Xiao Lei: Targeting virtual currency regulators again, the purpose is clear but there are challenges
Editor's Note: This article comes fromXiao Lei looks at the market(ID: kanshi1314), author: Xiao Lei, released with authorization.
Editor's Note: This article comes from
Xiao Lei looks at the market
(ID: kanshi1314), author: Xiao Lei, released with authorization.
At present, China has two official national-level red-headed documents on the level of virtual currency supervision. One is on December 3, 2013. , the China Insurance Regulatory Commission and other five ministries and commissions issued the "Notice on Preventing Bitcoin Risks"; The "Announcement on Preventing Financing Risks of Token Issuance" issued by seven ministries and commissions including the China Banking Regulatory Commission, China Securities Regulatory Commission, and China Insurance Regulatory Commission.
All current policies to further strengthen supervision are basically based on these two documents. To some extent, they are also the basis for new supervision policies issued by various ministries and commissions and local financial offices.
In fact, the most important part of these two documents can be summarized in three levels. First, domestic financial institutions are not allowed to provide various services for virtual currencies, including payment, settlement, custody, insurance, derivatives, etc.; second, any institution It is not allowed to publicly raise funds from the public in the name of issuing virtual currency; the third is that various Internet platforms cannot provide communication and trading venues for virtual currency transactions, issuance financing, etc.
Based on this, in fact, after September 4 last year, many various fundraising platforms involved in the issuance of virtual currency were first closed. By September 15, various trading venues began to close. The trading platform stopped operating, and the mainland market began to enter the final stage of supervision.
However, regarding the supervision of media and self-media, there are no clear regulations in these two documents. At present, there are two main criteria for judging the treatment of self-media and other titles. First, whether the self-media It is established by relevant trading venues or fundraising platforms. If so, even if some neutral research reports are released, they will be blocked by the regulators, because this can be defined as transaction-related according to the September 4th document last year. Second, whether the self-media has participated in the rating, recommendation and benefit transfer of domestic and foreign virtual currency issuance projects intentionally or unintentionally in China. This can also be blocked according to the document on September 4 last year.
In addition, some self-media actually touched on some sensitive events, such as disseminating some information about rights protection in the virtual currency market or maliciously amplifying market chaos, which caused panic among investors and increased the probability of outbreaks of various events , Stimulating some malicious rights protection and other phenomena. This problem is actually very serious. What the regulators are most worried about is that the virtual currency market is similar to the situation in the online loan industry, and they will pay more attention to the monitoring of public opinion.
Of course, the virtual currency market also has its particularities, which may bring certain challenges and troubles to regulation.
Since the concept of virtual currency actually comes from its underlying technology "blockchain", one of the considerations from the perspective of the regulator is to remove the dross and keep the essence, remove the dross of hype virtual currency, and leave " The essence of "blockchain", this may be a big challenge.
Blockchain, as an underlying technology, has been written into the 13th Five-Year Information Plan by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. Blockchain has also begun to be introduced by various technology companies, and domestic Internet giants have also begun to participate heavily. The hotter the concept, the more common investment The more investors want to participate, but the available investment targets are actually relatively limited. At present, the only legal channel is to go to the stock market to buy blockchain concept stocks, but the problem is that many listed companies in China are creating concepts themselves. There are actually not many companies that want to study this technology. After a while, it is estimated that some companies will directly change their name to "Blockchain" to fool shareholders, just like when online loans were hotter, some companies directly changed their name to "Pitou". Like horses, the ultimate harm to investors and the market will be greater. In the field of blockchain, there may also be things that use "serving the real economy" to confuse supervision. How to avoid doing various things that hurt the industry and investors under the guise of "blockchain" serving the real economy? Also a challenge.
