South Korea’s Financial Services Commission (FSC) is accelerating the drafting of a formal framework for tokenized securities, with a detailed rule package slated for release in July as the country choreographs a 2027 transition of blockchain-based securities into its capital markets regime. The measures are expected to outline a roadmap for tokenizing assets such as stocks, bonds and money market funds, and may contemplate adjustments to over-the-counter trading limits as well as the pooling of similar underlying assets through fractional investment products. The FSC disclosed the plan at the second meeting of its public-private tokenized securities council, created in March to design issuance, trading, infrastructure and settlement rules ahead of the framework’s 2027 rollout.

“The goal is to make an announcement in July,” stated FSC Vice Chairman Kwon Dae-young, underscoring that the forthcoming rules will serve the “institutionalization” of tokenized securities. The July package will serve as a critical test of how far South Korea is willing to open regulated capital markets to distributed ledger technology while maintaining existing investor-protection standards.

The announcement comes on the heels of broader developments signaling regulatory readiness and institutional interest in tokenized finance. In a separate public address, Bank of Korea Governor Hyun-Song Shin voiced support for tokenized deposits. The remarks were reported as part of ongoing coverage on the sector’s policy trajectory. In a related move, the Ministry of Economy and Finance announced a pilot project to use tokenized deposits for government operational spending, with a full rollout earmarked for the fourth quarter of 2026.

FSC accelerates tokenized regulation efforts ahead of 2027 rollout

The accelerated rulemaking aligns with the amended Capital Markets Act and Electronic Securities Act, which are scheduled to take full effect on February 4, 2027. When enacted, the reforms will inaugurate South Korea’s first regulated environment for issuing, distributing and trading tokenized securities on distributed-ledger technology. The framework is designed to bring tokenized assets under the FSC’s jurisdiction, transitioning them from an experimental phase into formalized market infrastructure.

In January 2026, the FSC announced amendments to the legislation, establishing a one-year preparatory period for lawmakers and market participants. This timeline places significant emphasis on governance, disclosure, and investor protection as tokenized instruments move from pilots to regulated products. As the regulatory architecture evolves, the government intends to provide clear registries, compliance standards and oversight mechanisms that can accommodate diverse tokenized asset classes while preserving the integrity of traditional capital markets.

For market participants, the transition implicates a broad set of compliance requirements. Banks, securities firms, exchanges and asset managers will need to adapt their risk controls, KYC/AML procedures, and reporting capabilities to a hybrid environment where blockchain-ledgers function as recognized securities registries. The process also raises questions about cross-border recognition, interoperability with EU-style regimes such as MiCA, and the alignment of Korean rules with international standards for custody, settlement finality and asset custodianship.

Policy and market structure implications for participants

Key regulatory levers under consideration include the scope of tokenized trading on regulated venues, the treatment of OTC transactions involving tokenized assets, and the framework governing fractional investment products that pool multiple underlying assets. Officials have signaled a careful balance: regulatory certainty and investor protection must be preserved, even as the market tests the efficiency gains of blockchain-based settlement and programmable asset terms. The contemplated changes could affect a wide range of actors, including conventional securities exchanges, licensed broker-dealers, banks engaging in custody or settlement services, and institutional investors exploring tokenized exposure to baskets of assets.

From a compliance perspective, the regime is expected to emphasize robust AML/KYC controls, clear disclosure obligations, and centralized or delegated supervisory oversight to monitor tokenized issuance, distribution and trading. The design aims to reduce counterparty risk and settlement risk while ensuring that tokenized instruments remain within the protective perimeter of existing securities laws. The broader regulatory posture also matters for cross-border activity, as Korea’s approach will influence financial institutions that operate in Asian and global markets, and could shape discussions with international standard-setters about the treatment of tokenized assets within a harmonized framework.

Government use-cases and public-finance integration

In parallel with private-sector regulation, Seoul is exploring how tokenized assets can support public-finance and government operations. The pilot program announced by the Ministry of Economy and Finance will deploy tokenized deposits to execute government spending, with a full rollout anticipated in late 2026. Bank of Korea Governor Shin’s expressed support for tokenized deposits signals a policy openness to integrating digital-asset rails into public finance and central-bank–fiscal coordination, potentially influencing how future government payments, procurement and cash management are conducted within a regulated, ledger-based infrastructure. While the work remains in pilot form, observers note that tokenized public-finance mechanisms could offer benefits in transparency, traceability and efficiency, provided appropriate risk controls and regulatory guardrails are in place.

This convergence of regulatory reform and public-finance experimentation occurs within a global context of evolving central-bank digital-currency (CBDC) discourse and tokenized-asset regulation. Authorities have emphasized that tokenized securities will be treated as true securities under existing investor-protection regimes, avoiding a treatment that would place them outside the framework governing traditional assets. The Korean path may offer a blueprint for jurisdictions weighing similar transitions, balancing innovation with compliance obligations that are central to institutional trust and market stability.

Related reporting underscores Korea’s broader ambition to test real-world utility for distributed-ledger infrastructure in both financial and fiscal domains. As Korea positions its regime ahead of 2027, the interplay between securities tokenization, custody solutions, and government-led use cases will be a focal point for policymakers, market participants and international observers assessing the maturation of crypto-enabled capital markets.

Regulatory path and international context

The forthcoming regime situates Korea within a growing global wave toward formalizing tokenized assets. While MiCA in the European Union provides a comprehensive framework for crypto-assets and related services within the EU’s single market, Korea’s approach focuses on incorporating tokenized securities into the established capital markets architecture, with explicit recognition of blockchain-ledgers as valid securities registries. This alignment with traditional securities oversight—coupled with a parallel push to harness blockchain-based settlement and issuance—signals a policy stance that prioritizes investor protection and market integrity while gradually expanding the regulatory perimeter to include tokenized instruments.

Industry observers will be watching several regulatory and operational touchpoints: the precise definitions of tokenized securities under the amended acts; the treatment of cross-border trading and custody; the adequacy of AML/KYC controls for tokenized offerings; and the readiness of financial institutions to integrate ledger-based settlement with existing clearing infrastructures. The government’s public-private council remains a key mechanism for ironing out technical standards, interoperability requirements and enforcement expectations as the 2027 milestone approaches.

Closing perspective

South Korea’s tokenized-securities initiative reflects a deliberate policy evolution that prioritizes clear regulatory guardrails while pursuing the efficiencies of distributed-ledger technology. The July rule package and the 2027 implementation timeline establish a concrete roadmap for institutional participants, with implications for licensing, compliance programs, and cross-border cooperation. As government pilots advance and the private sector adapts, the central question will be how seamlessly tokenized assets can be integrated without diluting investor protections or market integrity. Watch for ongoing policy clarifications, interoperability standards, and enforcement guidance as Korea moves from pilots toward a regulated, ledger-based capital markets environment.

Law firm Gerstein Harrow LLP filed a new motion on Thursday in a miscellaneous enforcement lawsuit, asking the court to compel stablecoin company Tether to hand over more than $344 million in frozen USDt linked to Iranian entities.

The motion claims that the plaintiffs are owed more than $532 million in compensatory damages and more than $1.8 billion in punitive damages from acts of “terrorism committed or sponsored by Iran,” stretching back more than 25 years. 

The latest filing is part of a broader lawsuit against North Korea (DPRK) and Iran, attempting to claim and redistribute digital assets as compensation for victims of various and unrelated judgments tied to state-sponsored violence, drawing criticism from the crypto community.

The motion to claim $344 million in frozen stablecoins linked to Iranian entities. Source: PACER

In May, the law firm filed a restraining notice against the Kelp decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), which manages the liquid staking platform, attempting to block the transfer of frozen Ether ( ETH) tied to the $293 million Kelp exploit in April.

The law firm’s tactics have drawn condemnation from the crypto community, with critics arguing that distributing funds owed to hack victims to satisfy unrelated judgments stretching back decades delays repayment for hack victims, who have a greater claim to the funds.

Related: Coinbase faces lawsuit over frozen funds from $55M crypto theft

ZachXBT slams Gerstein Harrow for crypto targeting strategy

Gerstein Harrow LLP has a long history of filing similar claims against cryptocurrency companies and platforms following hacks and cybersecurity exploits, including the Harmony protocol, the Bybit cryptocurrency exchange, and others, according to onchain sleuth ZachXBT. 

“This is a predatory US law firm with a strategy that is pure evil,” he said in an X post from May 1, adding that the law firm used his cybersecurity research of various crypto hacking incidents to justify the claims.

“Whenever there’s a new Lazarus Group victim after an exploit and crypto assets get frozen, these clowns come in and say they have a claim for an alleged DPRK victim from 26 years ago that has zero relation to crypto or exploits/hacks,” he added.

Source: ZachXBT

In April, the United States Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) ordered Tether to freeze $344 million in stablecoins tied to Iranian entities.

The asset freeze also drew mixed reactions from the crypto community over the ethics of wallet freezes and the role of centralized crypto issuers in enforcing law enforcement requests. 

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?

Myanmar’s military authorities have published the text of an Anti-Online Fraud Bill that would impose severe penalties on digital currency fraud and online scam operations. The draft statute, presented to the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw, frames online fraud as a threat to national sovereignty and stability and contemplates punishments ranging from long prison terms to the death penalty for certain offenses.

According to Cointelegraph, the proposed legislation sets out that individuals convicted of “digital currency fraud” or related online fraud could face a sentence of 10 years to life imprisonment, with the possibility of capital punishment in specified circumstances. The bill also delineates the death penalty for those implicated in the operation of scam centers or for actions that resulted in the death of a victim coerced or exploited into committing fraud. The government has underscored the aim of curbing organized online fraud networks that have proliferated in parts of Southeast Asia.

The seriousness of the penalties places Myanmar among the most draconian regimes globally for digital currency–related crime. The move comes as authorities in the region contend with what they describe as increasingly sophisticated scam infrastructure. In January, China reportedly ordered the execution of 11 people linked to Myanmar-based scam centers that trafficked Chinese nationals, underscoring cross-border law-enforcement stakes in tackling these operations. Source: Al Jazeera.

As part of its broader focus on combatting scam networks, international authorities have intensified cooperation to dismantle illicit operations that use schemes such as pig-butchering, romance scams, and fake investments to launder funds and traffic victims. The FBI noted in a report released in April that Americans suffered more than $11 billion in losses from crypto-related scams in 2025, with total online-fraud losses exceeding $20 billion. The agency cited a March executive order from the White House aimed at bolstering federal efforts to combat scam centers and cybercrime. FBI report (Cointelegraph summary), Executive action overview.

The Myanmar government has been under international scrutiny since the 2021 coup, after which parliamentary sessions were suspended for years and did not reconvene until March 2026 following elections described by the Council on Foreign Relations as “neither free nor fair.” A government notice published midweek indicated that lawmakers would reconvene in the first week of June, with the bill potentially on the agenda for consideration. CFR analysis.

Key takeaways

• Draconian penalties: The bill contemplates 10 years to life imprisonment for digital currency and online fraud offenses, including the potential for the death penalty in certain cases.
• Targeted offences: Provisions cover digital currency fraud and operations tied to scam centers, with enhanced penalties for those involved in coercing or exploiting victims to commit fraud.
• Policy rationale: Authorities frame the measure as essential to protecting sovereignty and stability amid widespread online fraud networks.
• Regional enforcement context: The move aligns with a broader Southeast Asian crackdown on scam centers, amid cross-border actions and international pressure to curb crypto-enabled crime.
• Regulatory landscape for crypto entities: The development has implications for crypto exchanges, banks, and service providers operating in or with Myanmar, underscoring heightened AML/KYC and licensing considerations in a volatile legal environment.

Myanmar’s bill in context: penalties, centers, and cross-border implications

The Anti-Online Fraud Bill sets a framework in which digital currency and online scams are treated as grave offenses with severe penalties. By tying the most extreme punishments to crimes related to scam centers and coercive manipulation, the proposal signals a hard-line stance against organized scams that authorities say exploit vulnerable individuals. The text and its language emphasize a governance objective—protecting sovereignty and stability—amid a political transition marked by controversy and international scrutiny.

International reporting underscores that this is not an isolated domestic policy move. The region has seen a surge in scam centers that traffic people and funds under crypto-enabled schemes, prompting a broader enforcement push. The China-based retaliation against Myanmar-linked scam operations—where authorities reportedly executed 11 individuals connected to trafficking networks—illustrates the potential for cross-border criminal activity to trigger parallel enforcement actions across jurisdictions. Such developments raise critical questions for compliance teams and financial institutions about screening, risk assessment, and the handling of cross-border payments and correspondent relationships in contexts where criminal enterprises leverage cryptocurrency and online platforms.

From a regulatory perspective, the Myanmar bill intersects with ongoing global efforts to constrain illicit crypto activity. In the United States, federal authorities have intensified investigations into crypto scams, with law-enforcement “strike forces” targeting leaders of scam networks, including cross-border actors linked to organized crime groups operating in Southeast Asia. The FBI’s findings, reported by Cointelegraph, highlight the ongoing risk of large-scale losses to consumers and the importance of robust AML/KYC programs for firms that facilitate or process crypto-related transactions. The White House’s March executive action reinforces the federal mandate to pursue cybercrime and predatory schemes, signaling a high-priority enforcement trajectory for the coming years. FBI report (Cointelegraph coverage), Executive action summary.

For institutions operating in or with Myanmar, the bill amplifies the regulatory risk calculus. Even if the measure advances slowly through the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw, the prospect of stringent penalties for crypto-related fraud signals a tightening of licensing expectations and compliance controls. Cross-border enforcement efforts and cooperation with international partners further complicate the landscape, as firms must navigate divergent regulatory regimes and potential sanctions in areas impacted by scam centers or illicit financial activity. In this context, regulators and compliance teams should monitor developments closely, assess exposure in customer onboarding and transaction monitoring, and prepare for potential licensing or reporting changes that could emerge from the new bill or subsequent implementing regulations.

Historical and policy backdrop shaping the debate

The bill’s emergence occurs against a backdrop of political upheaval and a shifting regional security–economic order. Myanmar’s 2021 coup disrupted normal legislative processes and delayed parliamentary action, with observers noting that subsequent elections did not meet commonly accepted standards for free and fair process. As authorities propose top-tier penalties for online crimes, analysts and policymakers are weighing the balance between deterrence, due process, and the implications for civil liberties within a fraught governance environment. The convergence of domestic security priorities with international pressure to combat trafficking, crypto-enabled scams, and cross-border crime underscores the challenge of implementing consistent, enforceable policies in a fragmented legal landscape.

Looking ahead, observers will be watching for the bill’s progress and for any implementing regulations that define how penalties would be applied, how scam centers would be identified and shut down, and how cooperation with foreign law-enforcement agencies would operate in practice. The interplay between national sovereignty claims and international AML/CFT standards will shape not only Myanmar’s regulatory posture but also the operational realities for crypto firms seeking to operate compliantly in a high-risk environment. As authorities stress sovereignty and stability, regulators and institutions alike must prepare for a period of intensified scrutiny and potential policy evolution.

In sum, the Anti-Online Fraud Bill represents a stark signal of regulatory posture: a willingness to wield severe penalties to deter crypto-enabled fraud and online scams, coupled with the likelihood of ongoing cross-border enforcement activity. For analysts and compliance professionals, the development underscores the necessity of robust risk assessment, vigilant KYC/AML controls, and clear governance around cross-border arrangements in a region where illicit networks continue to adapt their methods to exploit digital financial channels.

Closing perspective: While the bill’s passage remains to be seen, its introduction reinforces a policy trend toward aggressive anti-fraud regulation and heightened enforcement across Southeast Asia. Stakeholders should monitor parliamentary proceedings and any subsequent amendments that specify enforcement mechanisms, due-process safeguards, and the scope of regulatory oversight for digital assets and related services.

There were low expectations for Drake’s new album Iceman, but one track released today underperformed even by crypto’s degenerate standards. In his new song “Dust,” Drake calls Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) one of his guys and calls for his prison release.

“An FTX penthouse high-riser, yeah / Samuel Bankman, free all my guys up, yeah,” Drake raps on the album’s second track.

Drake’s “free all my guys” framing is a standard hip-hop convention as a solidarity shout-out. It also follows the storyline of “Dust” as an aggressive statement track, which follows the rap genre’s basic victory lap-and-diss sparkline.

The song isn’t complicated. Drake simply re-asserts examples of his dominance and successes while casting his rivals as washed-up, living off old plaques and memories. The chorus repeats the simple message, “Go blow the dust off your plaques.”

The music video also adds no more nuance, depicting a childish police car race from the fun-loving rapper.

Elsewhere, he also names himself a “BTC crypto big-timer,” demonstrating his obvious failure to understand how bitcoin (BTC) and crypto are distinct.

As evidence of his status, Drake references his globe-trotting lifestyle via Melbourne’s time zone, sold-out shows, and dubious references to the Bahamas where SBF stole FTX’s customer money: smoking luxury cigars at Graycliff, and a high‑rise penthouse.

SBF famously lived in one of the very few Bahamian high-rise penthouses, within the Albany neighborhood.

Key Takeaways

• Pershing Square Capital Management revealed it purchased Microsoft shares while divesting its entire Alphabet holdings in Q1
• Bill Ackman described Microsoft’s current pricing as offering “highly compelling valuation” following recent market weakness
• Shares climbed as high as 4.1% during Friday trading, settling around 3.7% higher by midday ET as broader indexes declined 1.2%
• Hedge fund TCI dumped nearly all of its decade-old $8 billion Microsoft position due to concerns about AI competition
• Azure cloud services expanded 40% in the latest quarter; Copilot AI has secured 20 million paid subscribers from a potential 450 million business users

Microsoft (MSFT) shares surged on Friday following the revelation that hedge fund manager Bill Ackman’s investment firm, Pershing Square Capital Management, established a significant position in the tech giant as a “core holding” while simultaneously exiting its Alphabet investment.

Microsoft Corporation, MSFT

Shares traded at $424.81 by midday ET, representing a 3.76% gain. The stock peaked at $426.44 during the session, marking a 4.1% intraday advance. Meanwhile, broader market indices moved in the opposite direction, with the S&P 500 sliding 1.2% and the Nasdaq declining 1.4%.

In an extensive 887-word social media post Friday morning, Ackman explained his rationale, describing Microsoft’s current valuation as “highly compelling” after sustained selling pressure that has pushed shares down 13% year-to-date in 2026 and 22% below their record high.

The investment represents a complete portfolio swap — Pershing liquidated its entire Alphabet stake to finance the Microsoft acquisition. Ackman highlighted the company’s cloud infrastructure operations and commanding presence in office productivity applications as fundamental pillars supporting his investment thesis.

Contrasting Views from Elite Hedge Funds

Ackman’s enthusiasm isn’t universally shared. TCI Fund Management, managed by Chris Hohn and recognized as among last year’s most successful hedge funds globally, discreetly liquidated the bulk of its $8 billion Microsoft position — an investment maintained for ten years.

TCI communicated its reasoning directly to investors: “We reduced our investment in Microsoft because the rapid progress in AI introduces uncertainty over Microsoft’s competitive position in the future.”

This situation presents two highly respected investment firms analyzing identical circumstances and arriving at diametrically opposed investment decisions. Financial analysts are keenly observing which perspective will prove accurate.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella appeared in an Oakland courtroom this week, providing testimony in Elon Musk’s litigation against OpenAI. Microsoft has channeled approximately $12 billion into OpenAI across seven years and currently maintains a 27% ownership stake valued near $230 billion. Musk’s lawsuit aims to dismantle this partnership, creating genuine strategic concerns for Microsoft’s artificial intelligence initiatives.

Copilot Penetration and AI Investment Returns

Regarding operational performance, Microsoft delivered adjusted earnings of $4.27 per share against revenue of $82.9 billion for its fiscal third quarter — surpassing analyst projections of $4.05 per share on $81.4 billion revenue. Azure cloud expansion reached 40%.

Microsoft’s infrastructure investments have escalated from $24 billion in fiscal 2021 to $88 billion in fiscal 2025, with projections indicating $190 billion for the current calendar year. These expenditures face intensifying examination as debates intensify regarding whether AI investments are translating into measurable customer returns.

The corporation presently counts 20 million paying subscribers for its premium Copilot AI product, representing a fraction of approximately 450 million total enterprise seats. Tigress Financial Partners maintains a Buy recommendation with a $680 price objective — significantly exceeding current market levels — pointing to triple-digit annual growth in paid Copilot subscriptions.

Nevertheless, the Wall Street Journal highlighted that certain clients have experienced confusion regarding Microsoft’s diverse AI product nomenclature, with some preferring Google’s Gemini alternative. Microsoft recently reorganized its AI division leadership.

Judson Althoff, who assumed control of commercial operations in October, dismissed these worries: “They don’t concern me, because I think the market is still trying to figure out AI.”

A research paper released by Microsoft Research this week introduced complexity to the AI optimism, determining that large language models “introduce sparse but severe errors that silently corrupt documents, compounding over long interaction.”

The paper’s three researchers are affiliated with Microsoft Research.

Justin Sun’s made-up country Liberland has given Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin a star-shaped medal, “its highest state distinction,” for his technical blockchain achievements. 

The “First Class Order of Merit of the Star of Liberland” was given to Buterin during ETHPrague 2026, where he attended a Network State event sponsored by the micronation. 

Liberland said the medal recognizes Buterin’s “extraordinary technical achievements,” and, “his role in advancing new ideas about how societies can organize themselves.

Additionally, Buterin was praised for the attention he has given to “pop-up cities, decentralized societies, and network states.”

Read more: Justin Sun is now prime minister of Liberland, an entirely made-up country

The medal’s name appears to have been inspired by the Commonwealth’s Order of Merit, a 100-year-old award that recognises the distinguished services of people such as Florence Nightingale. 

Someone who hasn’t received Liberland’s highest distinction is Tron founder Justin Sun. The crypto billionaire was, however, elected prime minister of the region back in October 2024. 

Sun has been re-elected seven times. 

When he first applied for the role, Sun emphasized the need to maintain a strong relationship with the US and boasted about his investments in Trump-linked crypto firm World Liberty Financial (WLFI).

He also praised US Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff as an ally.

These statements haven’t aged well, however, as Witkoff’s son and WLFI co-founder, Zach Witkoff, is now claiming that Sun is attempting to “torch” the firm as WLFI and Sun launch lawsuits against each other.