The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has released a statement addressing a few queries and misconceptions raised after FTX collapse. The Bahamas-based exchange of cryptocurrency remained unsuccessful in filing for bankruptcy on the 11th of November this year. Subsequently, the venue stated owing approximately US$3.1B (almost $4.26B) to its creditors.
MAS Releases a Statement to Cover Misconceptions after the FTX Collapse
MAS, in its statement, focused on three chief points while responding to the misconceptions and questions. The initial point was that the central bank declared it to be impossible to shield the native users who have been dealing with FTX.com because the company had not registered under MAS and works offshore. The regulator has frequently cautioned about the hazards of working with unregulated platforms.
In this respect, it was clarified on the 14th of this month that the status of FTX was neither that of a licensed venue nor the one exempted from having a license in Singapore. The 2nd point was related to the difference between the treatments of MAS between FTX.com and Binance.com and the reason why the latter was positioned at the Investor Alert List (IAL) and not the former. Both platforms are not licensed in the country but Binance.com enthusiastically solicited Singaporean customers whereas FTX did not do that.
**You May Also Like: **Ponzi Schemes in the Crypto Space
The Monetary Authority of Singapore Justifies Placing Binance.com on IAL^
The statement pointed out that Binance.com even went ahead to offer listings in Singapore-based dollars along with accepting PayLah, PayNow, and other payment modes specific to Singapore. Apart from that, many complaints had been made regarding Binance.com from January to August of the previous year. On the contrary, no evidence was available that FTX.com was engaged in soliciting users based in Singapore, according to MAS. The statement also declared that Binance was placed on the IAL for this.
The 3rd thing debated was answering the question that an exhaustive list should be provided on the IAL. Adequate information about all offshore crypto platforms across the globe was also demanded in the queries. The MAS mentioned that it was impossible to be done in the case of hundreds of exchanges and offshore organizations. It justified its statement by saying that none of the regulators throughout the world has done this.
Comments