The Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA) has now published a Virtual Financial Assets (VFA) Rulebook specifically pertaining to the regulation of Issuers of VFAs under the Virtual Financial Assets Act (VFAA). However, it seems that the publication of this rulebook has not got down very well with financial services providers who spoke to CCN. Some have lamented that it is onerous and over-cautious in several aspects and makes business slightly more complicated where cryptocurrencies and blockchain are concerned.
Joseph Borg, Partner at WH Partners said that although the publication of the rulebook was a positive step, this needs to be polished to be actually effective.
“I strongly suggest to stakeholders to participate in this consultation in order to help the MFSA come up with a well-balanced regulatory framework that is robust and attractive at the same time. It is clear that some things published in the rule book need to be polished and, in some cases, toned down. However, if sensible responses with workable solutions to the consultation paper are received, I am sure that our regulators will take them on board and fine-tune the framework accordingly”, Borg said.
“The two consultation papers relative to the first two chapters of the ‘Virtual Financial Assets Rulebook’ provide a well-defined framework for what will constitute the eventual two chapters of the Rulebook,” he stated. “There are some issues which merit further discussion with the regulator, and in fact, as interested parties in this space, we have already provided our feedback for relative amendments and clarifications within the time frame of the conclusion of the first consultation period relative to the first chapter. We are currently reviewing the second consultation paper relative to the second chapter, issued just two days ago and we will provide with our feedback to the regulator in due course.”
Other stakeholders who spoke on condition of anonymity said that the rulebook needed to be drastically revised to be effective as in it’s current state, it was a ‘no go’.