Summary
- Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse praised regulators in countries such as Dubai, the U.K., Australia, Brazil, and South Korea for providing „leadership“ and „clarity“ for crypto firms.
- Garlinghouse highlighted the various regulatory development each of these countries has made in recent weeks.
- He said that their efforts are “desperately missing” in the U.S.
Positive Global Regulatory Developments
Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said the number of positive global regulatory developments happening in the crypto industry is „energizing.“ In a Feb. 9 Twitter thread, Garlinghouse praised regulators in Dubai, the U.K., Australia, Brazil, and South Korea for providing „leadership“ and „clarity“ for crypto firms. According to Garlinghouse, the regulators in these countries are doing the work that is „desperately missing in the U.S.“
Regulatory Developments From Dubai
Garlingouse highlighted the various regulatory development each of these countries has made in recent weeks. The Ripple CEO pointed out that the Dubai government „published an extensive new set of tech-agnostic rulebooks for crypto market participants, covering compliance standards, advertising, issuance, and much more.“ He added that this continues the region’s „history of being tech-forward.“
Regulatory Developments From Australia
In Australia, Garlinghouse noted that authorities were working on regulations that would reform licensing and crypto custodial services and bolster consumer protection. He said:“They recently published a token mapping consultation and are looking for public input before updating existing frameworks.“
Regulatory Developments From Other Countries
Garlinghouse said the regulatory efforts in the U.K. provide an opportunity for it to become a global crypto hub. According to him,the new “consultation [efforts] reflects government’s intent to establish a proportionate ,clear framework that allows firms to innovate while maintaining financial stability” . He added South Korea’s financial regulator guidelines would “delineate what would be considered a security token vs payment token ,and how those are separately governed“.