News linked to both this project and an event.
Odaily News: Costa Rica's Legislative Assembly has unanimously approved amendments to Law No. 7786, establishing specific obligations for virtual asset service providers regarding anti-money laundering, counter-terrorism financing, and counter-proliferation financing of weapons of mass destruction. The new law requires virtual asset service providers to register with the Financial Superintendence General and fulfill obligations including customer identification, due diligence, transaction record keeping, and reporting of suspicious transactions. Penalties for violations range from 5% to 50% of the transaction amount, or between $1,800 and $90,000. The law will take effect three months after its publication.
According to Digital Asset, Jeong Tae-ho, Democratic Party’s chief of the National Assembly’s Committee on Finance and Economy, stated that taxation on digital assets “has already been postponed and should now be implemented as scheduled,” adding that intra-party discussions will commence once the tax reform proposal is submitted to the committee. This statement marks a clear hardening of his stance compared to his more reserved position one month ago. The South Korean government has also officially confirmed that it will begin taxing income from digital asset transfers and leasing starting January 1, 2027. Several hardline lawmakers within the Democratic Party have recently voiced their support for implementing the tax on schedule.
According to Money Today, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) of Korea announced that it will release detailed regulations and guidelines for tokenized securities in July 2026. The proposed framework would permit issuing fractional investment securities backed by a bundle of similar underlying assets and explore raising trading limits on over-the-counter (OTC) exchanges. Regulators will also draw on international precedents to develop a roadmap for tokenizing standardized securities—including equities, bonds, and money market funds—and advance testing and enhancement of infrastructure such as on-chain settlement. Korea’s tokenized securities regime was approved by the National Assembly in January this year and is scheduled to take effect on February 4, 2027.
According to ZDNet, the South Korean government plans to impose taxes on virtual assets starting in January next year, but faces opposition from the opposition party, increasing policy uncertainty. Moon Kyung-ho, head of the Income Tax Division at the Ministry of Economy and Finance, made the government’s first official statement on the matter during a National Assembly discussion, affirming that taxation on virtual assets will proceed as scheduled beginning January 1, next year, emphasizing that “income must be taxed.” Under the current amendment to the Income Tax Act, gains exceeding 2.5 million KRW from the transfer or lending of virtual assets are subject to a 22% tax rate. However, the opposition People Power Party argues that taxing only virtual assets—while abolishing the financial investment income tax—is unfair, and is advancing a bill to abolish the virtual asset income tax. This bill has already been submitted to the National Assembly’s Committee on Strategy and Finance and will be discussed by its Tax Subcommittee. Analysts believe that, ahead of next year’s local elections, the ruling party may join discussions on delaying or scrapping the tax to win support from younger voters.
Odaily News According to a message released by Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of the Islamic Consultative Assembly of Iran, in the early hours of the 21st local time, U.S. President Trump, through imposing blockades and violating the ceasefire agreement, is attempting to turn the negotiation table into a surrender table for Iran, or to find an excuse to reignite war. Currently, the U.S. side frequently releases news about sending a delegation to participate in negotiations, while Iran has expressed refusal to negotiate. Analysis points out that behind Iran's related statements lie multiple considerations and concerns:First, Iran questions the lack of sincerity from the U.S. in negotiations. Iran once announced a conditional temporary opening of the Strait of Hormuz, but this move did not lead to the U.S. lifting the blockade on Iranian ports.Second, it is a negotiation tactic. "Refusing to negotiate" itself is often an important bargaining chip outside the negotiation table. If Iran shows an "eagerness to negotiate," the U.S. is likely to exert further pressure. In the absence of basic trust, both sides will engage in a series of maneuvers before negotiations to probe each other's bottom lines.Third, there are hardline voices and anti-American sentiment within Iran. Hardliners believe that expressing a willingness to return to the negotiation table too early under continued U.S. pressure is a sign of compromise and concession.Currently, the U.S. and Iran have disagreements on multiple issues including the nuclear issue, passage through the Strait of Hormuz, and sanctions against Iran. There is a severe lack of mutual trust, and the goals each side hopes to achieve through negotiations also differ significantly. Analysis points out that the current situation may develop in the following directions:First, both sides return to the negotiation table within the ceasefire period, or reach a consensus to extend the ceasefire and continue negotiations. However, the possibility of reaching a comprehensive, long-term agreement in the short term is low, and negotiations could break down again at any time due to hardline statements or actions from either side.Second, both sides fall into a "limited-scale conflict." After the ceasefire expires, military standoffs and harassment between the U.S. and Iran around the Strait of Hormuz will continue, and hostilities may reignite.Third, the conflict escalates on a large scale, leading to an uncontrollable situation. The U.S. has recently continued to issue military threats against Iran, but analysis from the U.S. side suggests that, constrained by factors such as rising war costs and increasing electoral political pressure, the Trump administration's decision-making space for a large-scale escalation of hostilities is relatively limited. (CCTV)