U.S. derivatives watchdog CFTC is also casting an eye on the sector as the need for clearer rules becomes more pressing after last year's collapse of crypto exchange FTX. But in the absence of other legal frameworks, EU rules will inevitably serve as international norms until there is consensus on a global standard, said Eva Gustavsson, head of public affairs at crypto firm Copper. "We are drinking from a veritable fire hose right now of regulatory proposals, and that's all over the world," Gustavsson said. "I think it would be unrealistic for any firm to think they were not going to need to comply with anything rather quickly." Global standards and harmonisation as much as possible are key, said Sarah Pritchard, executive director for supervision at Britain's Financial Conduct Authority. There would be global policy proposals shortly from IOSCO, an umbrella body for securities regulators, Pritchard said. Gustavsson said more clarity on regulation would see more traditional, institutional investors entering the crypto market to "mature it further". (Reporting by Huw Jones; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)
Messaging: huw.jones.thomsonreuters.com@reuters.net)) By Huw Jones
LONDON, May 10 (Reuters) - A "fire hose" of differing
regulatory approaches to cryptoassets lack the global consensus
needed to attract established investors that would create a
maturer market, a conference was told on Wednesday.
The European Union has finalised the world's first
comprehensive rules for cryptoasset markets, known as MiCA, but
others like Britain and the United States are further behind.
Apart from compliance with rules to stop money laundering
and terrorist financing, crypto firms are largely unregulated in
many parts of the world.
"It's really commendable that Europe was able to get that
done so quickly," Hester Peirce, a commissioner at the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission, told a Financial Times
conference.
"If we built a good regulatory regime, people would come. I
think you will see that with MiCA. We are shooting ourselves in
the foot by not having a regulatory regime in the U.S.," Peirce
said.
U.S. Congress needed to decide which regulatory body has
authority over crypto, Peirce added.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Kitco Metals Inc. The author has made every effort to ensure accuracy of information provided; however, neither Kitco Metals Inc. nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in commodities, securities or other financial instruments. Kitco Metals Inc. and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.