bitcoinist.com

South Korea’s long-awaited stablecoin legislation risks being delayed until next year, as financial authorities brawl with the Bank of Korea (BOK) over the role of banks in the sector.

BOK, Financial Regulators In Disagreement

On Tuesday, Korea JoongAng Daily reported that the highly anticipated stablecoin framework, which is expected to come by the end of 2025, seems unlikely to pass this year, arguing that while regulators aim to open the market to tech companies, the central bank insists that the financial institutions should hold a majority stake in the issuance of any won-pegged token.

According to the local news media outlet, the BOK and regulators agree that banks must be involved in the issuance of won-pegged tokens, but differ on the extent of the financial institutions’ role.

The central bank is pushing for a consortium of banks owning at least 51% of any stablecoin issuer seeking regulatory approval. Meanwhile, regulators are reportedly willing to take a chance at innovating Korea’s financial structure, involving diverse players in the process.

Korea JoongAng Daily affirmed that, “even if the two sides agree on the ownership issue, other issues remain unresolved, including limits on the total issuance amount and the regulatory framework.”

Moreover, the BOK is allegedly calling for a legally mandated interagency council to make stablecoin policy decisions by a unanimous vote. Nonetheless, financial regulators are seemingly pushing back, citing a lack of legal basis for this requirement.

In July, BOK Governor Lee Chang-yong expressed concerns about the issuance of stablecoins by non-bank entities, claiming that the digital assets could confuse monetary policies and foreign exchange regulations.

Lee asserted that “if multiple non-bank institutions issue won-pegged stablecoins, it could lead to confusion similar to that caused by private currency issuance in the 19th century,” adding that if won-pegged tokens are allowed to be issued “indiscriminately,” it may conflict with foreign exchange liberalization policies.

Last month, the central bank released a report warning that these digital assets could unlock new possibilities for the Korean economy but could also “sow the seeds of new instability.” In the report, the BOK affirmed that the promise behind stablecoin raises unrealistic expectations in the market.

“Allowing non-bank companies to issue stablecoins is essentially equivalent to permitting them to engage in narrow banking — simultaneously issuing currency and offering payment services,” the central bank claimed.

In addition, it warned that online platform companies issuing their own stablecoins could integrate payment and settlement services into their ecosystems, further consolidating “monopolistic power” and potentially altering banks’ profit structure.

Korea’s Stablecoin Sector Faces Regulatory Challenges

A BOK official, on condition of anonymity, told Korea JoongAng Daily that “banks, which are already under regulatory oversight and have extensive experience handling anti-money laundering protocols, are best positioned to serve as majority shareholders in stablecoin issuers.”

However, the report noted that financial authorities are concerned that giving a majority stake to banks could reduce participation from tech companies and constrain the Korean market’s innovation.

As reported by Bitcoinist, financial institutions in Korea have been preparing for two potential scenarios. Notably, the sector has allegedly explored a business model in which banks establish a joint venture to collectively issue stablecoins, while also contacting various non-bank companies to prepare for the upcoming framework.

The regulatory standoff has seemingly left the market in limbo, with some tech companies actively preparing to secure approval while others remain cautious due to the unclear regulatory direction.

An official at a fintech company revealed that “there’s doubt about whether a won-based stablecoin will catch on, and with no clarity on approval rules, most firms are taking a wait-and-see approach.”

Korea JoongAng Daily cited a recent report by Hashed Open Research, which argued that “to maintain competitiveness in the digital economy, Korea should adopt a capital market-led structure instead of a bank-centered one,” similar to major issuers such as Tether and Circle.

Kim Sang-bong, an economics professor at Hansung University, considers that “to earn public trust, stablecoins can’t be left entirely in the hands of tech firms, and financial institutions must be involved.”

“But if banks dominate, innovation could be stifled. A more realistic solution may be to start by granting licenses to card companies and other firms focused on payments,” Kim concluded.

Amid ongoing speculation regarding the true identity of Bitcoin’s (BTC) creator, new analysis suggests that Jack Dorsey, the entrepreneur known for founding Twitter and currently serving as the CEO of Block, could potentially be Satoshi Nakamoto. 

Surprising Links Between Jack Dorsey And Bitcoin’s Satoshi

During Square’s investor day last week, Dorsey was directly questioned about his possible connection to Satoshi. Jeff Cantwell, an analyst at Seaport Research, posed the pointed inquiry: “Jack, this probably is the most important question you’ll ever get asked from the sell side — are you Satoshi Nakamoto?” 

In response, Dorsey remarked that the identity of Satoshi has become irrelevant, emphasizing that Bitcoin is now an open protocol managed by a community. He added, “If it was important to Satoshi, there is a simple way they can prove who they are, so we’ll wait for that day.”

This response prompted analysts from Baird to investigate potential coincidences linking Dorsey to Satoshi. They discovered several notable parallels.

For instance, the first post on the BitcoinTalk forum by Satoshi was made on November 19, which also happens to be Dorsey’s birthday and coincided with the date of Block’s investor day. Block’s CFO, Amrita Ahuja, noted, “He may or may not be Satoshi, but it is his birthday today.”

Furthermore, the Baird team identified important early Bitcoin milestones that align with the birthdays of Dorsey’s parents. They pointed out that Dorsey was involved in the “cypherpunk” mailing list as early as 1996 and possesses programming skills in C and Python, languages featured in the initial Bitcoin codebase. 

Additionally, an early Bitcoin address reportedly includes a sequence, “jD2m,” which some interpret as “Jack Dorsey 2 Mint,” referencing Mint Plaza, where he lived.

Mining Patterns And IP Address

The analysts also observed a notable change in Satoshi’s mining patterns that allegedly coincided with Dorsey founding Block in February 2009. They highlighted that he visited Iraq with the State Department in April of that same year. 

Reports indicate that in early 2009, Satoshi inadvertently logged into an Internet Relay Chat using an IP address linked to California during a period when Dorsey resided in the Bay Area.

An essential aspect of this speculation centers around Satoshi’s wallet containing approximately 1 million Bitcoin, which have remained untouched since their mining. 

This fact aligns with Dorsey’s previous assertion that the mystery surrounding Satoshi’s identity could be resolved quite simply. Forbes estimates Dorsey’s wealth at around $4.7 billion, suggesting he has no need to access those long-dormant holdings, currently worth about $87 billion.

NewsBTC reported on Monday that Satoshi’s assets are now estimated to be valued at nearly $96 billion, positioning this mysterious figure just below US billionaire Bill Gates, who is estimated to have a net worth of about $104 billion.

The quest to unveil Satoshi’s identity has led to a variety of candidates, including the late software engineer Hal Finney, systems engineer Dorian Nakamoto, computer scientist Nick Szabo, and Hashcash inventor Adam Back. 

In 2016, Australian cryptographer Craig Wright claimed to be Satoshi but failed to provide compelling evidence, leaving many skeptical of his assertions. A British High Court ruling last year further undermined Wright’s claims.

BTC is currently trading at $86,540, down more than 31% from its all-time high reached back in October and more than 8% year-to-date (YTD). 

Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView.com 

On-chain data shows Bitcoin sharks and whales have observed their population grow during the recent market downturn, while retail has capitulated.

Bitcoin Sharks & Whales Have Been Growing In Number Recently

In a new post on X, on-chain analytics firm Santiment has talked about the latest trend in the Supply Distribution of the key Bitcoin investors. The “Supply Distribution” is an indicator that tells us, among other things, the number of addresses that belong to a particular cohort.

Investors are divided into these groups based on the amount of the asset that they are carrying in their balance. For example, the 1 to 10 coins cohort includes all wallets with at least 1 and at most 10 BTC. The Supply Distribution for this group would determine the total number of addresses on the network that fall inside the range.

In the context of the current topic, the range of interest is the 100+ BTC one, equivalent to about $8.6 million at the current exchange rate. It includes two key investor cohorts known as the sharks and whales. The sharks and whales are entities that can carry some degree of influence on the blockchain due to their large holdings (with whales naturally being the more important of the two), so their behavior can often be worth keeping an eye on.

Since the all-time high (ATH) in October, Bitcoin has been following a downtrend, and as the chart below shows, the sharks and whales initially reacted by exiting as their Supply Distribution registered a sharp drop.

Interestingly, however, as Bitcoin’s decline has accelerated since November 11th, the Supply Distribution of the sharks and whales has witnessed a reversal. Today, there are 91 more investors of this size on the network compared to the low earlier in the month. This represents an increase of 0.47% for the metric, which, while not that high, is a sign that big money holders have been slowly coming back in to buy the crash.

Santiment has also revealed that the smallest of investors on the network (holding less than 0.1 BTC or $8,700) have seen their population shrink at the same time as this growth in the sharks and whales.

This trend could be a potential indication that the small hands have been capitulating after the bearish momentum, and large entities have been buying coins off them. “Retail capitulation will generally play out well for crypto prices in the long run,” explained the analytics firm.

BTC Price

Bitcoin displayed a brief recovery above $89,000 on Monday, but the coin has since retraced back to $87,000.

China has quietly worked its way back into the top three global Bitcoin miners, holding about 14% of the network’s total computing power.

Reports have disclosed that this share is roughly equal to 145 EH/s (exahashes per second), putting the country behind the United States and Russia in raw hashrate.

The shift comes despite an official crackdown on mining that started in 2021, when many operations moved overseas.

According to data from Hashrate Index and other tracking services, the rebound is real and measurable. Some mining activity now appears to be running in Xinjiang and Sichuan, where power costs can be low at certain times.

Based on reports, operators are using a mix of legacy farms, small private setups and cloud-like arrangements that mask mining as other forms of compute work.

Why Bitcoin Mining Returned To China

Cheap electricity is one driver. Another is that factory and data center capacity can be reused without large new investments. Manufacturers that supply mining rigs also report stronger sales back home.

Canaan, a maker of mining machines, has seen a pickup in Chinese demand. That suggests money is again flowing into hardware and setup, not just into restarting old machines.

At the same time, revenue from mining has been under pressure. Hashprice — the estimated payout per unit of hashrate — fell to record lows this year as Bitcoin prices and fees weakened and mining difficulty rose.

That decline puts strain on smaller players and makes efficiency and low-cost power more important than ever.

What This Means For The Network

A return of significant mining capacity to China raises two kinds of concern. One is over concentration: if too much hashrate clusters in particular regions or systems, the network’s geographic diversity shrinks.

The other is enforcement uncertainty. Mining remains banned on paper in many parts of China, yet enforcement appears uneven. As a result, some operations run under the radar while others run in partnerships with local firms that provide energy and space.

Publicly available maps track hashrate by country, but exact figures can shift fast. The best current snapshot points to China at 14% and about 145 EH/s of capacity, but those numbers will change as miners add or remove machines.

The United States and Russia remain the largest hosts, and that fact does limit immediate systemic risk.

What Analysts Are Watching

Analysts will watch three things closely: whether Chinese authorities change enforcement, how hardware makers like Canaan perform in coming quarters, and whether hashprice recovers if Bitcoin’s price strengthens.

If policy softens in some regions, more visible growth could follow. If enforcement tightens, activity could scatter again, just as it did after the 2021 ban.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView