South Korea Weighs Interim Stablecoin Rules to Bridge the Gap Before Its Crypto Law Lands
A new policy report argues Seoul shouldn't wait for a stalled comprehensive bill to give stablecoin issuers a licensing path.
By Jane Doe
Published on Jul 30, 2026
Cryptorah
Quick Take
- A report from Hashed Open Research and the Solana Policy Institute says South Korea should issue interim licensing guidance for stablecoins rather than wait for its full crypto law.
- It's based on a June 23 symposium with lawmakers, legal experts and industry participants.
- The underlying Digital Asset Basic Act is stuck: lawmakers haven't merged competing bills, largely over who gets to issue stablecoins.
- One floated compromise: banks keep majority ownership of stablecoin issuers, while fintechs and non-bank firms run day-to-day operations.
What Happened
South Korea should give stablecoin issuers more regulatory flexibility, put interim licensing guidance in place, and phase in stablecoin rules ahead of finishing its broader digital asset law — that's the core recommendation of a policy report released Wednesday by Hashed Open Research and the Solana Policy Institute.
The report isn't a standalone proposal; it's a write-up of a symposium held on June 23, where lawmakers, legal experts and industry participants worked through how South Korea should sequence its stablecoin oversight relative to the country's still-unfinished digital asset legislation.
The bill this is all racing against
The Digital Asset Basic Act would be South Korea's first comprehensive digital asset framework — covering stablecoins, token issuance, disclosure requirements and market conduct rules in one law. The report's pitch is essentially: don't make stablecoin issuers wait for all of that to be finished before they know how to get licensed.
Background: why is this being proposed now?
Comprehensive crypto legislation tends to move slowly because it has to reconcile many stakeholders — banks, fintechs, foreign issuers, consumer-protection concerns — in a single bill. A common regulatory pattern globally, referenced explicitly in this report via the EU's MiCA rollout, is to legislate in stages: get baseline rules for the fastest-moving product (stablecoins) into force first, then layer in the rest of the framework. ⚠️ This paragraph is general regulatory context, not a claim from the source about South Korea's specific timeline.
Why It Matters
The Digital Asset Basic Act is stalled because lawmakers haven't reconciled multiple competing bills, with disagreements over who is allowed to issue stablecoins acting as the main sticking point. That leaves stablecoin issuers — and anyone building on South Korean rails — without clarity on licensing while the larger law works through the legislature.
Said policymakers are considering a compromise structure in which banks would retain majority ownership of stablecoin issuers, while fintech and other non-bank firms would handle operations.
Argued South Korea needs to spell out which crypto activities financial institutions can engage in, resolve licensing uncertainty around stablecoin payments, and set rules covering foreign-issued stablecoins. He also pointed to the European Union's phased rollout of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) as a model — introducing stablecoin issuance rules ahead of the broader digital asset law, rather than waiting for it.
The Numbers
Market Reaction
What's Next / Things to Watch
The report frames its recommendations as things South Korean policymakers should still act on, not decisions that have been finalized. Based on what's in the source, the open threads are:
- Whether lawmakers adopt interim licensing guidance for stablecoins ahead of the Digital Asset Basic Act, as recommended.
- Whether the bank-majority-ownership / fintech-operations compromise floated by lawmaker Ahn Dogeol becomes the basis for stablecoin issuer structure.
- Whether South Korea clarifies rules for foreign-issued stablecoins, one of the gaps Kim Hyobong flagged.
- How the multiple competing bills underlying the Digital Asset Basic Act get reconciled, since that reconciliation — not just stablecoin rules — is what's currently delaying the law.
FAQs
What is South Korea's Digital Asset Basic Act?
It would be South Korea's first comprehensive digital asset framework, covering stablecoins, token issuance, disclosure requirements and market rules. As of this report, it's still pending — lawmakers haven't reconciled the multiple bills that would form it.
Why is the stablecoin bill delayed?
Because of disagreements over who can issue stablecoins — specifically the balance of control between banks and non-bank/fintech firms.
Who is behind this policy report?
Hashed Open Research and the Solana Policy Institute published it, based on a June 23 symposium with lawmakers, legal experts and industry participants.
What compromise has been floated for stablecoin ownership?
Democratic Party lawmaker Ahn Dogeol said policymakers are considering a structure where banks hold majority ownership of stablecoin issuers while fintech and non-bank firms manage operations.
Does this report change any actual regulation yet?
No — the source describes it as recommendations from a symposium, not a finalized rule or law. ⚠️ No enactment or adoption is confirmed in the source.
Methodology & sourcing notes
This article is built entirely from a single wire-style news item summarizing a policy report and its underlying June 23 symposium. It does not draw on the full text of the report itself, other coverage, or live market data. Any figure not explicitly present in that source item is flagged with ⚠️ rather than estimated.
- Related coverage referenced in the source: "South Korea plans stablecoin rules as opposition pushes crypto tax repeal" — no URL was provided in the source material, so it is cited by title only.
- Source publisher: Cointelegraph, produced per its stated Editorial Policy. No article URL was included in the supplied source content.
Investment disclaimer: The content reflects the author’s personal views and current market conditions. Please conduct your own research before investing in cryptocurrencies, as neither the author nor the publication is responsible for any financial losses.
Ad Disclosure: This site may feature sponsored content and affiliate links. All advertisements are clearly labeled, and ad partners have no influence over our editorial content.
Related Articles
.webp)
Binance Adds Gold and Silver Options to Its Abu Dhabi-Regulated Exchange
Binance will list USDT-settled gold and silver options through its ADGM-regulated Nest Exchange, extending a build-out of regulated commodity products that already includes January's metals perpetual futures and a wave of tokenized-gold activity from Tether and Paxos.
.webp)
Saylor's Warning: Bitcoin's Constitution Is Under Threat From Inside, Not Outside
Michael Saylor argues Bitcoin's real threat isn't hackers but insiders trying to rewrite its \\\"constitution\\\" — a breakdown of his case against BIP-110, larger blocks, and covenants.
Bitcoin and Gold Are Both Down Big — the "Quiet Accumulation" Story Behind Both Isn't as Clean as It Sounds
Bitcoin is down 54% from its 2025 peak and gold is off 29% from its record. Both markets are being sold as \"quiet accumulation\" stories — but a look at wallet-size data, ETF flows, and central bank reporting gaps shows the buying is thinner and less uniform than the headlines suggest.
White House Teleprompter Operator Exits After $100K+ Prediction Market Scandal
Gabriel Perez, a White House teleprompter operator accused of profiting over $100,000 from insider Kalshi bets on Trump speeches, has left federal employment following an investigation into prediction market manipulation.