Chinese Version CBDC (Digital Yuan) Applied to Guangzhou Housing Provident Fund Loans

The Guangzhou Housing Provident Fund Management Center has successfully implemented the usage of the Chinese version of the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), commonly known as the digital Yuan, for housing provident fund loans. On June 19th, a lady received a loan of 480,000 yuan through the digital Renminbi (digital Yuan) wallet app, marking the official launch of the digital Renminbi loan application for housing provident funds in Guangzhou. This achievement represents a significant step towards achieving comprehensive coverage of digital Renminbi applications in the housing provident fund system, including deposits, withdrawals, and loans.

Since the introduction of the digital Renminbi service in August 2022, the Guangzhou Housing Provident Fund Management Center has witnessed a steady increase in transaction volumes. The digital Renminbi offers a simple transaction process, fast processing times, and high levels of fund security. The procedures for handling digital Renminbi transactions are similar to regular transactions, supporting counter, online, and mobile transactions. As of now, the center has successfully processed 6,433 digital Renminbi deposit transactions, amounting to 9.0842 million yuan. Remarkably, 97% of depositors have repeatedly used digital Renminbi for housing provident fund deposits. Additionally, 729 digital Renminbi withdrawal transactions have been completed, totaling 6.6706 million yuan. Leveraging the instant settlement feature of digital Renminbi, 464 depositors were able to make timely repayments on the due date, avoiding late fees. Moreover, the system has assisted 164 depositors whose transactions failed due to issues with their bank cards, enabling them to complete their transactions seamlessly.

Moving forward, the Guangzhou Housing Provident Fund Management Center will continue to promote the digitization of the housing provident fund system. Their focus will be on optimizing public services to meet the diverse and specialized needs of businesses and the public. By enhancing the quality of the housing provident fund industry in Guangzhou, the center aims to improve the well-being of city residents and contribute to the overall economic development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.


Tagged : / / / / / / / / /

Hong Kong Monetary Authority Explores Virtual Asset Regulation in UAE and Highlights Converging Global Standards

According to a report by Ming Pao, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) recently visited the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to discuss the regulation of virtual assets (cryptos) with the local central bank. HKMA Chief Executive Eddie Yue shared that both regions have begun developing virtual assets within regulated environments, with Hong Kong having introduced regulatory frameworks earlier than the UAE. 

Yue also mentioned the recent strengthening of virtual asset regulation in the United States, raising questions about whether other jurisdictions, including Hong Kong, would follow suit or adopt a more relaxed approach. He noted that in the past, Hong Kong had stringent regulations on virtual assets, bordering on prohibition, while regulations in other regions were relatively unclear. However, there is now a global trend towards converging regulatory standards, which will help minimize potential discrepancies in the future.

Eddie Yue also discussed the challenges faced by virtual asset exchanges in Hong Kong when it comes to opening bank accounts. Yue acknowledged that there have been ongoing discussions between the HKMA and local banks regarding this issue. He mentioned that the perception of pressure during these discussions varied among different parties. Yue explained that while the United States previously lacked clear regulatory requirements for virtual assets, places like Singapore and Dubai had regulations in place, particularly targeting functions such as anti-money laundering. Hong Kong, after learning from experiences such as the closure of FTX, has gradually opened up its regulatory approach, aiming for strict yet clear guidelines. The banking industry is encouraged to continuously update its understanding and seek regulatory clarity from authorities.


Tagged : / / / / / Denies Allegations of Misleading Trading Practices, Faces Regulatory Scrutiny Over Proprietary Trading Concerns

According to insider sources cited by The Financial Times,, the Singapore-based cryptocurrency exchange platform, allegedly operates an in-house trading and market-making team whose primary objective is to generate profits rather than facilitate trading. 

However, executives at have issued a solemn declaration to external trading firms, asserting that the company does not engage in any trading activities. Furthermore, employees of the platform have been instructed to disavow any involvement in internal market-making operations. promptly responded to the allegations, stating that they have not instructed their employees to provide false information to other market participants. The platform acknowledges the presence of an internal market maker, which operates on the trading platform. They claim that this internal market maker receives the same treatment as third-party market makers, contributing to a platform characterized by narrow spreads and efficient markets. The company emphasizes that the majority of its revenue comes from its retail trading application, where acts as the counterparty to customers in a broker model. To ensure risk neutrality, the trading team hedges these positions by trading across multiple platforms, including their own. They assert that all participants on the platform, including market makers, are treated equally, and the company does not rely on proprietary trading as a source of income.

In light of recent allegations surrounding’s proprietary trading practices, concerns have been raised regarding the potential misuse of user data and the impact on market liquidity. While hedged market making has been touted as a means to bolster liquidity, regulators typically view proprietary trading with suspicion, citing the exchange’s access to sensitive user trading data as a significant risk. Notably, on May 23, the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) of Hong Kong issued regulatory requirements for virtual asset trading platform operators, imposing a complete ban on proprietary trading activities.

The SFC’s regulatory framework explicitly addresses the issue, stating, “With regard to proprietary trading, we agree that liquidity on a trading platform is important for clients. Hence, the SFC allows market-making activities to be conducted by third-party market makers. However, the current prohibition on proprietary trading is all-encompassing and effectively prohibits even the group companies of a licensed virtual asset trading platform from holding any positions in virtual assets.”

The ban on proprietary trading stems from concerns surrounding the potential conflicts of interest and abuse of user data that can arise when an exchange engages in such activities. Regulators argue that by having access to trading data, exchange owners can exploit it to their advantage, leading to unfair practices and potential market manipulation.


Tagged : / / / / /
Bitcoin (BTC) $ 41,515.12 5.23%
Ethereum (ETH) $ 2,255.50 4.46%
Litecoin (LTC) $ 74.08 3.00%
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) $ 250.76 9.64%