Hong Kong is probably the worst jurisdiction for ICOs nowadays
since China banned ICOs and Hong Kong is considered a part of China by the chinese and they are working on
it being legally recognised as well,the chinese laws could be imposed on Hong Kong,so why risk it when there are more than enough
countries that have recognised the legality of cryptocurrencies,hence creating ICOs there would be a good idea (Japan,Korea)
Topic: Which jurisdiction is better now? (Read 1777 times)
Which jurisdiction is more suitable for ICO now? How do you like Hong Kong?
I understand that Hong Kong is a very good location for many fintech companies involved in cryptocurrency. Although Hong Kong is administratively under the Chinese government, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are legally recognized in this territory and this is something we have to thank for. We just hope that it will stay this way and that China will not be imposing its decision on the matter to Hong Kong. Aside from being known to be a shopping mecca of Asia, Hong Kong is also a huge financial center for the said region. Cryptocurrency is alive and well in this territory and if I am thinking of doing crypto-related business then i will consider this on the the top of my list.
Right now ICOs are regulated in such countries as USA, Switzerland, Singapore, islands, etcICOs are banned in China, North Korea, Vietnam.Europe still doesn’t have strict regulations.Choosing the jurisdiction, most important is the citizenship of your future investors.
Depending on your product or service, eg. whether it’s an access “Token” for a product or service, or a “Coin” for a security offering, you will need to know how to choose a facilitative jurisdiction and corporate formation for your project.
I think yes, Hong Kong is good for the meantime. But hey, we all know that lawmakers in different countries can totally change their minds and make something legal illegal or vice versa. It goes both ways. What we have to do as Bitcoin investors is to take advantage of the good before it will all be stroke down again.
Things seems to be very unclear right now. But what ive noticed is that ico's are setting jurisdictions.
I saw full and limited jurisdictions on UnikoinGold's whitepaper. As they negotiate with different countries and acquire their licenses, the features are still enabled, just in a different way(ie use ether to buy their token that converts to unikoinsilver on the platform etc)
I saw full and limited jurisdictions on UnikoinGold's whitepaper. As they negotiate with different countries and acquire their licenses, the features are still enabled, just in a different way(ie use ether to buy their token that converts to unikoinsilver on the platform etc)
Depending on your product or service, eg. whether it’s an access “Token” for a product or service, or a “Coin” for a security offering, you will need to know how to choose a facilitative jurisdiction and corporate formation for your project.
I think that the opposite. The less the government regulates the circulation of cryptocurrency the easier and more profitable to work there. I do not understand why people want legalization. Than you feel bad now. To seek change need to know what they will bring. I think that people do not understand.
So far, Japan is the most wise and systematic in the issue of recognizing and regulating crypto-currency. I like how calm, without excessive fuss they solve issues related to the crypto currency. Therefore, Japan in this matter can serve as role model for other countries. As far as I know, the US also decided to regulate the Crypto currency in
I guess Mauritius could rank high 
, https://cointelegraph.com/news/ethereum-island-mauritius-craves-to-become-blockchain-paradise
, https://cointelegraph.com/news/ethereum-island-mauritius-craves-to-become-blockchain-paradise Things are very unclear to be honest. It's not like any jurisdiction has banded up to include ICOs in their laws specifically. It's also up to question whether or not any jurisdiction would favor investors or developers but it's all very novel to law makers.
1. Singapore - I was on one legal meetup and lawyer said that Singapore authority declared the token is not a security and therefore it doesn't require any regulation, so ICOs over-there are legit and not against the law.
2. Switzerland - is considering how to legally class a token. They are most advanced legally in EU area, but still unclear what token is and how to regulate it.
I think Switzerland can be the most open country for introducing an ICO project. Its well-known addiction to firm bank secrecy law has become a fixture of its own culture and this same predisposition can work well for cryptocurrency. I am aware that there are already some ICOs who are registered their company behind the project under the jurisdiction of Switzerland.
However, I am thinking why I have not yet heard much of any ICO projects coming from Japan. Japan can be a good candidate if we are looking for a base on which to legally apply and promote an ICO project. I am hoping soon that we can see more projects originating from Japan.
Things are very unclear to be honest. It's not like any jurisdiction has banded up to include ICOs in their laws specifically. It's also up to question whether or not any jurisdiction would favor investors or developers but it's all very novel to law makers.
1. Singapore - I was on one legal meetup and lawyer said that Singapore authority declared the token is not a security and therefore it doesn't require any regulation, so ICOs over-there are legit and not against the law.
2. Switzerland - is considering how to legally class a token. They are most advanced legally in EU area, but still unclear what token is and how to regulate it.
I think Switzerland can be the most open country for introducing an ICO project. Its well-known addiction to firm bank secrecy law has become a fixture of its own culture and this same predisposition can work well for cryptocurrency. I am aware that there are already some ICOs who are registered their company behind the project under the jurisdiction of Switzerland.
However, I am thinking why I have not yet heard much of any ICO projects coming from Japan. Japan can be a good candidate if we are looking for a base on which to legally apply and promote an ICO project. I am hoping soon that we can see more projects originating from Japan.
Which jurisdiction is more suitable for ICO now? How do you like Hong Kong?
Just to clarify things up. Hong Kong is under the administration of China so whatever decision China may have on anything Hong Kong has no choice but to take cognizance of it. I am predicting that soon it can be Russia which can be the next hub for ICO projects but one has to pass rigid and strict implementing guidelines to be granted permit to do the business.
Which jurisdiction is more suitable for ICO now? How do you like Hong Kong?
this is often overlooked, but id say Estonia. they are seemingly the most crypto integrated/ technological country at the moment. one sec, let me dig something up:
Quote
The small Baltic nation of Estonia not only has a history of jumping on the latest technological innovation, but its tech-friendly government seems willing to implement innovations like blockchain technology for healthcare, banking services and even governance by allowing its citizens to become “e-Residents.” This service also gives Estonian citizens and businesses digital authentication. It was also one of the first to use a blockchain-based e-voting service that enables people to become shareholders of Nasdaq’s Tallinn Stock Exchange.
Well known as the birthplace of Skype, it now hosts a number of Bitcoin ATMs and startups such as Paxful, a global peer-to-peer buying and selling service for bitcoins. With one of the highest internet penetration rates in the world, Estonia is well positioned to be a place where a cryptocurrency users can certainly feel welcome.
Well known as the birthplace of Skype, it now hosts a number of Bitcoin ATMs and startups such as Paxful, a global peer-to-peer buying and selling service for bitcoins. With one of the highest internet penetration rates in the world, Estonia is well positioned to be a place where a cryptocurrency users can certainly feel welcome.
with that much blockchain adoption, you feel they would be permissive, even if you had o actually go through regulatory process. you still may not want to offer a security, per se, but there are plenty of ways around that
also, according to this source, you wouldnt do too bad with Denmark.
Quote
Denmark is not only one of the most developed countries in the world in terms of living standards and technology, but it’s also at the forefront of the push towards eliminating cash in favor of 100% digital currency. Therefore, wide-scale adoption of digital currency is not a question of if, but when. But whether Bitcoin will be used as a means of exchange or an alternative to the central banking monopoly or both, remains to be seen.
What’s more is that the Danish Central Bank declared Bitcoin not a currency, stating that it will not regulate its use in the country. Denmark is home to a number of Bitcoin startups and exchanges such as CCEDK, which has been a prolific innovator in the crypto-space with recent releases of Bitcoin “3.0” technology and decentralized exchange.
What’s more is that the Danish Central Bank declared Bitcoin not a currency, stating that it will not regulate its use in the country. Denmark is home to a number of Bitcoin startups and exchanges such as CCEDK, which has been a prolific innovator in the crypto-space with recent releases of Bitcoin “3.0” technology and decentralized exchange.
Denmark had pretty much given everyone the green light, if you have a decent lawyer. you would really want to offer a coin with a unique functionality in this case; a dumb token really doesnt do much except be a token. but a foldingcoin, a significant improvement over bitcoin; they most likely would let you alone, especially given that no oone is prolifically offering ICOs out of these countries. it only seems to become a problem when everyone starts doing it
I think Switzerland county of zug is better than anywhere else
liability — the risk laws in certain purview are more good to account holders instead of leasers. For example, Wyoming is very defensive, though florida is definitely not. Nevis is profoundly defensive, Singapore is definitely not.
This is by a long shot the most widely recognized setup for an ICO, with most remarkable ICO's including Ethereum, Bancor, and numerous others working this structure in light of a Swiss establishment. Be that as it may, it's likewise conceivable this should be possible through an organization constrained by ensure. For example: Switzerland , Hong Kong, Singapore.
This is by a long shot the most widely recognized setup for an ICO, with most remarkable ICO's including Ethereum, Bancor, and numerous others working this structure in light of a Swiss establishment. Be that as it may, it's likewise conceivable this should be possible through an organization constrained by ensure. For example: Switzerland , Hong Kong, Singapore.
Things are very unclear to be honest. It's not like any jurisdiction has banded up to include ICOs in their laws specifically. It's also up to question whether or not any jurisdiction would favor investors or developers but it's all very novel to law makers.
1. Singapore - I was on one legal meetup and lawyer said that Singapore authority declared the token is not a security and therefore it doesn't require any regulation, so ICOs over-there are legit and not against the law.
2. Switzerland - is considering how to legally class a token. They are most advanced legally in EU area, but still unclear what token is and how to regulate it.
Anywhere that won't give the USA extradition or extension, and won't classify it as a security.
Which jurisdiction is more suitable for ICO now? How do you like Hong Kong?
Is there sufficient interest in Hong Kong? Apart from the jurisdiction, you need to figure out where the moneybags who are ready to invest are.
Apart from the US, all jurisdictions are rather ambivalent towards ICOs.
Which jurisdiction is more suitable for ICO now? How do you like Hong Kong?
This is one question that majority of the ICO around are either don't know the answer to or they are outright shying away from providing answers about or they just go the default line and assume its not illegal but the answers is equally dicey aside USA whose body language as we all know is hostile towards bitcoin, no other country has been able to get a definite position and when they do, I am sure its going to become clearer.
not sure why do you think USA is hostile towards bitcoin?
besides there are many states that treat bitcoin differently,in general-there is no hostility towards bitcoin,but you are supposed to pay income taxes and such so not the best place for ICOs
Hong Kong sounds good,but there is a high chance for China to impose its laws and attitude towards cryptocurrency,so be prepared for risks
that come together with that
Jump to: