Australia crushes on Fraudulent and Deceptive ICO

Australia’s financial regulator is repressing on misleading initial coin offerings (ICOs), referring on “a serious breach of the Australian law”
03 May 2018   776329

In the result of the regulator’s requests, some issuers have stopped their token sales or are updating their structures. On Tuesday the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) declared  that it is taking measures “on misleading or deceptive conduct in the marketing and selling of digital or virtual tokens via initial coin offerings (ICOs).” ASIC is an independent Australian governmental structure that conducts as the country’s corporate regulator.

ASIC is issuing inquiries to ICO issuers and their advisers where we identify conduct or statements that may be misleading or deceptive. This is in addition to our inquiries where we identify potentially unlicensed conduct. As a result of our inquiries, some issuers have halted their ICOs or have indicated the ICO structure will be modified.
ASIC
(The Australian Securities and Investments Commission)

ASIC has also refreshed its information sheet on ICOs and cryptocurrency which defines “misleading or deceptive conduct.”

If you are acting with someone else’s money, or selling something to someone, you have obligations. Regardless of the structure of the ICO, there is one law that will always apply: you cannot make misleading or deceptive statements about the product. This is going to be a key focus for us as this sector develops. 
John Price, 
Commissioner, ASIC

The Commission presented 4 examples of what this conduct may entail. “The use of social media to generate the appearance of a greater level of public interest in an ICO” is the 1 on the list, then “undertaking or arranging for a group to engage in trading strategies to generate the appearance of a greater level of buying and selling activity for an ICO or a crypto-asset.” Also, “failing to disclose adequate information about the ICO” and “suggesting that the ICO is a regulated product or the regulator has approved the ICO if that is not the case” are banned as well.

Malaysia to Regulate ICO and IEO

Rules says tokens can be distributed via venture capitalists and financial institutions without selling shares and without debt instruments
16 January 2020   112

In Malaysia, the procedure for initial coin offerings (ICO) and initial exchange offerings (IEO) has been established. The Malaysia Securities and Exchange Commission (SC) provided relevant guidance for participants in the digital asset industry.

According to the regulator, projects can distribute their tokens through venture capitalists and financial institutions without selling shares and without using debt instruments. It was also established the maximum limit on the amount of funds raised through ICO, which will be 100 million Malaysian ringgit or about $ 24.5 million. No special requirements for investors are provided, that is, both institutional and retail investors will be able to participate in such campaigns.

After the completion of sales, the regulator will monitor the spending of collected funds.

Digital tokens offering can provide another alternative fundraising avenue for early-stage entrepreneurs. This initiative supports Malaysia’s Shared Prosperity Vision 2030 (SPV2030) by supporting the growth of SMEs and micro businesses which are targeted to contribute 50% to Malaysia’s GDP. It also aligned with SPV2030’s aspiration to create 30% high technology Malaysian companies.

 

Datuk Syed Zaid Albar

Chairman of the SC

In addition, the rules for the functioning of IEO platforms were established. Such platforms, if they operate in the country, must independently register with the agency. In addition, they must carry out the necessary checks to verify the integrity of the issuer, as well as understand the capabilities and characteristics of the token they offer.

New regulations are expected to be established in Malaysia in the second half of this year. At the first stage, SC intends to cooperate with IEO platforms on the issue of identifying satisfactory issuers.