The key points from the Central Bank meeting on November 28 are here: Strict crackdown on illegal exchange currency of stablecoins, making it tough for coin traders.

[Block Rhythm] recently noticed an important signal - on November 28, the Central Bank held a meeting with several departments to specifically discuss cracking down on the speculation of virtual money trading. The spirit of the 9.24 notice from 2021 was reiterated at the meeting: in China, business operations related to virtual money are still off-limits. However, this meeting particularly emphasized one point: a severe crackdown on money laundering using virtual money and illegal transfer of funds abroad.

Legal professionals analyze that this meeting mainly reiterates old themes, and the core issue that really needs to be addressed is - the illegal exchange of currencies using stablecoins. In simple terms, this matter has indeed disrupted the financial order.

Everyone knows that foreign exchange controls are quite strict in the country, with an annual exchange limit of 50,000 US dollars for ordinary people. But now the stablecoin market is getting bigger and bigger, with more and more people using USDT, USDC, and many demands to move money out are being solved through these stablecoins. What's even more ruthless is that some people use stablecoins to launder money for upstream crimes, and there are even foreign trade merchants who are bold enough to use USDT and USDC to bypass United Nations sanctions and help sanctioned countries trade.

From actual cases, in the past year or two, the judicial authorities have significantly intensified their crackdown on coin merchants. A large number of coin merchants have been arrested for crimes such as illegal business operations, aiding and abetting, Money Laundering, and concealing criminal proceeds.

However, there is one point that needs to be clarified: this conference should not affect the virtual money policy in Hong Kong. Hong Kong and the mainland have formed a pattern of one being open and the other being restrictive regarding this business. The regulatory authorities' intention is actually quite clear—it's not that they don't allow you to engage in financial innovation, but you have to do it in designated areas.