India’s SEBI open to crypto regulation, unlike Reserve Bank

by

As a crypto investor with some experience in the Indian market, I find SEBI’s recommendation to have multiple regulators overseeing different aspects of crypto-assets a promising development. India has been known for its strict stance against cryptocurrencies, and this proposed approach indicates a willingness among some authorities to permit their use within certain regulatory frameworks.

As a crypto investor, I’ve noticed the ongoing regulatory debate between two key Indian financial institutions: SEBI and RBI. While SEBI has signaled a more welcoming approach towards crypto-asset trading by suggesting multiple regulators should oversee the market, RBI maintains its cautious stance, viewing private digital currencies as potential risks.

As an analyst, I’d rephrase it as follows: I came across information that both SEBI and RBI put forth their respective stances before a government committee aiming to draft finance ministry policies. Notably, SEBI’s previously unreported suggestion implies a readiness among certain regulatory bodies in India to allow the utilization of private virtual assets.

India has adopted a firm position towards cryptocurrencies. Initially, the central bank prohibited financial institutions from engaging with crypto users or platforms. However, the Supreme Court subsequently reversed this restriction. Nonetheless, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) remains adamant on enforcing a ban against stablecoins, citing concerns over potential risks to fiscal stability and tax evasion.

SEBI proposed that different regulators oversee cryptocurrency activities within their areas instead of having a single unified regulator. SEBI would handle cryptocurrencies as securities and ICOs, while the RBI would regulate tokens backed by fiat currencies. The IRDAI and PFRDA would manage insurance and pension-related virtual assets.

Investor grievances should be addressed under the Consumer Protection Act. The RBI remains cautious due to risks like tax evasion and reliance on voluntary compliance in decentralized P2P activities, which could affect fiscal stability and seigniorage income.

Read More

2024-05-16 17:08