Recently, I noticed an interesting new development among South Korean regulators regarding corporate investment in cryptocurrencies. They are drafting new corporate investment rules, but they plan to exclude stablecoins such as USDT and USDC—an approach that is definitely worth examining.

According to the latest updates, the Korean authorities are citing the current Foreign Exchange Act as the rationale. The Foreign Exchange Act provides clear definitions for external payment instruments, and stablecoins have not yet been included in the recognized scope. Therefore, regulators believe that directly allowing stablecoin investments under the new corporate crypto framework would be inconsistent with the existing legal framework. This reasoning is rather conservative, and it also reflects their aim to set stricter entry thresholds for corporate participation in the digital asset market at the initial stage.

What’s interesting is that some publicly listed companies that are actually doing business are pushing for changes. Companies with substantial overseas trade particularly value stablecoins such as USDT trading platforms and USDC, because they enable rapid cross-border movement and have significantly lower settlement costs than traditional methods. However, as of now, South Korean companies cannot open digital asset trading accounts through formal channels, so some companies are working around the restriction by using personal wallets or overseas exchanges to handle stablecoin payments.

It is understood that in October of last year, someone submitted a legislative amendment that includes provisions to recognize stablecoins as a means of payment, but the case is still under review. Before this process is completed, regulators do not seem to plan to include stablecoins in the official corporate investment guidelines.

That said, this does not mean companies have no way to trade stablecoins. Even if the new rules exclude them, companies can still buy and sell through personal wallets or overseas OTC platforms—the difference is that these activities would fall outside the formal regulatory framework. It is reported that the working group for corporate guidelines has finished its discussions. The final shape of the rules is now tied to the progress of the legislation on the Digital Assets Basic Law, so when they will truly take effect depends on developments there.

To be honest, this regulatory approach is somewhat like balancing two needs: one is to open the market for corporate participation, and the other is to ensure that there is not too much disorder in the early stages. Excluding stablecoins may just be a cautious stance for the time being, and with the legal framework becoming more complete, the situation should be adjusted accordingly.