#南非拟将加密纳入外汇管制
If the founder can move coins out of the country, then it’s illegal for his company to collect a USD stablecoin loan payment.
▪️ Draft with 88 pages: personal annual额度 R2 million / R10 million; zero额度 for entities.
▪️ Fully free within the territory: local buying/selling, custody, carrying/transporting, and selling back for rand are all considered domestic; only cross-border triggers reporting.
▪️ Two conflicting High Court decisions in Johannesburg: one says crypto is not subject to exchange control (appealed), and another says Bitcoin is both money and capital.
▪️ The manual claims “no statutory force,” yet it has the effect of law.
The disagreement is not whether to regulate crypto, but rather that what it regulates is not holding—it’s the line; and the rights on either side of that line are asymmetric: individuals have quotas, while entities have no channel.
The same deal becomes illegal depending on the track: going through banks is legal for companies, but using a regulated on-chain channel is illegal. Luno asks the governor’s own principle back—equivalent economic activity should face equivalent regulation, regardless of technology.
On the BTC side: capital controls on crypto typically divert rather than eliminate it; look at the offshore share of locally licensed channels more than the on-chain volume. “Failure” would mean the final version opens up corporate channels (SARB in September said stablecoin treatment is not yet determined).
You are the founder of that company: keep routing around with personal quotas, or move settlement offshore?$BTC
If the founder can move coins out of the country, then it’s illegal for his company to collect a USD stablecoin loan payment.
▪️ Draft with 88 pages: personal annual额度 R2 million / R10 million; zero额度 for entities.
▪️ Fully free within the territory: local buying/selling, custody, carrying/transporting, and selling back for rand are all considered domestic; only cross-border triggers reporting.
▪️ Two conflicting High Court decisions in Johannesburg: one says crypto is not subject to exchange control (appealed), and another says Bitcoin is both money and capital.
▪️ The manual claims “no statutory force,” yet it has the effect of law.
The disagreement is not whether to regulate crypto, but rather that what it regulates is not holding—it’s the line; and the rights on either side of that line are asymmetric: individuals have quotas, while entities have no channel.
The same deal becomes illegal depending on the track: going through banks is legal for companies, but using a regulated on-chain channel is illegal. Luno asks the governor’s own principle back—equivalent economic activity should face equivalent regulation, regardless of technology.
On the BTC side: capital controls on crypto typically divert rather than eliminate it; look at the offshore share of locally licensed channels more than the on-chain volume. “Failure” would mean the final version opens up corporate channels (SARB in September said stablecoin treatment is not yet determined).
You are the founder of that company: keep routing around with personal quotas, or move settlement offshore?$BTC
