财新传媒
位置:博客 > 王立仁 > 仁兄的翻译:新加坡金融管理局MAS澄清了ICO的监管思路

仁兄的翻译:新加坡金融管理局MAS澄清了ICO的监管思路

写在前面:MAS 还是很专业的清楚区分了virtual Currency 和Digital Token, 也就是说代币和凭据是有区别的,所以我们在转换成中文的是有也要注意下。

----------------

1 新加坡金融管理局MAS(The Monetary Authority of Singapore)于2017年8月1日强调,如果ICO中的数字凭据所构成的产品,属于《证券与期货法》的管理范围,则该ICO流程需要接受MAS的监管。最近一段时间,新加坡出现大量通过ICO进行融资的案例,让MAS认识到ICO监管的必要性。
2 数字凭据,是一种通过加密保护的,表明其所有者具有收益权,或者行为权的凭证。虚拟货币,是一种特定的数字凭据,其典型功能是:交换的中介物,账户的单位,或者价值的存储。
3 ICO非常容易被用于洗钱,以及恐怖融资(资助恐怖主义活动),因为其匿名的天然属性,以及可以在短时间内筹集大量资金。金融管理局在2014年4月13日就表示过,因为虚拟货币本身没有被监管,所以要监管虚拟货币的中间交易,以防止洗钱或恐怖融资。金融管理局现在正在评估如何设置数字凭据的监管细则。
4 金融管理局和其他司法机构一样,本身并不负责监管虚拟货币。但是金融管理局发现,数字凭据现在已经不仅仅是用作虚拟货币了。比如,数字凭据可以表示所有权,或者基于发行者资产的收益权。因此,根据《证券与期货法》,这些代币可以看做是股份,或者是集资投资行为。同时,这些代币也可以看做是发行者承担的债务,也就是债券。
5 只要这些代币符合《证券与期货法》的描述,则在ICO之前,必须要金融管理局提前做备案(除非获得免除)。发行或交易这些代币,必须要满足《证券与期货法》和《财务顾问法》的许可(除非获得免除),以及反洗钱/反恐怖融资的规范要求。除此之外,转换代币的二级交易平台,需要获取金融管理局的许可,并满足《证券与期货法》的要求。
6 新加坡以及其他地方ICO中的代币有很多不同的种类,有些必须遵循《证券与期货法》,而有些则不需要。所以,ICO,代币中间交易,ICO咨询顾问,代币交易平台,都需要寻求独立法律咨询,以保证其活动符合所有适用法律的要求。也可以直接咨询金融管理局。
 

原文见 http://www.mas.gov.sg/News-and-Publications/Media-Releases/2017/MAS-clarifies-regulatory-position-on-the-offer-of-digital-tokens-in-Singapore.aspx?from=groupmessage&isappinstalled=0

MAS clarifies regulatory position on the offer of digital tokens in Singapore

Singapore, 1 August 2017... The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) clarified today that the offer or issue of digital tokens in Singapore will be regulated by MAS if the digital tokens constitute products regulated under the Securities and Futures Act (Cap. 289) (SFA). MAS’ clarification comes in the wake of a recent increase in the number of initial coin (or token) offerings (ICOs) in Singapore as a means of raising funds.

2     A digital token is a cryptographically-secured representation of a token-holder's rights to receive a benefit or to perform specified functions. A virtual currency is one particular type of digital token, which typically functions as a medium of exchange, a unit of account or a store of value.

3     ICOs are vulnerable to money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF) risks due to the anonymous nature of the transactions, and the ease with which large sums of monies may be raised in a short period of time. MAS’ media release of 13 March 2014 had communicated that while virtual currencies per se were not regulated, intermediaries in virtual currencies would be regulated for ML/TF risks. MAS is currently assessing how to regulate ML/TF risks associated with activities involving digital tokens that do not function solely as virtual currencies.

4     MAS’ position of not regulating virtual currencies is similar to that of most jurisdictions. However, MAS has observed that the function of digital tokens has evolved beyond just being a virtual currency. For example, digital tokens may represent ownership or a security interest over an issuer’s assets or property. Such tokens may therefore be considered an offer of shares or units in a collective investment scheme1 under the SFA. Digital tokens may also represent a debt owed by an issuer and be considered a debenture under the SFA.

5     Where digital tokens fall within the definition of securities in the SFA, issuers of such tokens would be required to lodge and register a prospectus with MAS prior to the offer of such tokens, unless exempted. Issuers or intermediaries of such tokens would also be subject to licensing requirements under the SFA and Financial Advisers Act (Cap. 110), unless exempted, and the applicable requirements on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. In addition, platforms facilitating secondary trading of such tokens would also have to be approved or recognised by MAS as an approved exchange or recognised market operator respectively under the SFA.

6     The types of digital tokens offered in Singapore and elsewhere vary widely. Some offers may be subject to the SFA while others may not be. All issuers of digital tokens, intermediaries facilitating or advising on an offer of digital tokens, and platforms facilitating trading in digital tokens should therefore seek independent legal advice to ensure they comply with all applicable laws, and consult MAS where appropriate.

Examples of schemes falling under the revised definition of a collective investment scheme are found in Section 3 of the Consultation Paper on Proposals to Enhance Regulatory Safeguards for Investors in the Capital Markets, July 2014.

推荐 9