Korean Lawmakers Review Three Rival Stablecoin Bills on the Road to Regulation

Key Takeaways

• South Korean lawmakers met to review three competing stablecoin bills on Monday.
• Both main parties have proposed stablecoin legislation in the National Assembly.
• The two sides disagree on whether to allow interest payments.

South Korean lawmakers took a major step toward stablecoin regulation on Monday, Nov. 24, when the National Assembly’s Political Affairs Committee convened to review three competing bills.

According to local media reports, the proposed legislation includes two bills put forward by the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), and one from the opposition People Power Party (PPP).

Influential Committee Picks up Stablecoin Regulation

Within South Korea’s National Assembly, the Political Affairs Committee is a powerful gatekeeper for financial regulation.

For the unicameral legislature, it is the equivalent of the House Financial Services Committee or the Senate Banking Committee in the United States Congress.

According to sources cited by Bloomingbit , the committee opened a plenary meeting on Monday morning with the review of three bills on the agenda.

From the DPK, Kim Hyun-jung’s “Value-Stabilized Digital Asset Issuance Business Bill” and Ahn Do-geol’s “Value-Stabilized Digital Asset Issuance and Distribution Bill” were under discussion.

Meanwhile, Kim Eun-hye’s “Bill on Payment Innovation Using Fixed-Value Digital Assets” represented the PPP’s alternative vision for stablecoin regulation.

Competing Visions

While they share some basic commitments, the DPK and the PPP diverge on other aspects of stablecoin policy.

All three bills would set similar reserve requirements and require stablecoin issuers to be regulated and licensed by the Financial Services Commission (FSC).

Both parties have also aligned around a minimum capital requirement for issuers of 5 billion won.

However, the two sides disagree on whether to allow interest payments.

In the mold of the U.S. GENIUS Act, the DPK prefers a ban on interest-bearing stablecoins. But no such provision exists in Kim Eun-hye’s proposal.

Other differences relate to consumer protections, minimum redemption times, and the treatment of non-KRW stablecoins.