmakers are attempting to pass DABA can be traced back to the swift collapse of Terra – an algorithmic stablecoin issuer – which wiped approximately $60 billion from the global crypto ecosystem when it imploded one month after its launch in May 2020. This was followed by a string of other high-profile collapses at hedge funds such as Three Arrows Capital and exchanges/lenders like Celsius Network, Voyager Digital, Genesis and FTX – prompting regulators around the world to call for comprehensive regulation that would protect investors from similar events occurring again in future.

Global Regulatory Calls For Action
In response to these calls for action from regulators globally, several different initiatives have been put forth across numerous countries seeking to regulate cryptocurrencies themselves: The European Union has proposed its Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) regulation which is set for a vote sometime this April; U.S lawmakers have introduced various bills seeking to regulate domestic markets; while South Korean lawmakers hope that DABA could be completed as early as June 2021 if everything proceeds according to plan..

Necessary Global Cooperation
It’s clear that regulating cryptocurrency country by country isn’t going to be enough if we want to prevent another major collapse like that experienced with Terra last year – especially given how interconnected international markets already are today through digital currency networks like Bitcoin and Ethereum . That’s why it’s essential that regulators from around the world come together now more than ever before in order cooperate on crafting effective regulations that will protect investors from potential fraud or manipulation while still encouraging innovation within this sector .

Conclusion                                                                                                                                         
  In conclusion , it’s evident that cooperative action between global stakeholders is needed now more than ever before if cryptocurrencies are truly going become mainstream financial instruments . With South Korea taking steps towards passing their own version of a regulatory framework through their Digital Asset Basic Act , hopefully other countries will follow suit soon enough so we can truly ensure investor safety across international markets .

Table of Contents

• Summary
• Analysis
• Roadblocks to Crypto Mainstreaming

Coinbase’s $3.6M Dutch Fine Shows Crypto Will Hit Road Bumps as It Goes Mainstream

Summary

Coinbase’s fine for „very serious“ breaches of Dutch crypto registration procedures reveals potential pitfalls the industry faces as it works towards operating within the regulatory fold. The charge sheet from the Dutch central bank (DNB) outlines its decision to impose a sanction of 3,325,000 euros ($3.6 million). Coinbase didn’t gain the registration until 2022 – during which period it saw huge growth worldwide. This article summaries that there will be road bumps as crypto goes mainstream and Coinbase may appeal the fine.

Analysis

As crypto comes within the regulatory fold, there will be disputes over rules, procedures and jurisdiction – and the relatively compliant may end up bearing the brunt of regulators‘ wrath. This is exemplified in Coinbase’s case where they applied for registration in September 2020 but withdrew their application since they couldn’t meet the strictures set by DNB under an anti-money laundering law which, since 2020, has also applied to crypto. Registration is a legal requirement to serve customers in Netherlands but Coinbase failed to comply while still being able to attract new customers during this two year violation period resulting in a very serious violation according to DNB leading them to impose a hefty fine on Coinbase similar to that imposed on rival exchange Binance last year. Paul Tang, a center-left Dutch member of the European Parliament, criticized this low level fine pointing out that billions lost by investors in last years crash due to lack of regulations. A spokesperson for Coinbase stated they disagree with this fine and are considering appealing it while stressing they should not be penalized for playing by the rules implying that DNB has unfairly targeted those who at least tried engaging with them rather than those who ignored regulatory requirements completely.

Roadblocks To Crypto Mainstreaming

The incident involving Coinbase underscores some important points about crypto regulation as it moves towards being mainstreamed: First off, governments are becoming stricter when it comes to setting regulations regarding how companies handle customer data and money transfers into or out of their platforms as well as compliance with anti-money laundering laws; Second, even if companies try their best efforts to remain compliant with these regulations their efforts may still not be enough leading them into trouble with government authorities; And lastly, fines imposed on such companies may seem low compared to other financial crimes penalties like insider trading or market manipulation which makes it hard for investors or customers wanting assurance that their money is safe before investing into cryptocurrencies or utilizing any services related thereto.

Table of Contents
• Introduction
• FTX Lawyers Request Cross-Examination of Sam Bankman-Fried’s Family
• Background on the FTX Collapse
• FTX’s Allegations Against Fried’s Family
• Mind The Gap Responds to Allegations
• Conclusion
Summary:
• FTX lawyers are seeking to subpoena Sam Bankman-Fried’s family members in a financial investigation into alleged misappropriation of funds.
• The company is looking for answers as to who received potentially stolen funds, and what communications were exchanged with executives.
• Mind the Gap, a political action committee allegedly funded by Bankman-Fried, denied any direct contributions from him.

FTX Lawyers Request Cross-Examination of Sam Bankman-Fried’s Family
Seeking to locate allegedly misappropriated funds, the lawyers from the bankrupt crypto exchange have asked a court to cross-examine at least some of Sam Bankman-Fried’s immediate family—his mother, brother and father—who they allege are not cooperating with the financial probe. According to a legal filing made Wednesday (January 26th), Barbara Fried has „ignored“ requests while Gabriel Bankman-Fried and former chief engineer Nishad Singh have not provided „meaningful engagement or any response.“ Talks between attorneys for Joseph Bankman, Sam’s father, are ongoing but no consensual outcome has been reached yet.
Background on the FTX Collapse
FTX was founded by Sam Bankman-Fried in 2019 as one of many cryptocurrency exchanges that sought to capitalize on the crypto boom. However, in December 2020 it fell victim to an alleged misappropriation scheme involving its executives which led to its collapse and subsequent bankruptcy proceedings. In order to find out what happened with customer funds and other assets, FTX’s new management is now trying to locate them through an investigation into certain transactions conducted prior its insolvency filing.
FTX’s Allegations Against Fried’s Family
The legal filing claims that at least some members of Samuel Bankman-Fried’s family acted as his advisors during his time at FTX and should be subpoenaed alongside former company executives for questioning about missing funds. According to their allegations: Fried’s brother Gabriel operated Guarding Against Pandemics which purchased a multimillion dollar property near US Capitol; both parents resided in a $16 million house titled under their names despite knowing it belonged to FTX; and Mind The Gap received donations directly from him or other staff members.
Mind The Gap Responds To Allegations
In response to these accusations Marissa McBride, Executive Director at Mind The gap issued an emailed statement where she denied any direct contributions made by Samuel Bankman-Fried saying instead he “contributed towards some programs recommended by MTG network“. She also informed that all contributions received by Mind The Gap are publicly disclosed on Federal Election Commission website according FTC regulations.

Conclusion                                                  In summary ,FTX lawyers requested cross examination against SamuelBankman – Fried ‚ s family , alleging that they were not cooperating with their investigation into missing customer funds . They assert his brother operated Guarding Against Pandemics , his parents lived in property owned by FTX ,and his political action committee ,Mind The Gap ,received donations directly from him . While Mind The Gap denied any direct contribution fromhim ,it admitted that he contributed towards programs recommendedby them . Currently discussions between attorneys for JosephBankman remain ongoing .

Table of Content
I. Introduction
II. What is Crypto Regulation?
III. Why Do We Need Crypto Regulation?
IV. How Can Congress Separate Custody from Exchange?
V. Conclusion

Summary:
• This article discusses the need for crypto regulation in the United States and suggests that Congress should separate custody from exchange, just as it separated Wall Street from commercial banking nearly a century ago.
• This piece explains why crypto regulation is necessary and how it can be implemented effectively to protect consumers while preserving crypto’s promise of financial autonomy.
• It also examines Rep. French Hill’s views on digital assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion, as well as his thoughts on which agency (SEC or CFTC) will seek explicit oversight over them.

 Introduction:

Cryptocurrency laws are becoming increasingly common in the United States, with more being proposed each day. But what kind of legislation would benefit both consumers and the industry alike? One suggestion is that Congress should mandate the separation of cryptocurrency custody and exchange services, similar to how it separated Wall Street from commercial banking almost a century ago. In this article, we’ll discuss why crypto regulation is needed and how it can be done effectively, using Rep French Hill’s views on digital assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion as an example of how the industry can expect clarity on which regulatory agency (SEC or CFTC) will have oversight over them. We’ll also examine how such legislation could help protect customers while allowing cryptocurrencies to retain their promise of financial autonomy.
 What Is Crypto Regulation?
Crypto regulation involves setting certain rules for companies dealing with cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum in order to protect investors and prevent fraud or money laundering activities involving these digital assets. These regulations may include licensing requirements for exchanges or other entities involved in trading cryptocurrency; customer identification requirements; restrictions on margin trading; capital requirements; reporting obligations; disclosure rules; anti-money laundering measures; and know-your-customer procedures that require exchanges to verify customers’ identities before allowing transactions between them and other parties involved in trading cryptocurrencies online.
 Why Do We Need Crypto Regulation?
The main reason for regulating cryptocurrencies is to reduce risk for users who are investing in them by ensuring that exchanges providing services related to these digital assets adhere to certain standards designed to protect customers‘ funds from theft or misuse by unscrupulous actors within the industry itself or outside forces seeking to exploit vulnerabilities present within vulnerable exchanges’ systems or accounts held by individual traders/investors themselves . Additionally, having clear regulations also helps build trust with potential investors who may be wary due to past incidents involving hacks on these platforms resulting in significant losses for those affected by them – thus creating a safe environment where people feel secure enough about their investments so they can confidently invest without fear of losing all their funds overnight due to unforeseen circumstances beyond their control occurring at any given time whilst doing so . Lastly , it helps ensure stable prices since market manipulation tactics like wash trading (trading between two accounts owned by one person) are rendered impossible once proper regulations are put into place – thus reducing volatility seen during bearish markets when compared against unregulated ones where such activities are conducted freely without any consequences .
 How Can Congress Separate Custody From Exchange?
To separate custody from exchange services adequately, Congress needs firstly pass legislation requiring all firms offering custodial services related to cryptocurrency must obtain a license before they can start providing said service – this ensures only trusted parties with adequate security measures in place hold onto user funds securely instead of letting anyone do so indiscriminately without sufficient checks/balances being put into place beforehand . Secondly , if an exchange wishes offer its own custodial solutions then they must do so through an escrow account set up specifically used solely purpose holding funds designated trades yet remain unmatched/unfulfilled – thus preventing company misusing customer funds any way possible whilst keeping key private keys safe holders themselves rather than giving access away third party providers . Finally , no firm allowed provide both custodial exchange services same time lest conflict interests arise result either one not functioning efficiently risks posed users increase exponentially even further .   Conclusion:
Cryptocurrency regulations are becoming increasingly common around the world as governments look towards protecting consumers from fraudsters while also allowing innovative technologies such as blockchain technology remain competitive globally – but there still much work left done ensure current laws reflect need properly without stifling progress either way . To this end , separating custody exchange services seems logical step take since allows companies focus solely either type service without worrying about other causing conflicts interest otherwise would lead mistrust amongst community ultimately result failure entire ecosystem if gone unchecked long enough time period eventually reach breaking point where recovery becomes near impossible anymore made afterwords regardless what measures taken then anyways . With right balance struck between consumer protection innovation though hopefully positive outcome come out regulators better understanding issues at hand allowing everyone benefit life changing opportunities presented us today thanks power decentralization offers us ability live free unencumbered open networks built upon trustless principles no matter what happens long run future holds only thing certain now clear path forward requires effort many sides come together finally achieve results desired most beneficial all concerned

Table of Contents

• Summery
• StoryCo Raises $6M to Decentralize Storytelling
• Web3 Storytelling Platforms
• The Disco Ball Narrative Experience
• Bringing Hollywood to Web3
• Important: Formatting This Article in HTML and Structure Headings

Summery

• StoryCo, a Web3 storytelling platform, has raised $6 million in seed funding.
• Its first narrative experience, The Disco Ball, will be released in 2023 and allows community members to contribute meaningfully to its expansion.
• Other platforms such as Toonstar are also decentralizing IP by creating NFTs for its original productions and associated merchandise..

.

StoryCo Raises $6M to Decentralize StorytellingWeb3 Storytelling Platforms

.

StoryCo isn’t alone when it comes to decentralizing IP or bringing Hollywood into Web3 realm. Last July, Toonstar teamed up with Hot Topic clothing retailer to create NFTs for their original productions along with merchandise which further distributes associated IP. As more projects take part in this effort of merging traditional entertainment industry with blockchain technology there are boundless possibilities for collaborative story telling experiences that involve fans themselves contributing towards the narratives being told.

The Disco Ball Narrative Experience

.

The Disco Ball is an interactive storytelling experience that uses token gating as a way of involving members of the community while building out this narrative world together. With a StoryPass NFT users can gain access pre release content where they solve puzzles find artifacts all within this universe created by Kyle Killen & co . Each contribution made builds out this narrative experience adding more value for those who purchase these tokens allowing them to have more influence within the story itself..

Bringing Hollywood To Web3

. As more projects enter this space merging traditional entertainment industry with blockchain technology we begin exploring new ways of collaborative storytelling experiences involving fans themselves contributing towards narratives being told . With companies like StoryCO & ToonStar leading this charge , we’re getting closer everyday than ever before at making Hollywood great again but decentralized .

SEC Rejects Ark 21Shares Spot Bitcoin ETF for Second Time

Table of Contents

• Background
• SEC Rejection of the ETF Proposal
• SEC’s Record on Bitcoin ETFs
• Conclusion

Summary

The U.S. securities regulator, the SEC, has rejected a joint effort by Ark Investment Management and 21Shares to list a spot bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) for the second time. The SEC said the Cboe BZX Exchange – on which the ETF would be listed – had failed to „demonstrate that its proposal is consistent with the requirements“ surrounding prevention of fraud and other malevolent practices. This latest rejection follows numerous rejections from the SEC in recent years related to proposals for bitcoin ETFs and other cryptocurrency funds.

Background

In April 2021, Ark Investment Management and Swiss investment products provider 21Shares made an attempt to list a spot bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) in the U.S., but were rejected by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The two firms decided to have another go, filing a new application in May 2021. However, this too was denied by the SEC as they felt that Cboe BZX Exchange – on which the ETF would be listed – had failed to „demonstrate that its proposal is consistent with the requirements“ surrounding prevention of fraud and other malevolent practices.

SEC Rejection of the ETF Proposal

The SEC released a statement on January 26th regarding their decision to reject yet again this application for an ETF investing directly in bitcoin: “The Commission finds that it is appropriate to disapproved [sic] this proposed rule change because it does not find that Cboe BZX has met its burden under existing law.“ For many investors, this comes as no surprise given how hard it is to meet all of these requirements set out by regulators when trying to launch such a product.

SEC’s Record on Bitcoin ETFs

Despite having rejected numerous applications for an ETF investing directly in bitcoin, they have approved several funds tracking BTC futures market over recent years; most notably those filed by WisdomTree Investments Inc., VanEck Associates Corp., First Trust Advisors LP, AssetMark Financial Holdings Inc., GraniteShares Advisors LLC, VanEck Vectors Bitcoin Strategy Fund GP LLC and Valkyrie Digital Assets LLP.

In conclusion, while there may still be hope when it comes to launching an exchange-traded fund investing directly in bitcoin once all regulatory issues are addressed satisfactorily; until then we must content ourselves with funds tracking BTC futures markets instead – something investors have been able to do since December 2020 when trading began on exchanges like Bakkt Futures US.

Summary

• Moody’s is developing a system to score up to 20 stablecoins based on the quality of their reserves attestations.
• The project is in its infancy and won’t be issuing official credit ratings.
• Stablecoins are meant to closely track the value of something else, often the U.S. dollar.
• Tether was forced to pay $18.5 million in penalties after New York State found that it had falsely claimed that its stablecoin was fully backed 1-to-1 by U.S. dollars.

Table of Contents

Summary

Scoring System for Stablecoins
Reserve Quality Under Scrutiny
Tether’s USDT Penalties

Moody’s Developing Scoring System for Stablecoins: Bloomberg

Moody’s, which provides credit ratings for publicly-traded companies, is working on a scoring system to assess up to 20 different stablecoins based on the quality of their reserve attestations. The project is still in its infancy and won’t be issuing any official credit ratings yet. This move comes as the quality of stablecoin reserves continues receiving scrutiny from those in the crypto industry.

Reserve Quality Under Scrutiny

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to remain pegged or „stable“ against an external asset like the US Dollar or another fiat currency. For example, if investors put $10 billion into a stablecoin, there should theoretically be $10 billion sitting somewhere to back it up; however, this has not always been the case and has caused concern within the industry.

Tether’s USDT Penalties

In 2021, Tether – one of the largest stablecoin providers – was forced to pay $18.5 million in penalties after New York State found that it had falsely claimed that its stablecoin was fully backed 1-to-1 by U.S. dollars. Moody’s declined comment on this report when asked about it by Bloomberg but nevertheless plans on rolling out their evaluation system soon enough so investors can make more informed decisions about which tokens they choose to invest in going forward.

Summary

• The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) issued guidance for cryptocurrency firms after only 41 of 300 applicants were approved.
• The advice covers what applicants need to consider before, during and after submitting their applications.
• Crypto service providers with a registered head office in the U.K. must apply with the FCA and have a money laundering reporting officer involved in the application process.
• U.K. lawmakers are currently debating the Financial Services and Markets Bill which should give the FCA more powers over to police the crypto industry.

Table of Contents

1. Background Information
2. Guidance from The FCA
3. Financial Services and Markets Bill Debate

Background Information: UK’s FCA Issues Advice for Crypto Firms After Only 41 of 300 Applicants Win Regulatory Approval

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has recently published advice for crypto companies after just 14% of firms looking to win regulatory approval in the United Kingdom passed muster. Of 300 companies that applied since it opened its registration regime two years ago, only 41 managed to win full approval while 195 either refused or withdrew their application and 29 were rejected.

This prompted criticism from some members of the industry as well as lawmakers, leading to an exodus of crypto companies from the country. In response, the regulator has pledged a friendlier approach that aligns with government plans to turn Britain into a crypto hub.

Guidance From The FCA

In order to facilitate this new approach, the regulator released an extensive list of tips on what applicants need to consider before, during and after submitting their applications for registration. Applicants are expected to include details such as business model, roles and responsibilities of business partners and comprehensive risk-assessment capabilities when preparing their applications.

Crypto service providers with a registered head office in the U.K., running operations in the country must apply with The FCA if they wish be approved by them. Furthermore, they should have a money laundering reporting officer who “should be fully involved in preparation” of application.

Financial Services And Markets Bill Debate

U.K.’s lawmakers are currently debating Financial Services And Markets Bill which should give The FCA more power over policing cryptocurrency industry if it passes.

In conclusion, while being approved by The FCA is not easy it is possible if firms take into account all of its requirements when applying for registration. This could potentially help open up Britain’s doors even further