We are now over halfway through 2020, which by many accounts, has been, shall we say, unusual. Coronovirus’s all encompassing impacts aside, we are in the midst of even greater engagement from policy makers looking to bring our nascent industry into the broader regulatory perimeter.
We’ve long anticipated that greater regulatory clarity could finally trigger a tsunami of institutional interest to engage in our sector, propelling both adoption and growth. This past week we’ve seen major announcements from the likes of the U.S. OCC and Mastercard, both of which could fuel business opportunities for crypto exchanges, custodians and traditionals banks. Are we now experiencing the serendipitous moment that we will reflect upon in the future as the catalyst for major development for our industry?
Policy makers around the world are becoming increasingly focused on whether crypto-assets should be regulated. And if so, which regime would they fall into? Many in the industry see security tokens as naturally slotting into existing frameworks such as the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA) and Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID). However, where does that leave payment and utility tokens? Do they even fit into an existing regime? Should lawmakers consider a new bespoke regime and if so what will this look like?