Our weekly roundup of news from East Asia curates the industry’s most important developments.
JPEX scandal grows to over $166M
Last week’s Token2049 conference in Singapore was a life-changing experience for some; for others, the event did not meet expectations — but for a select group of individuals, the imminent prospect of being pursued by law enforcement meant they had to abandon their booths and flee the event.
On Sept. 21, local news outlets reported that Hong Kong police had arrested 11 individuals linked to troubled cryptocurrency exchange JPEX on charges of fraud and operating an unlicensed virtual assets exchange. More than 2,000 users are estimated to have been affected, with $1.3 billion Hong Kong dollars ($166 million) involved. Police allege users’ assets have been embezzled by JPEX staff.
In a dramatic raid on Sept. 13 — day one of the conference — Hong Kong police arrested key JPEX executives, leading staff to abandon its corporate booth. The exchange subsequently applied for voluntary deregistration with the Australia Securities & Investment Commission, disclosing that its Australian entity had little assets left. After the news broke, JPEX reportedly raised its withdrawal fees to 999 USDT per transaction to prevent capital flight.
In an announcement on Sept. 20, JPEX said that 400 million Tether (USDT) worth of users’ deposits would be eligible for redemption. However, the catch is that the funds can only be redeemed starting in late 2025. The firm stated that due to the ongoing law enforcement investigation, its telecom service providers and asset custodians have frozen applicable services.
JPEX booth advertisement posted the day before the exchange was raided by police. (Facebook)
In a press conference, John Lee, the chief executive of Hong Kong, said, “This incident highlights the importance that when investors want to invest in virtual assets, then they must invest on platforms that are licensed.” Founded in 2019, JPEX heavily promoted its presence in Hong Kong with brand banners on local metro stations and taxis, as well as soliciting the help of celebrities such as singer Julian Cheung.
Before its collapse, JPEX’s marketing included free vouchers to any users who signed up, offers of up to 300X trading leverage, and stablecoin staking yields exceeding 30% per annum. The firm has since suspended all of its services despite previous assurances that “it will not collapse.”
Users of defunct Japanese crypto exchange Mt. Gox were dealt another setback on Sept. 21, when it was announced that bankruptcy trustees would delay payment deadlines by another year. If executed, this means that the bankruptcy process would have stretched out for 10 years (if not more) since a devastating hack obliterated the exchange in 2014.
Mt. Gox victims protesting over the excruciating delay in repayments (Finance Feeds)
In April, Mt. Gox set a final deadline for creditors to register a claim against the defunct crypto exchange. A target date of October 2023 was then set for the repayment of users’ assets. The registration process has been extended periodically for several years. Despite previous reassurances, Mt. Gox trustees wrote:
“Given the time required for rehabilitation creditors to provide the necessary information, and for the Rehabilitation Trustee to confirm such information and engage in discussions and share information with banks, fund transfer service providers, and Designated Cryptocurrency Exchanges etc., involved in the repayments, which are required before the repayments can be made, the Rehabilitation Trustee will not be able to complete the repayments above by the deadline.”
Mt. Gox was the biggest Bitcoin exchange in the world when it filed for bankruptcy in 2014 after discovering that 850,000 of its customers’ Bitcoin (BTC) had been stolen after years of subtle siphoning. The exchange has since recovered around 200,000 BTC. The funds have been held in trust for the creditors, with 162,106 BTC ($4.38 billion) sitting in wallet addresses tracked by Token Unlock. At the time of the hack, the price of Bitcoin was around $580 apiece, meaning that many creditors would have realized gains on investment despite over half of their BTC being stolen.
In its communication to creditors, the trustee stated that payments could come as soon as the end of this year for registered creditors. However, like for the past decade, a caveat clause was included (as always):
“Please note that the schedule is subject to change depending on the circumstances, and the specific timing of repayments to each rehabilitation creditor has not yet been determined.”
Singaporean fintech raises $10M
Singaporean firm DCS Fintech Holdings has received a $10 million investment from Foresight Ventures for creating crypto-fiat on-ramping solutions.
According to the Sept. 21 announcement, DCS, which originally stood for “Diners Club Singapore,” the first credit card issuer in the city-state nation, will use the capital to develop “new payment solutions that provide a seamless connection between Web2 and Web3.” Its subsidiary, DCS Card Center, is regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore for issuing credit cards. CEO Karen Low commented:
“The rapid evolution of Web3 today necessitates the bridging of payments into Web2, while the rise of fintechs is democratizing payments for consumers, creating demand for greater variety and refreshing experiences. These are opportunities that DCS is well-poised to seize.”
As part of DCS’s initial foray into Web3, it has developed a Singaporean-dollar-backed payment token, which is also dubbed “DCS,” for the financial service sector.
Also based in Singapore, Foresight Ventures is a $400 million fund investing in Web3, AI and blockchain-related entities. In May, the firm pledged an additional $10 million for its Web3 accelerator, bringing the total to $20 million. The firm also backs the $120 million Sei Ecosystem Fund.
Subscribe
The most engaging reads in blockchain. Delivered once a
week.
Zhiyuan Sun
Zhiyuan Sun is a journalist at Cointelegraph focusing on technology-related news. He has several years of experience writing for major financial media outlets such as The Motley Fool, Nasdaq.com and Seeking Alpha.
A growing rift has emerged in Washington, D.C., between the cryptocurrency industry and labor unions as lawmakers debate whether to ease rules allowing cryptocurrencies in 401(k) retirement accounts.
The dispute centers on proposed market structure legislation that would allow retirement accounts to gain exposure to crypto, a move labor groups say could expose workers to speculative risk. In a letter sent on Wednesday to the US Senate Banking Committee, the American Federation of Teachers argued that cryptocurrencies are too volatile for pension and retirement savings, warning that workers could face significant losses.
The letter drew immediate pushback from crypto investors and industry figures. “The American Federation of Teachers has somehow developed the most logically incoherent, least educated take one could possibly author on the matter of crypto market structure regulation,” a crypto investor said on X.
The AFT letter to Congress opposes regulatory changes that would allow 401(k) retirement accounts to hold alternative assets, including cryptocurrency. Source: CNBC
In response to the letter, Castle Island Ventures partner Sean Judge said the bill would improve oversight and reduce systemic risk, while enabling pension funds to access an asset class that has delivered strong long-term returns.
Consensys attorney Bill Hughes said the AFT’s opposition to the crypto market structure bill was politically motivated, accusing the group of acting as an extension of Democratic lawmakers.
Funds held in US retirement accounts by type of account plan. Source: ICI
Opposition to crypto in retirement and pension funds mounts
Proponents of allowing crypto in retirement portfolios, on the other hand, argue that it democratizes finance, while trade unions have voiced strong opposition to relaxing current regulations, claiming that crypto is too risky for traditional retirement plans.
“Unregulated, risky currencies and investments are not where we should put pensions and retirement savings. The wild, wild west is not what we need, whether it’s crypto, AI, or social media,” AFT president Randi Weingarten said on Thursday.
The AFT represents 1.8 million teachers and educational professionals in the US and is one of the largest teachers’ unions in the country.
According to Better Markets, a nonprofit and nonpartisan advocacy organization, cryptocurrencies are too volatile for traditional retirement portfolios, and their high volatility can create time-horizon mismatches for pension investors seeking a predictable, low-volatility retirement plan.
Bitcoin and Ether volatility compared to other asset classes and stock indexes. Source: US Federal Reserve
In October, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) also wrote to Congress opposing provisions within the crypto market structure regulatory bill.
The AFL-CIO, the largest federation of trade unions in the US, wrote that cryptocurrencies are volatile and pose a systemic risk to pension funds and the broader financial system.
The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has conditionally approved five national bank charter applications for companies tied to the digital assets industry.
In a Friday notice, the OCC said it had conditionally approved BitGo, Fidelity, and Paxos to convert their existing state-level trust companies into federally chartered national trust banks. In the same announcement, the regulator said it had conditionally approved new applications from Circle and Ripple for national trust bank charters.
“New entrants into the federal banking sector are good for consumers, the banking industry and the economy,” said Jonathan Gould, the Comptroller of the Currency, adding: “The OCC will continue to provide a path for both traditional and innovative approaches to financial services to ensure the federal banking system keeps pace with the evolution of finance and supports a modern economy.”
Europe’s crypto regulatory framework is entering a new phase of scrutiny as policymakers weigh whether enforcement of the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation should remain with national authorities or be centralized under the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).
MiCA, which came largely into force at the beginning of 2025, was designed to create a unified rulebook for crypto-asset service providers across the European Union.
But as implementation progresses, disparities between member states are becoming harder to ignore. Some regulators have approved dozens of licenses, while others have issued only a handful, prompting concerns about inconsistent supervision and regulatory arbitrage.
In this week’s episode of Byte-Sized Insight, Cointelegraph explored what those growing pains mean for Europe’s crypto market with Lewin Boehnke, chief strategy officer at Crypto Finance Group — a Switzerland-based digital asset firm with operations across the EU.
Uneven enforcement fuels calls for oversight
According to Boehnke, the core challenge facing Europe isn’t the MiCA framework itself, but rather how it is being applied differently across jurisdictions.
“There is a very, very uneven application of the regulation,” he said, pointing to stark contrasts between member states. Germany, for example, has already granted around 30 crypto licenses, many to established banks, while Luxembourg has approved just three, all to major, well-known firms.
The ESMA released a peer review of the Malta Financial Services Authority’s authorization of a crypto service provider, finding that the regulator only “partially met expectations.”
Those disparities have helped fuel support among some regulators and policymakers for transferring supervisory powers to ESMA, which would create a more centralized enforcement model similar to the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
France, Austria and Italy have all signaled support for such a move, particularly amid criticism of more permissive regimes elsewhere in the bloc.
From Boehnke’s perspective, centralization could be less about control and more about efficiency.
“From just purely the practical point of view, I think it would be a good idea to have a unified… application of the regulation,” he said, adding that direct engagement with the ESMA could reduce delays caused by back-and-forth between national authorities.
MiCA’s design praised, but technical questions remain
Despite criticism from some corners of the crypto industry, Boehnke said MiCA’s overarching structure is sound, particularly its focus on regulating intermediaries rather than peer-to-peer activity.
“I do like MiCA regulation… the overarching approach of regulating not necessarily the assets, not the peer-to-peer use, but the custodians and the ones that offer services… that is the right approach.”
However, he also noted that unresolved technical questions are slowing adoption, especially for banks. One example is MiCA’s requirement that custodians be able to return client assets “immediately,” a phrase that remains open to interpretation.
“Does that mean withdrawal of the crypto? Or is it good enough to sell the crypto and withdraw the fiat immediately?” Boehnke asked, noting that such ambiguities are still being worked through and are awaiting clarity from ESMA.
To hear the complete conversation on Byte-Sized Insight, listen to the full episode on Cointelegraph’s Podcasts page, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And don’t forget to check out Cointelegraph’s full lineup of other shows!