A Hong Kong securities industry group has pushed back against key parts of the city’s proposed regulatory framework for virtual asset management, warning that theA Hong Kong securities industry group has pushed back against key parts of the city’s proposed regulatory framework for virtual asset management, warning that the

Hong Kong Industry Group Pushes Back on Tougher Crypto Manager Rules

  • The HKSFPA objected to proposals that abolished the 10% crypto allocation threshold applicable in Hong Kong for Type 9 managers.
  • The proposed regulations may demand a full license even for limited cryptocurrency involvement.
  • Custody requirements can potentially damage VC and early investor entry into token investment opportunities unless accommodating solutions emerge.

A Hong Kong securities industry group has pushed back against key parts of the city’s proposed regulatory framework for virtual asset management, warning that the plan could discourage traditional asset managers from gaining exposure to cryptocurrencies.

In a Tuesday submission to regulators, the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Professionals Association (HKSFPA) criticized proposals that would tighten licensing requirements for portfolio managers. The group argued that the draft rules create an “all-or-nothing” compliance burden that could stop traditional firms from testing crypto exposure through small allocations.

Hong Kong authorities have been consulting the market on additional licensing regimes for virtual asset dealing, advisory, and management services, as the city expands its broader digital asset policy push. Already, regulators have made progress regarding frameworks for virtual asset trading systems and issuers of stablecoins, and now new regulations are emerging regarding fund management and custody activities.

Removal of the 10% threshold draws the sharpest criticism

HKSFPA focused much of its feedback on the plan to remove the existing “de minimis” threshold for managers with a Type 9 license, the SFC registration category covering discretionary portfolio and asset management.

Under current arrangements, Type 9 licensed firms can allocate less than 10% of a fund’s gross asset value to crypto assets without applying for a separate license uplift, as long as they notify the regulator. According to guidance cited by Hong Kong-based law firm JunHe, this approach has allowed traditional asset managers to gain limited crypto exposure while keeping risk and compliance costs in balance.

However, regulators are now proposing to scrap that threshold entirely. Under the updated plan, even a minimal allocation, such as a 1% holding in Bitcoin, would require managers to secure a full virtual asset management license.

HKSFPA called the approach disproportionate. The group warned that it would impose significant compliance costs regardless of actual exposure size, which could deter fund managers from experimenting with crypto as an emerging asset class.

Expanded licensing could widen the regulatory perimeter

JunHe lawyers also highlighted how the proposed framework could significantly expand the scope of firms that fall under licensing requirements.

Some asset managers that run portfolios made up entirely of digital assets do not currently hold Type 9 licenses because their work does not fit neatly into the traditional definition of managing securities portfolios. Under the proposed regime, those firms would also need to obtain a virtual asset management license, which would widen regulatory coverage across crypto-native investment vehicles.

That shift could reshape how Web3 funds operate in Hong Kong, particularly specialist managers that have historically relied on lighter-touch classifications.

Custody rules could disrupt VC and early-stage token investing

HKSFPA also criticized the proposed custody framework. The draft rules would require virtual asset managers to hold client assets only with SFC-licensed custodians.

The association warned that this requirement would create practical issues for private equity and venture capital funds, especially those investing in early-stage or newly issued tokens. Many local custodians do not support these assets during early lifecycle stages, which could block Hong Kong-based funds from participating in Web3 venture deals.

HKSFPA argued that a strict custody mandate could effectively prevent Hong Kong managers from running Web3-focused VC funds, even when investors understand the risks and accept specialist custody approaches.

Meanwhile, the industry organization supported the consideration by regulators of more flexible alternatives, such as permitting self-custody in a limited fashion and allowing the use of qualified offshore custodians when serving professional investors.

Hong Kong balances hub ambitions with tighter supervision

The announcement comes at a time when Hong Kong is increasing its pace to emerge as an Asian leader in the cryptocurrency market. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority has introduced licenses for exchanges, as well as for stablecoin providers.

However, feedback of this kind from the industry, such as what has been seen in HKSFPA’s feedback, shows that what the market desires is regulation commensurate to risk rather than regulation that seeks to haul all crypto-related activity into a costly regulatory orbit. The consultations have brought about a new era of negotiations between policymakers and industry participants.

Highlighted Crypto News:

NYSE Moves Toward 24/7 Markets With Blockchain Trading Venue for Tokenized Equities

Market Opportunity
CyberKongz Logo
CyberKongz Price(KONG)
$0.00135
$0.00135$0.00135
0.00%
USD
CyberKongz (KONG) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
Will XRP Price Increase In September 2025?

Will XRP Price Increase In September 2025?

Ripple XRP is a cryptocurrency that primarily focuses on building a decentralised payments network to facilitate low-cost and cross-border transactions. It’s a native digital currency of the Ripple network, which works as a blockchain called the XRP Ledger (XRPL). It utilised a shared, distributed ledger to track account balances and transactions. What Do XRP Charts Reveal? […]
Share
Tronweekly2025/09/18 00:00
China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

The post China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise China’s internet regulator has ordered the country’s biggest technology firms, including Alibaba and ByteDance, to stop purchasing Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D GPUs. According to the Financial Times, the move shuts down the last major channel for mass supplies of American chips to the Chinese market. Why Beijing Halted Nvidia Purchases Chinese companies had planned to buy tens of thousands of RTX Pro 6000D accelerators and had already begun testing them in servers. But regulators intervened, halting the purchases and signaling stricter controls than earlier measures placed on Nvidia’s H20 chip. Image: Nvidia An audit compared Huawei and Cambricon processors, along with chips developed by Alibaba and Baidu, against Nvidia’s export-approved products. Regulators concluded that Chinese chips had reached performance levels comparable to the restricted U.S. models. This assessment pushed authorities to advise firms to rely more heavily on domestic processors, further tightening Nvidia’s already limited position in China. China’s Drive Toward Tech Independence The decision highlights Beijing’s focus on import substitution — developing self-sufficient chip production to reduce reliance on U.S. supplies. “The signal is now clear: all attention is focused on building a domestic ecosystem,” said a representative of a leading Chinese tech company. Nvidia had unveiled the RTX Pro 6000D in July 2025 during CEO Jensen Huang’s visit to Beijing, in an attempt to keep a foothold in China after Washington restricted exports of its most advanced chips. But momentum is shifting. Industry sources told the Financial Times that Chinese manufacturers plan to triple AI chip production next year to meet growing demand. They believe “domestic supply will now be sufficient without Nvidia.” What It Means for the Future With Huawei, Cambricon, Alibaba, and Baidu stepping up, China is positioning itself for long-term technological independence. Nvidia, meanwhile, faces…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:37