- The Hong Kong lawyer Gilbert Ng shared insights on the impact of the SEC’s actions on the city.
- The lawyer asserted that the SEC’s regulations on Binance would hinder its expansion in Hong Kong.
- Ng also asserted that the approach of SEC towards Binance is different from its stance on Tether.
Gilbert Ng, a legal counsel in Hong Kong asserted that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) holds a different approach to Binance when compared to its slant on Tether (USDT). The lawyer added that the SEC’s adamancy in Binance altogether leaving the United States would have adverse effects on the exchange’s license applications in other locations, including Hong Kong.
On June 7, reporter Collin Wu took to Twitter to share Ng’s words on the impact of SEC’s legal actions on Hong Kong.
Recently, the SEC’s regulations on Binance have been increasing. The exchange has been in trouble since the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) charged Binance in the name of trading unregistered crypto derivatives. Recently, on Monday, the SEC filed 13 charges against the exchange including Binance’s control over Binance US.
According to Wu’s tweets, Ng asserted that the stringent rules the regulatory system imposed upon Binance would restrict the exchange from its expansion in Hong Kong, in addition to the hindrances Binance faces in its smooth functioning.
The lawyer also shed light on the fact that Hong Kong has a full-fledged legal framework for the governance of cryptocurrencies, with regulatory certainties. He added that such a supportive crypto atmosphere provides little space for the SEC to intervene in Hong Kong’s cryptocurrency supervision.
While analyzing the contrasting crypto conditions of the US and Hong Kong, Ng stated that the US lacks comprehensive crypto governance laws and regulations and the existing laws are needed to be strengthened. In contrast, Hong Kong holds a set of clear and convenient crypto regulatory rules.
The reporter also shared the different definitions of securities held by the United States and Hong Kong, as highlighted by Ng. He posited that it is not necessary that the coins that are categorized as security tokens in the US fall under the same class in Hong Kong.
Finally, Wu highlighted the restrictions on purchasing security tokens by retail investors, drawing insights from Ng. The reporter stated, “Currently, Hong Kong does not allow retail investors to purchase security tokens, only professional investors are allowed to purchase.”
Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.
