The Virtual Currency Regulation Review: Singapore
Introduction to the legal and regulatory framework
While there are a vast number of digital tokens available in the market, from a Singapore legal perspective, it is important to look beyond the labels and instead consider the structure and characteristics of each digital token, as different regulatory considerations may apply, depending on whether the structure and characteristics fall within the definition of a regulated product. Accordingly, a factual analysis of each digital token on a case-by-case basis would be necessary to ascertain how each digital token would be categorised from a legal perspective.
In this chapter, we will look at four common types of digital tokens currently in the market, namely security tokens, payment tokens, asset-backed tokens (which have recently been in the spotlight (discussed in Section XI)) and utility tokens. It should be noted that these terms are not specifically defined legal terms; rather, they are used only for ease of discussion.
i Security tokens
We use the term 'security tokens' generally to refer to digital tokens that constitute any capital markets product (CMP) under the Securities and Futures Act (SFA),2 which includes securities, shares, debentures, units in a business trust, units in a collective investment scheme and derivative contracts.3
On 26 May 2020, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) released a revised guide titled 'A Guide to Digital Token Offerings' (the DT Guide).4 MAS clarified5 that offers or issues of digital tokens may be regulated should such digital tokens constitute CMPs under the SFA, which is the main legislation that governs the offering of and dealing in CMPs in Singapore.
To determine whether a digital token would be regulated under the SFA and accordingly trigger the relevant requirements under the SFA, MAS will consider the structure and characteristics of the digital token, as well as the rights attached to such token.6
The DT Guide helpfully provides a list of non-exhaustive examples where digital tokens may constitute CMPs. Examples provided include shares, where such shares represent or confer ownership interest in a corporation, represent the liability of the token holder in the corporation and represent the token holder's mutual covenants with other token holders in the corporation. Another example includes debentures, where such debentures evidence or constitute the indebtedness of the digital token issuer in respect of any money that is or may be lent to such issuer by token holders.7
The relevant requirements are discussed in further detail in Section II.
ii Payment tokens
We use the term 'payment tokens' generally to refer to digital tokens that constitute either digital payment tokens or e-money under the Payment Services Act (PSA),8 which came into effect on 28 January 2020.
The PSA is intended to (1) streamline payment services under a single piece of legislation by combining both the previous Money-Changing and Remittance Businesses Act9 and the Payment Systems (Oversight) Act,10 (2) enhance the scope of regulated activities to take into account developments in payment services (including services relating to digital payment tokens and e-money) and (3) calibrate regulations according to the risks such activities pose by adopting a modular regulatory regime.11
Under the PSA, the regulated activities that would require a payment service provider licence include account issuance services, domestic and cross-border transfer services, merchant acquisition services, digital payment token services and e-money issuance.
A digital token may be a digital payment token if, as defined under Section 2 of the PSA, it is a digital representation of value (other than those prescribed by the MAS to be excluded) that:
- is expressed as a unit;
- is not denominated in any currency and is not pegged by its issuer to any currency;
- is, or is intended to be, a medium of exchange accepted by the public, or a section of the public, as payment for goods or services or for the discharge of a debt;
- can be transferred, stored or traded electronically; and
- satisfies such other characteristic as MAS may prescribe.
Some examples of digital payment tokens listed by the DT Guide include Bitcoin and Ether.
Currently, under the PSA, provision of digital payment token services includes the service of dealing in (buying or selling, or both, of) digital payment tokens or the service of facilitating the exchange of digital payment tokens through establishing or operating a digital payment token exchange. Any person who provides any of these foregoing services would trigger licensing requirements under the PSA.12
Some payment tokens may alternatively constitute e-money, which is defined under section 2 of the PSA to mean any electronically stored monetary value that:
- is denominated in any currency or pegged by its issuer to any currency;
- has been paid for in advance to enable the making of payment transactions through the use of a payment account;
- is accepted by a person other than its issuer; and
- represents a claim on its issuer, but does not include any deposit accepted in Singapore, from any person in Singapore.
An issuer of e-money would also trigger licensing requirements under the PSA.
It should be noted that money is defined under the PSA to include e-money but exclude any digital payment token and any excluded digital representation of value.
Digital payment tokens and e-money are discussed further in Section III.ii.
iii Asset-backed tokens
The advantages of blockchain technology is that it allows for most (if not all) assets to be tokenised, ownership rights for such assets to be held by multiple parties and the relative ease for digital tokens to be traded in any part of the world. There is, however, a need to carefully consider the specific asset being tokenised as this may lead to multiple legal issues arising.
Real estate is an example of an asset that can be tokenised. If the underlying real estate of a token is held through a special purpose company vehicle and the token represents shares in that vehicle, the token could be deemed a security token. Alternatively, should an issuer collect fiat currency from token holders and pool the contributions to acquire real property (which token holders have no day-to-day control over the management of) and the real property is managed by or on behalf of a manager, with the purported purpose or effect of this arrangement to enable token holders to participate in and receive profits or income arising from the real property, it may be deemed as a collective investment scheme.13 This would then trigger the relevant offering requirements under the SFA. This is discussed in further detail in Section II.
Commodities (e.g., precious metals) is another example of an asset that is often tokenised. The trading of asset-backed tokens where the underlying asset is a precious metal may potentially give rise to the need to fulfil the relevant requirements under the Commodity Trading Act (CTA).14
iv Utility tokens
We use the terms utility tokens generally to refer to digital tokens that do not fall within the security token, payment token or any other regulated categorisations.
From a regulatory perspective, it is essential for market players to ensure that the utility tokens being offered in an initial coin offering (ICO) do not constitute CMPs based on their structure and characteristics such that they will also be characterised as security tokens, otherwise the offering and dealings will trigger the relevant requirements under the SFA as mentioned above in Section I.i and discussed in further detail in Section II.
Securities and investment laws
i Securities and Futures Act
Offers of security tokens as well as asset-backed tokens with the relevant characteristics (such that they would constitute CMPs) are subject to the regulatory regime under Part XIII of the SFA.
An offer may only be made if it complies with the relevant requirements under Part XIII of the SFA, such as needing to be made in or accompanied by a prospectus that is prepared in accordance with the relevant requirements, lodged with and registered by the MAS (the Prospectus Requirements), unless otherwise exempt.15
In particular, offers of digital tokens with characteristics that would constitute collective investment schemes would be subject to the relevant authorisation or recognition requirements (A/R Requirements), and would also need to comply with business conduct requirements under the Code on Collective Investment Schemes and the Securities and Futures (Offers of Investments) (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations 2005, unless otherwise exempt.16
ii Exemptions from the Prospectus Requirements and the A/R Requirements
Offers may be exempted from the Prospectus Requirements and the A/R Requirements if made in compliance with the conditions of an applicable offering exemption or safe harbour. The exemptions of note would include:
- a small and personal offer,17 where the total amount raised within any period of 12 months does not exceed S$5 million (or its equivalent in a foreign currency);
- a private placement offer18 that is made to no more than 50 persons within a period of 12 months; and
- when the offer is made to accredited investors19 or institutional investors20 only.
iii SFA Licensing Requirements
A person who markets or deals in CMPs (which would include digital tokens that constitute CMPs) will be required to hold a capital markets services (CMS) licence for dealing in CMPs under the SFA, unless otherwise exempt.
Separately, a person who is the manager of digital tokens that constitute a collective investment scheme will be required to hold a CMS licence for fund management under the SFA, unless otherwise exempt.
iv Financial Advisers Act
Any person who advises others on digital tokens with characteristics that would constitute CMPs or advises others by issuing or promulgating research analyses or research reports on such tokens may be deemed to be providing financial advisory services,21 and accordingly would need to be authorised to do so by obtaining a licence22 under the Financial Advisers Act23 (FAA) unless otherwise exempt.24
v Extraterritoriality of the SFA and FAA
The SFA and the FAA have extraterritorial applicability.25
Under the SFA, any acts (including offers and dealing activities) carried out partly in and partly outside Singapore by a person may be treated as being committed wholly in Singapore, and any acts carried out wholly outside Singapore by a person may be treated as being committed in Singapore should they have a substantial and reasonably foreseeable effect in Singapore.26 The requirements under the SFA would accordingly apply to all of the foregoing acts.
Under the FAA, even if a person is based overseas, should that person engage in any activity or conduct that is intended to or likely to induce the public in Singapore or any section of the public to use any financial advisory service provided by that person, including advising others on security tokens, that person would be deemed to be acting as a financial adviser in Singapore irrespective of whether the activity or conduct is intended to or likely to have that effect outside Singapore.27
See Sections V and VII, which discuss the regulation of exchanges and regulation of issuers and sponsors respectively.
Banking and money transmission
i Exception for banks, merchant banks and finance companies
Under the PSA, certain persons are exempt from the requirement28 to hold a payment service provider licence in respect of providing digital payment token services and these include banks licensed under the Banking Act,29 merchant banks approved under the MAS Act30 and finance companies licensed under the Finance Companies Act (notwithstanding, they may still be subject to certain PSA ongoing compliance requirements).31
ii Money transmission
The provision of inbound and outbound money transfer services and local payer to local payee money transfer services in Singapore would be considered cross-border money transfer services and domestic money transfer services respectively under the PSA,32 and would require a payment service provider licence,33 if not otherwise exempted.
As the framework of the PSA helpfully differentiates between e-money and digital payment tokens, it is clear that any person who intends to provide the services of transferring fiat currency or e-money, or both, would require a payment service provider licence in respect of domestic money transfer services and cross-border money transfer services, as applicable.
On the other hand, as stated in Section I.ii, the service of dealing in (buying or selling, or both, of) digital payment tokens and the service of facilitating the exchange of digital payment tokens would be digital payment token services for which a licence is required for under the PSA.34
While the transfer of digital payment tokens at present is not a service for which a licence is required for under the PSA, in light of proposed amendments to the PSA, this may change going forward. This is discussed further in Section XI.
i Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing
The anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regime in Singapore largely follows the guidance issued by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Singapore is an active member of FATF and a founding member of the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering.
The controls that MAS requires financial institutions to put in place in connection with AML/CFT generally include identifying and knowing customers (including beneficial owners), conducting regular account reviews, and monitoring and reporting any suspicious transactions.
MAS's supervisory expectations with respect to the requirements and expectations on financial institutions in relation to AML/CFT are set out in the notices, guidelines and other guidance issued by MAS.
On 21 November 2017, MAS issued the PSA Consultation Paper and with respect to seeking comments from the public on the approach of imposing specific risk mitigating measures, MAS commented that as digital payment token services carry higher money laundering and terrorism financing (ML/TF) risks owing to the ability to transmit money pseudonymously, there would accordingly be no subset of low-risk services, such that all digital payment token service providers would have to comply with AML/CFT measures nonetheless.35
On 5 December 2019, MAS issued its response to feedback received on a consultation paper in relation to AML/CFT with respect to payment services.36 MAS commented that there are higher risks associated with digital payment token transactions37 as well as how the anonymity, speed and cross-border nature of digital payment token transactions means that there is a higher risk of abuse for illicit activity, including for ML/TF in respect of such transactions.38
ii AML/CFT laws with respect to digital payment token service
On 5 December 2019, MAS released a notice in relation to the provision of digital payment token services (the AML/CFT Notice).39 Under the AML/CFT Notice, providers of digital payment token services are required to put in place robust controls to detect and deter the flow of illicit funds through Singapore's financial system.
As stated in Section I.ii, digital payment token services include the service of dealing in (buying or selling, or both, of) digital payment tokens or the service of facilitating the exchange of digital payment tokens through establishing or operating a digital payment token exchange.
Under the AML/CFT Notice, the AML/CFT requirements that digital payment token service providers are subject to include risk assessment and risk mitigation, customer due diligence, record-keeping, suspicious transaction reporting and internal policies, compliance, audit and training.40
Regulation of exchanges
i Primary platform
Persons establishing or operating a platform for offerors to make primary offers of digital tokens (primary platform) where such digital tokens include security tokens, may be deemed as dealing in CMPs under the SFA,41 for which a CMS licence for dealing is required, unless otherwise exempted.42
Persons establishing or operating a primary platform with respect to digital payment tokens may be considered as establishing or operating a digital payment token exchange, which is a payment service under the PSA43 requiring a payment service provider licence, unless otherwise exempted.44
ii Exchange platform
Persons establishing or operating a platform for secondary trades of digital tokens (an exchange platform)45 where such digital tokens include security tokens, may be seen as establishing or operating an organised market,46 which requires such persons to be approved or recognised by MAS as an approved exchange or recognised market operator respectively, unless otherwise exempted.47
Persons establishing or operating an exchange platform that facilitates the exchange of digital payment tokens would be considered as providing a digital payment token service under the PSA. Such service provided would be a payment service under the PSA48 for which a payment service provider licence is required, unless otherwise exempted.49
Regulation of miners
Mining of digital tokens is generally lawful under Singapore law.
There is no regulatory regime in Singapore specific to the mining of digital tokens and there is currently no published enforcement taken against the mining of digital tokens.
However, to the extent that the digital token being mined is a security token or an asset-backed token (namely a commodity token), and depending on the precise ambit of the specific mining arrangement, relevant regulatory or licensing considerations under the SFA and the CTA may apply.
For example, the running of a collective mining pool that aggregates and distributes returns as a result of running mining operations may be seen as operating a collective investment scheme or a commodities pool.
Regulation of issuers and sponsors
Generally, issuers of digital payment tokens and utilities tokens are not regulated in Singapore with respect to the issue of such tokens.
The service of issuing e-money to any person for the purpose of allowing a person to make payment transactions would also be a payment service under the PSA50 for which a payment service provider licence is required, unless otherwise exempted.51
Also, issuers of securities tokens will be subject to the relevant offering requirements under Part XIII of the SFA, unless otherwise exempted, as discussed in Sections II.i and ii.
Criminal and civil fraud and enforcement
It is widely acknowledged that given the anonymity of digital tokens and the cross-border nature of digital token transactions, where entities that investors deal with have non-transparent backgrounds and operations disallowing the appropriate level of due diligence to be conducted, there is a heightened risk of fraud.52
Accordingly, it would be challenging to identify the wrongdoer in the case of a criminal prosecution or a counterparty in the case of civil suit, where significant resources and effort would be required as a starting point for assessment of any legal recourse.
Separately, MAS has issued a number of advisories on possible fraudulent investments in digital tokens, including those that solicit investments in certain digital payment tokens with fabricated comments attributed to high-profile individuals, including political leaders in Singapore.53
In fact, individuals were charged with promoting a fraudulent digital token through the use of a multilevel marketing scheme. Local investors had participated in the scheme through the purchase of certain courses that were bundled with promotion tokens.54
i Good and services tax
The Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore published an e-tax guide on goods and services tax (GST) with respect to digital payment tokens on 19 November 2019 (the GST Guide).55
The GST Guide clarified that with effect from 1 January 2020, the exchange of digital payment tokens for fiat currency or other digital payment tokens (e.g., the exchange of Bitcoin for Ether and the exchange of a digital payment token for Singapore dollars (i.e., an ICO)) will be considered exempt supplies and, accordingly, be exempt from GST.56
The GST Guide also clarified that the use or provision of digital payment tokens as payment for anything (other than for other digital payment tokens or fiat currency) is disregarded as a supply for GST purposes. GST is chargeable only on the supply of goods and services, regardless of whether digital payment tokens are used to purchase goods and services.57
The current rate for GST is 7 per cent.
ii Income tax
The Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore published an e-tax guide on the income tax treatment of digital tokens on 17 April 2020 (the Income Tax Guide).58 The Income Tax Guide states that whether a person is taxed on the exchange of digital payment tokens for fiat currency or other digital payment tokens depends on whether the gain arising out of the disposal is capital or revenue in nature.59 There is no capital gains tax or its equivalent in Singapore.
The Income Tax Guide also states that whether ICO proceeds should be taxed depends on the type of token (e.g., the proceeds from the issuance of security tokens is not taxable as it is capital in nature owing to it being akin to proceeds from the issuance of an equity or debt security).60
The current corporate income tax rate for companies is 17 per cent.
Other legal considerations
Even if issuers of digital tokens are able to rely on an exemption to proceed with an offering, there is a need to ensure that all activities carried out in connection with the offering are in compliance with the relevant laws.
In 2019, a security token issuer had intended to rely on an exemption under the SFA, namely the accredited investor exemption, which would have allowed it to proceed with the offer without registering a prospectus. However, one of its advisers had called attention to the offer through a social media publication, breaching an exemption condition prohibiting advertising. This resulted in the issuer being warned by MAS that it would no longer be able to rely on the relevant exemption. The issuer thereafter suspended its global offering of the securities token.61
This was not the first time that MAS had issued such a warning. In 2018 it warned eight digital token exchanges in Singapore not to facilitate the trading of security tokens, and also warned and directed an issuer to stop the offering of its digital tokens in Singapore.62
On 23 December 2019, MAS issued a consultation paper seeking views on the scope of money, e-money and digital payment tokens, as well as the regulation of payment services based on such forms of payment (the Stablecoin Consultation Paper).63
With a constantly evolving digital token landscape, further innovation has led to the emergence of new digital tokens, namely stablecoins that could potentially challenge the prevailing concept of money under the PSA.64
The current definitions of the terms, digital payment token and e-money are set out in Section I.ii.
The Stablecoin Consultation Paper states that the two defining characteristics that differentiate e-money and digital payment tokens are that e-money is a digital representation of a single fiat currency, whereas digital payment tokens are simply a representation of value, which may not have any reference to fiat currency. In addition, e-money must represent a claim on the issuer, whereas digital payment tokens do not need to.65
Stablecoins are a new class of digital tokens that are designed to maintain a stable value relative to another asset (such as fiat currency or commodity) or a basket of assets. Stablecoins may potentially perform the functions of money as they would not have the excessive price volatility of digital payment tokens that were issued earlier on the assumption that the stablecoins gain widespread acceptance. Stablecoins could also vary in terms of accessibility (whether to retail or wholesale customers) and ability to be traded on the secondary market.66 MAS has stated that it would, therefore, be challenging to distinguish between e-money and digital payment tokens for regulatory purposes.67
In light of the above, MAS's decision on how it intends to regulate stablecoins and, in particular, determine which category stablecoins would fall into, if either, or whether a new category would emerge, is widely anticipated, especially since MAS has stated that it is not proposing to amend the definition of e-money or digital payment tokens.68 The consultation closed on 28 January 2020 and the responses to feedback released on the Stablecoin Consultation Paper are due to be published.
ii Expanding the scope of digital payment token services
On 23 December 2019, MAS also issued a consultation paper seeking views on proposed amendments to the PSA (the PSA Amendment Consultation Paper), including expanding the scope of digital payment token service providers' activities to include the transfer of digital payment tokens, the provision of custodian wallets for or on behalf of customers and the brokering of digital payment token transactions (without possession of money or digital payment token by the service provider).69
MAS stated in the PSA Amendment Consultation Paper that its intention to amend the PSA is for the purposes of full alignment with the most recent enhancements to the FATF standards of June 2019 in relation to the regulation of virtual asset service providers.70
In a relatively short time frame, Singapore has dynamically addressed the need to develop a regulatory framework or 'repurposing' of the current regime to deal with the regulatory concerns arising out of the offer, trade and services relating to digital tokens.
Global market players and stakeholders have commented that the recently enacted PSA provides regulatory certainty and legislative compliance thresholds, which set apart industry participants that investors have confidence and trust to work with.71
All of these recent developments are a positive way forward, as it shows the growing willingness by the local regulator to bring digital tokens into the regulatory fold.
While there may always remain some uncertainty given the dynamic and ever-changing nature of digital tokens, what is resoundingly clear is MAS's willingness, agility and flexibility to work with and quickly address new developments in the characteristics of digital tokens.72
1 Han Ming Ho is a partner and Josephine Law is a counsel at Sidley Austin LLP.
2 Securities and Futures Act (SFA), Chapter 289 of Singapore.
3 See Section 2 of the SFA read with Paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the Securities and Futures (Capital Markets Products) Regulations 2018.
4 This can be accessed at: https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/MAS/Sectors/Guidance/Guide-to-Digital-Token -Offerings-26-May-2020.pdf.
5 See Paragraph 2.1 of the DT Guide.
6 See Paragraph 2.2 of the DT Guide.
7 See Paragraph 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 of the DT Guide.
8 Payment Services Act 2019 (No. 2 of 2019) of Singapore.
9 Money-Changing and Remittance Businesses Act, Chapter 187 of Singapore, now repealed.
10 Payment Systems (Oversight) Act, Chapter 222A of Singapore, now repealed.
11 See Paragraph 1.2 of MAS, 'Consultation paper on Proposed Payment Services Bill' (the PSA Consultation Paper) (21 November 2017), https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/MAS/resource/publications/consult_papers/2017/Consultation-on-Proposed-Payment-Services-Bill-MAS-P0212017.pdf.
12 See Part 1 of the First Schedule to the PSA.
13 See Section 2 of the SFA.
14 Commodity Trading Act, Chapter 48A of Singapore.
15 Section 296 of the SFA.
16 See Paragraph 2.6 of the DT Guide.
17 See Sections 272A and 302B of the SFA.
18 See Sections 272B and 302C of the SFA.
19 See Sections 274 and 304 of the SFA.
20 See Sections 275 and 305 of the SFA.
21 See Section 2 read with the Second Schedule to the FAA.
22 See Section 6 of the FAA.
23 Financial Advisers Act, Chapter 110 of Singapore.
24 See Paragraph 2.10 of the DT Guide.
25 See Paragraphs 2.12 and 2.13 of the DT Guide.
26 See Section 339 of the SFA.
27 Section 6(2) of the FAA.
28 See Section 13 of the PSA.
29 Banking Act, Chapter 19 of Singapore.
30 Monetary Authority of Singapore Act, Chapter 186 of Singapore.
31 Finance Companies Act, Chapter 108 of Singapore.
32 See Section 5 read with the First Schedule of the PSA.
33 See Section 5 of the PSA.
34 See Section 5 of the PSA.
35 See Paragraph 5.14 of the PSA Consultation Paper.
36 MAS, 'Response to Feedback received on the proposed payment services notices on prevention of money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism' (AML/CFT Response), (6 June 2019), https://www.mas.gov.sg/publications/consultations/2019/proposed-payment-services-notices-on-prevention-money-laundering-countering-financing-terrorism.
37 See Paragraph 5.18 of the AML/CFT Response.
38 See Paragraph 5.7 of the AML/CFT Response.
39 MAS, 'PSN02 Prevention of Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism – Digital Payment Token Service' (5 December 2019), https://www.mas.gov.sg/regulation/notices/psn02-aml-cft-notice---digital-payment-token-service.
40 See Paragraphs 4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 16, and 17 of the AML/CFT Notice.
41 See Section 82 read with the Second Schedule of the SFA.
42 See Paragraphs 2.9 of the DT Guide.
43 See Section 5 read with the First Schedule of the PSA.
44 See Section 13 of the PSA.
45 See Paragraph 2.8.3 of the DT Guide.
46 See Section 7 read with the First Schedule of the SFA.
47 See Paragraphs 2.11 of the DT Guide.
48 See Section 5 read with the First Schedule of the PSA.
49 See Section 13 of the PSA.
50 See Section 5 read with the First Schedule of the PSA.
51 See Section 13 of the PSA.
52 MAS, 'MAS cautions against investments in cryptocurrencies' (20 December 2017), https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/media-releases/2017/mas-cautions-against-investments-in-cryptocurrencies.
53 MAS, 'Warning on Fraudulent Websites Soliciting 'Cryptocurrency' Investments' (29 January 2019), https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/media-releases/2019/warning-on-fraudulent-websites- soliciting-cryptocurrency-investments.
54 Singapore Police Force, 'Two Men Charged for Promoting A Multi-Level Marketing Scheme Involving Cryptocurrency' (10 April 2019), https://www.police.gov.sg/media-room/news/20190410_arrest_two_men_charged_for_promoting_a_mlm_cad.
56 See Paragraph 6.4 of the GST Guide.
57 See Paragraphs 6.1 to 6.3 of the GST Guide.
59 See rows B and C of Section 2 of Annex A to the Income Tax Guide.
60 See Paragraph 8.2 of the Income Tax Guide.
61 MAS, 'MAS halts Securities Token Offering for regulatory breach' (24 January 2019), https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/media-releases/2019/mas-halts-securities-token-offering-for-regulatory-breach.
62 MAS, 'MAS warns Digital Token Exchanges and ICO Issuer' (24 May 2018), https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/media-releases/2018/mas-warns-digital-token-exchanges-and-ico-issuer.
63 MAS, 'Consultation on the Payment Services Act 2019 - Scope of E-money and Digital Payment Tokens' (23 December 2019), https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/MAS/resource/publications/consult_papers/2019/Consultation-on-the-Payment-Services-Act-2019---Scope-of-E-money-and-Digital-Payment-Tokens/Consultation-on-the-Payment-Services-Act-2019---Scope-of-Emoney-and-Digital-Payment-Tokens-MAS.pdf.
64 See Paragraph 1.2 of the Stablecoin Consultation Paper.
65 See Paragraph 3.4 of the Stablecoin Consultation Paper.
66 See Paragraph 3.6 of the Stablecoin Consultation Paper.
68 See Paragraph 3.8 of the Stablecoin Consultation Paper.
69 MAS, 'Consultation on the Payment Services Act 2019 – Proposed Amendments to the Act' (23 December 2019), https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/MAS/News-and-Publications/Consultation-Papers/ 2019-Consultation-Paper-on-Proposed-Amendments-to-PS-Act/Consultation-on-Proposed-Amendments-|to-Payment-Services-Actdocx.pdf.
70 See Paragraph 1.3 of the PSA Amendment Consultation Paper.
71 Bloomberg, 'New Singapore Laws Allows Global Crypto Firms to Expand Locally' (28 January 2020), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-27/singapore-launches-new-regime-for- cryptocurrency-payments-firms.
72 See Paragraph 3.9 of the PSA Amendment Consultation Paper.