Regulatory deadline passes without stablecoin proposal
South Korea’s Financial Services Commission missed a December 10 deadline to submit a draft stablecoin bill. The regulator said it needed more time to coordinate positions with other agencies. This delay comes as lawmakers and financial authorities continue to debate fundamental questions about who should be allowed to issue these digital tokens.
I think this situation reveals how complex stablecoin regulation can be. Different agencies have different priorities, and finding common ground takes time. The FSC’s statement was straightforward—they simply couldn’t meet the deadline because they needed more coordination. That’s probably a common issue in regulatory circles, but it’s still notable when deadlines get missed.
Bank consortium requirement sparks innovation debate
At the heart of the disagreement is a proposal from the Bank of Korea. The central bank wants stablecoin issuance restricted to a consortium of banks holding at least 51% in any issuer seeking approval. This bank-centered approach has drawn criticism from lawmakers in the ruling party’s Digital Asset Task Force.
They argue that such restrictions would hinder innovation. One lawmaker reportedly said the special committee values innovation most, suggesting they want a more open approach. But the Bank of Korea has its reasons—they’re concerned about financial stability and want proper oversight mechanisms in place.
What’s interesting is that both sides seem to agree on some things. They both support establishing a policy consultative body that would include the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, the FSC, and the central bank. This body would make unanimous decisions on stablecoin approval and regulation. So there’s some common ground, but the details are still being worked out.
What happens next with the legislation
According to reports, the ruling party now expects to propose a consolidated bill in January 2026. That timeline suggests the government’s proposal should come out early next month at the latest. There’s an advisory meeting scheduled for December 22 where the task force plans to discuss the final direction of the legislation.
The Democratic Party has shown it might pursue independent legislation if needed. That’s a significant development—it suggests lawmakers are willing to move forward without complete agreement from all regulatory bodies. Perhaps they feel the issue is too important to wait indefinitely.
This whole situation reminds me of how different countries approach crypto regulation. Some move quickly, others take their time. South Korea seems to be in that careful consideration phase, trying to balance innovation with stability. It’s not an easy balance to strike, especially with something as potentially significant as stablecoins.
I wonder if the delay will actually help in the long run. Sometimes taking more time leads to better legislation. But there’s also a risk of falling behind other jurisdictions that move faster. The debate between innovation and stability isn’t unique to South Korea—it’s happening everywhere that’s seriously considering stablecoin regulation.
The next few weeks should be telling. With the December 22 meeting and the expected January timeline, we might see more clarity soon. But regulatory processes can be unpredictable, so I wouldn’t be surprised if there are more twists and turns ahead.
