Hong Kong's new virtual asset license is here, and the transitional period issue has stalled the regulators.

NullWhisperer · 2026-01-20T11:20:12+00:00

Hong Kong's new virtual asset regulations have raised industry concerns, and existing compliant managers are facing pressure to adjust their business structures. The industry is calling for a transition period of 6 to 12 months to ensure a smooth market transition and avoid chaos, with the current regulatory and market balance becoming a focal point.

NullWhisperer

2026-01-20 11:20:12

Abstract generation in progress

【Crypto World】Hong Kong’s virtual asset regulatory new rules draw industry attention. The Industry Professionals Association recently issued a statement, stating that if the new licensing system is implemented seamlessly and directly, existing compliant crypto asset managers will face a dilemma — either adjust their entire business structure to keep up with the new regulations or be forced to pause operations.

The key issue is the lack of a transition period. The association recommends that regulators reserve a 6 to 12-month recognition window for existing practitioners, providing them with some breathing room and time to adapt. This is not about bargaining, but about ensuring a smooth market transition — moving too quickly could cause chaos, while moving too slowly would undermine the purpose of the new rules.

For compliant organizations, this is a practical concern. Without knowing the deadline or how the transition policy will be defined, business planning becomes impossible. Hong Kong aims to find a balance between regulatory upgrade and market stability. How to proceed next is something everyone is watching.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

RektButSmiling

· 19h ago

Another wave of regulatory drama is coming, and the transition period really got stuck. This is a typical "one-size-fits-all" problem; giving some buffer time shouldn't be so difficult. 6-12 months is reasonable; otherwise, how can institutions survive? Let's wait for the policy to be implemented; worrying now is useless.

View OriginalReply0

ETHReserveBank

· 19h ago

The transition period doesn't really mean there are no rules; just going ahead like this? It might trigger another round of reshuffling.

View OriginalReply0

MetaverseVagabond

· 19h ago

Back to the transitional period again, Hong Kong is dragging their feet. Why not just give a timeline directly?

View OriginalReply0

MEVHunterNoLoss

· 20h ago

The transition period really hits a bottleneck; without a clear timetable, who dares to take action?

View OriginalReply0

NonFungibleDegen

· 20h ago

honestly HK regulators moving at turtle speed while market's already sprinting... 6-12 months cope or institutional rug season incoming fr

Reply0

ETHmaxi_NoFilter

· 20h ago

It's the same regulatory game again. Hong Kong wants to be the boss but is afraid of crashing the market. --- 6 to 12 months? Haha, giving such a long time probably means they're afraid someone will run away. --- Honestly, it's just about wanting money. Transition periods and window periods are all just a cover. --- Regulatory agencies are now the most uncomfortable; neither side is a good person. --- Why hasn't the regulatory department given a clear answer yet? If they don't, who dares to proactively adapt? --- If Hong Kong really wants to be a crypto hub, stop dragging your feet. Either loosen up or just say it's banned. --- This move is truly funny. Business planning and everything else can't be done at all. --- No transition period means someone has to die—simple and brutal. --- Hey, wait, will they really give enough time? Past routines are not necessarily reliable. --- Prioritizing market stability is correct, but SOP needs to be transparent.

View OriginalReply0