South Korea's Digital Asset Legislation Dilemma: Bills Piling Up, While the US Steadily Advances

Source: BlockMedia Original Title: Accumulating Bills, the Plenary Session is a ‘Faraway Story’… Drifting K-Digital Asset Law Original Link:

South Korea’s Digital Asset Legislation Faces Difficulties

Discussions on digital asset-related bills continue to be delayed, and this session of the National Assembly may also fail to bring relevant bills to a vote. Several bills remain at the Standing Committee stage, and proposals merging legislative proposals from lawmakers and government plans are under review, requiring more time for the legislative schedule.

The legislative process in this session is far from certain

According to the National Assembly Legislative Information System, last year, a total of 8 digital asset-related bills were submitted to the National Assembly’s Government and Judiciary Committee (excluding amendments to the Virtual Asset User Protection Act), including:

• Digital Asset Market and Industry Act (Rep. Park Sang-hyeok)
• Basic Law on Digital Asset Cultivation (Rep. Choi Bo-yoon)
• Digital Asset Market Integration Act (Rep. Kim Jae-seok)
• Digital Asset Market Innovation and Growth Act (Rep. Lee Kang-il)

Bills related to stablecoins include:

• Digital Asset Issuance Act for Value Stability (Rep. Kim Hyun-jung)
• Digital Asset Issuance and Circulation Act for Value Stability (Rep. Ahn Do-jae)
• Digital Asset Payment Innovation Act for Fixed Value (Rep. Kim Eun-hye)

Currently, these bills are only at the stage of being returned from or scheduled for the Government and Judiciary Committee, and have not yet entered the review stage required by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee for this session. Although there is a consensus among political circles on the necessity of strengthening the competitiveness of the digital asset industry, the actual legislative process is progressing slowly.

The delay in legislation stems from the fact that multiple stakeholders, including the National Assembly, Financial Services Commission, and Bank of Korea, have yet to reach a clear consensus on core issues of the Basic Law on Digital Assets. Disagreements exist between the Financial Services Commission and the Bank of Korea regarding the issuance structure of stablecoins and the composition of policy agreement bodies, leading to delays in submitting government plans. The recent coordination plan reported to the National Assembly by the Financial Services Commission includes a large shareholder shareholding restriction plan, which has sparked opposition within the Democratic Party’s Digital Asset Working Group pushing for legislation.

Therefore, the final framework for the proposed Basic Law on Digital Assets remains undetermined. The Digital Asset Working Group plans to hold related meetings with the Financial Services Commission next week to advance the coordination of key issues, but whether consensus can be reached remains uncertain.

The US Insists on the Big Picture Amid Adjustments

Unlike South Korea, the US is rapidly building a digital asset regulatory system centered around the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, making swift progress.

The GENIUS Act is a first-phase bill aimed at establishing issuance requirements for stablecoins and reserve management principles, integrating digital dollar infrastructure into the institutional framework. The CLARITY Act is considered a second-phase legislation, clarifying the legal status of digital assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum, and organizing jurisdiction among the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and banking regulators.

Market expectations are that, once relevant legislation is completed, discussions may expand to the regulation of real assets (RWA) and security tokens (ST), including on-chain circulation of government bonds, money market funds, and loan receivables. There is even potential for discussions on a comprehensive “Digital Capital Market Infrastructure” plan, including distributed ledger technology (DLT)-based payment and clearing infrastructure. After the Trump administration regained power, it explicitly stated plans to gradually improve the digital asset regulatory system.

Of course, internal opinions on digital assets in the US are not entirely uniform. The CLARITY Act, which has passed the House and awaits Senate review, has disagreements over stablecoin licensing, DeFi regulation scope, and the division of regulatory authority between the SEC and CFTC.

Among these, the stablecoin compensation issue is seen as the biggest challenge. Cody Karp, CEO of the Digital Chamber of Commerce, stated, “Stablecoin compensation and interest issues are matters that cannot be delayed further; both parties agree that they need to be reflected in the bill.” The Community Bankers Association under the American Bankers Association previously submitted a letter to the Senate requesting restrictions on compensation offerings by stablecoin issuing subsidiaries.

However, unlike domestic situations, these differences in stance are viewed as adjustments and decision-making processes within the American decision-making structure, rather than factors that hinder overall policy direction.

Shark Researcher Yoon Seung-jil said, “Public disagreements and conflicts among institutions are themselves part of the American decision-making structure,” and pointed out that “the process of institutional preparation is also advancing amid debates.” He added, “The US is choosing to use internal disputes and tensions as a driving force to attract the global digital asset industry center to its own country.”