Search this site

海關在2023年破獲了一間涉嫌洗黑錢的本地找換店，拘捕了包括集團主腦及找換店合規主任在內的4人。 再揭洗黑錢集團陰謀：找換店合規主任及銀行職員涉案 海關在2023年破獲了一間涉嫌洗黑錢的本地找換店，拘捕了包括集團主腦及找換店合規主任在內的4人。該合規主任涉嫌開設空殼公司及銀行帳戶，處理6億港元的犯罪得益。 近日，香港洗黑錢集團的非法活動再次被揭露，在去年10月涉嫌洗黑錢的合規主任並未停止其非法行為，而是繼續在幕後操控，指使另外兩人開設空殼公司及銀行帳戶，三年間洗錢金額高達16億港元。同時，一名銀行職員亦被發現與犯罪集團串通，協助空殼公司開戶並教唆如何規避銀行審查。 「火花II」行動：海關再度出擊 在2024年10月15日至16日，海關展開了為期兩日的「火花II」行動，財富調查科突擊搜查了5個單位和一個商業單位，拘捕了5人，包括再度落網的找換店合規主任及懷疑集團主腦，以及兩名開戶的男子和一名銀行客戶關係經理。 根據海關調查，2020年8月至2023年10月期間，兩名被捕人受人指使，開設兩間空殼公司，分別在6間本地銀行，開設總共23個戶口。開戶時，兩間公司報稱從事手機程式設計及從事資訊科技，惟兩間公司至成立起都沒有業務地址，根據稅務紀錄亦無任何收入申報。案發期間，兩名被捕人作為公司董事，其兩間公司開立的戶口，在3年內交易金額達到16億港元，涉及超過4,000宗可疑交易，交易對手超過400名。惟被捕兩人分別申報任職找換店職員及兼職保安員，他們的工作背景明顯與公司財務背景不相關。 海關亦發現涉案戶口有不尋常及可疑的交易模式，當資金到戶後，通常於數日或同日內轉出，最高單日交易次數達到32次，單日最大入帳金額有4,800萬港元，單日出帳最高金額更達5,200萬港元。調查揭示，有關銀行交易並不是由公司持有人進行，反而由找換店合規主任在背後操作。 銀行職員的協助角色 調查進一步揭示，一名銀行客戶關係經理與找換店合規主任串通，協助空殼公司開戶，並教唆如何偽造公司紀錄，以通過銀行的開戶審查。此外，該客戶經理還提示如何應對銀行對可疑金額的審查。這顯示出洗黑錢集團的專業化及內部人員的參與，讓整個洗黑錢活動更加隱蔽且難以察覺。 這名銀行職員的涉案，暴露了金融機構內部合規管理的漏洞，也提醒了銀行必須加強內部監控和審查機制，防止內部人員利用職務之便進行非法活動。 金錢服務經營者如何避免 金錢服務經營者 (“MSO”) 應對所有合作的商業夥伴進行背景調查 - 了解你的客戶 (“KYC”) 程序，亦應加強內部控制和監控，包括嚴格審查員工背景，確保所有員工，尤其是合規人員，通過全面的背景調查。持續進行打擊洗錢和合規相關培訓，使員工保持警惕並熟悉最新的法規和監管要求。 MSO應引入先進的監控技術，使用人工智能和大數據分析技術，對所有交易進行實時監控，及時發現和報告可疑活動。採用自動化的KYC和AML（反洗錢）系統，以確保審查程序的徹底和一致性，對涉及高額資金的交易和空殼公司進行更嚴格的審查，拒絕與無法提供充分業務證明的公司合作。「東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統」運用先進技術，能全面自動化您的反洗錢審查流程，即時篩查客戶、評估風險，大幅提高效率。系統同時提供完整的客戶檔案管理功能，確保合規記錄完備。立即試用「東查查」系統，助您輕鬆應對日益複雜的反洗錢合規挑戰。 免費試用 加強客戶審查也是關鍵，建立完善的風險評估系統，針對高風險客戶採取更嚴格的審查和監控措施，對所有客戶定期進行盡職調查，確保其信息和行為符合規定。金錢服務機構還應加強合作與信息共享，與其他MSO、金融機構和執法機構建立合作機制，共享洗錢風險信息，提升整體防範能力。 此外，積極參與行業相關培訓及課程，了解最新的合規趨勢和最佳實踐。通過這些措施，金錢服務機構可以顯著降低洗黑錢風險，維護金融市場的穩定和健康。 天匯合規網上培訓課程: https://complianceone.thinkific.com/collections/msozh 結論 洗黑錢是一項嚴重罪行，根據香港法律，若有人知道或有合理理由相信某財產全部或部分、直接或間接代表從可公訴罪行得益而仍處理該財產，即屬犯罪，最高刑罰為罰款港幣500萬元及監禁14年，犯罪得益亦會被充公。市民利用銀行帳戶處理來歷不明款項，無論有否涉及金錢報酬，均有可能觸犯洗黑錢罪。 此次海關的「火花II」行動，再次揭示了洗黑錢活動的複雜性及嚴重性。隨著執法部門的不懈努力，洗黑錢集團的非法活動逐漸曝光，未來需要加強監管和打擊力度，確保金融市場的健康和穩定。

Review of Internal controls on client asset protection Compliance Impact Alert: Review of Internal controls on client asset protection Aug 2025 Disclaimer: Contents contained in this document including should not be regarded as a substitute legal and / or compliance advice in any circumstances and shall not be reproduced (in whole or in part), distributed or otherwise passed on to any other person without our prior written consent. Language: English version only I. INTRODUCTION Overview The Securities and Futures Commission (“ SFC ”) has issued a circular highlighting the red flags and internal control deficiencies regarding client asset protection in licensed corporations (“ LC ”). The SFC conducted a review, with the assistance of an external consultant, on 12 small-to-medium sized security brokers focusing on the brokers internal controls designed to protect client assets. Client asset protection is the top priority of the SFC, and it raises alarms that a lot of reports or complaints received from the public towards misappropriation of client assets by fraudsters and from licensed corporation towards dishonest employees. The SFC suggest that LCs should review its own operations and specific circumstances to ensure that appropriate and effective control procedures are put in place and enforced to protect client assets. To address these red flags and internal control deficiencies, the SFC has issued guidelines for maintaining appropriate standards of conduct and implementing proper policies and procedures to adequately protect client assets and diligently supervise their staffs. II. FRAUDULENT INCIDENTS ON CLIENT ASSETS 1. Using email which closely resembles legitimate client emails to issue counterfeit instructions. A fraudster successfully issued counterfeit instructions to an LC using emails that closely resembled the clients. In one case, the LC approved adding the fraudster as an authorized person, and in another, processed a significant withdrawal from a hacked account to a non-designated bank. The LC failed both times to authenticate the emails or follow its own policy of obtaining direct written confirmation from the client. 2. Forged client’s signature in issuing counterfeit written instructions. In several instances, an LC processed counterfeit written instructions that forged a client's signature. The fraudulent requests asked to change key contact information (email, phone) and withdraw assets to non-designated accounts. Each time, the LC failed to follow its own policy of calling the client directly for verification. In a critical error, staff once called the new (fraudulent) number provided in the forged request, allowing the scammer to "confirm" the changes. This led to unauthorized access to trading accounts and significant financial losses. III. DEFICIENCIES AND REGULATORY STANDARDS The SFC is concerned about the results of the review conducted on small to medium-sized securities brokers, which raised questions about their suitability to remain licensed. If an LC consistently fails to maintain effective internal controls that jeopardize client assets and the firm's interests, the SFC will consider imposing conditions on the firm's license to manage or restrict how it conducts regulated activities. Scenario Deficiencies Regulatory Standards Changes on Customer Information The system did not regularly review logs tracking changes to client information. No confirmation messages sent to clients’ registered addresses, emails, or mobile phones for account changes. No checks to compare new client contact details with existing ones. No clear policies exist to verify email change request. Assign specific staff to regularly review audit logs for client information changes. Verify and confirm the identities and signatures for client information change requests, ideally contacting clients via alternative methods. Promptly notify clients of any changes to their information at their registered addresses, emails or mobile phones. Stay vigilant for unusual patterns, such as usernames, new foreign bank accounts, or addresses resembling those of other clients. Handling of Email Request No guidance and regular training provided to staff on handling procedures. No policies exist to manage email scam risks or verify client email instructions. Provide regular training and guidance to staff on identifying email scams and handling procedures. Establish policies to manage risks from email requests for orders, asset transfers, or client details changes. Verify suspicious email instructions and requests for orders or asset transfers above a reasonable threshold. Third-Party deposits and payments and collection of physical scrips No written policies exist for handling third-party deposits and payments. Failed to independently confirm with clients the authenticity of stock withdrawals for physical scrips by third parties. Adopt a policy discouraging third-party deposits and payments, allowing them only under exceptional circumstances approved by the senior management. Verify the transaction request with the client before processing any securities withdrawals to third parties. Operation of Bank Accounts Failed to implement proper authorized signer arrangements. No authorization control measures on payments from house account to client bank accounts. Resigned staffs authorized signatories were not promptly removed. Sharing of user accounts to access the LCs online banking accounts. Blank cheques were pre-signed by the authorized signer. Authorized signer of an LC client’s bank accounts should only be ROs, MICs, or their delegates. Require two or more authorized signers and set appropriate limits for payments from house and client bank accounts, including online banking. Review and update the authorized signing arrangement in a timely manner. Payment cheques should be crossed and signed only after filling in the payee’s name, amount, and the date. Dormant Accounts Failed to establish and implement written policies to identify dormant accounts and review their trading activities. No record of reviews on trading activities in dormant accounts. Establish policies to identify and review irregular trading in dormant accounts not exceeding 24 months. Maintain proper record of reviews for dormant account trading activities. Updates and Maintenance of Client Information Outdated clients contact information, with 8% of confirmation letters undelivered. No records of account opening documents to verify client signatures on instructions. Update client information promptly and ensure accuracy. Ensure relevant client specimen signature information is accessible to staff. Segregation of Duties Account Executives handled client assets and changes without proper controls. No marker-checker controls for key operational functions. Ensure key duties are segregated to minimize conflicts and abuses. Front office staffs should be restricted from handling non-trade-related matters. Implement marker-checker controls for key operational duties. System Access Controls Did not grant access right to staff on a need-to-have basis. Ensure access rights are granted on a need-to-have basis. Enforce access and security controls to prevent unauthorized database access. Reconciliation of Client Asset Records Failed to reconcile ledgers with external records. Failed to promptly follow up on reconciliation discrepancies. Regularly reconcile internal records with third-party reports. Reconcile client and bank accounts, fund transfer per Client money rules. IV. ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Assess and document current controls Document all your current client asset protection internal controls. This will provide a clear overview of what exists and reveals any gaps or areas for improvement. 2. Identify and evaluate risks Assess the risks. Ongoing risk assessments are crucial as they ensure your controls align with your organization’s evolving needs. These assessments help ensure your controls address the real-world challenges your organization encounters. 3. Test control effectiveness Assessing your controls is the backbone of any internal control review. This will ensure that your controls not only exist but also function as intended. 4. Review and analyze results Review your testing data to identify trends, failures, or areas where controls are lacking. It is recommended to maintain clean documentation of control failures and recommended fixes, ensuring a clear audit trail. 5. Implement Improvements Implement improvement to ensure that your client’s asset protection internal controls stay relevant and effective. This includes providing training for key staff on new or updated controls to ensure proper implementation. V. How We Can Help Our team comprises experienced professionals with deep expertise in compliance, risk management, and policy review and development in identifying gaps between the regulatory expectations in the circular and your current policies and procedures. We understand the complexities of regulatory requirements and provide tailored solutions to meet your specific needs and close any material gaps. Our expertise ensures adherence to regulatory standards and enhances overall compliance practices. If you have any questions, please feel free to Contact Us .

Thematic Cybersecurity Review of Licensed Corporations Compliance Impact Alert: Thematic Cybersecurity Review of Licensed Corporations Feb 2025 Disclaimer: Contents contained in this document including should not be regarded as a substitute legal and / or compliance advice in any circumstances and shall not be reproduced (in whole or in part), distributed or otherwise passed on to any other person without our prior written consent. Language: English version only Overview The Securities and Futures Commission (“SFC”) completed a thematic review of cybersecurity practices among 50 licensed corporations (“LCs”) in Hong Kong engaging in internet trading. The review assessed compliance with Cybersecurity Guidelines and the Code of Conduct, focusing on phishing, end-of-life (“EOL”) software, and third-party provider management. On-site inspections were conducted at 7 internet brokers, and deep-dive discussions were held with 6 globally operating LCs. The review identified eight significant breaches between 2021 and 2024, linked to issues like weak two-factor authentication (“2FA”), poor security configurations, delayed security patches, inadequate encryption, and unauthorized access to admin accounts. The SFC highlighted insufficient senior management oversight and weak cybersecurity measures as key contributors. To address rising threats, the SFC issued guidelines on phishing prevention, software management, and cloud security. **For more details, please refer to 2023/24 Thematic Cybersecurity review of LCs ** Findings of Cybersecurity Incidents and Expectations The SFC surveyed 50 LCs to assess cybersecurity practices. Key findings, impacts and expectations are summarized below: Findings Impact Expections 1. Ransomware Attacks One LC's systems and data were encrypted, requiring a full rebuild to resume trading. Deploy anti-malware, avoid embedded hyperlinks, conduct training, and establish incident handling. 2. Phishing Vulnerabilities A ransomware attack traced to a phishing email encrypted an LC’s systems, necessitating a rebuild. Conduct simulations and ensure effective reporting procedures. 3. EOL Software Management EOL software increased risks of unauthorized access to critical systems. Maintain IT asset inventories, monitor software validity, and cease using EOL systems. 4. Vulnerability to Unauthorized Access Cybercriminals exploited unpatched VPNs and unsecured ports to access internal networks. Enforce least-privilege access, 2FA, VPNs, session timeouts, and monitor third-party access. 5. Third-Party Provider Management A cyber-attack on a provider disrupted clearing services; some LCs had non-compliant trading systems. Conduct due diligence, establish SLAs, monitor performance, and include providers in contingency plans. 6. Cloud Security Weak network policies increased data leakage risks. Secure infrastructure, enforce access controls, manage API keys, and back up data securely. Actions and Recommendations LCs must ensure senior management (e.g. MIC-IT) addresses cybersecurity risks by: 1. Appointing qualified staff and allocating resources. 2. Reviewing and approving risk management policies. 3. Conducting regular cybersecurity reviews and addressing vulnerabilities. 4. Restricting access to sensitive systems and enforcing secure remote access. 5. Maintaining and testing contingency plans. Requirements are effective immediately, but the SFC will adopt a practical approach for LCs needing time to upgrade systems. Future plans include a comprehensive review of cybersecurity requirements to develop a broader framework for all LCs. How We Can Help Our team comprises experienced professionals with deep expertise in compliance, risk management, and policy review and development in identifying gaps between the regulatory expectations in the circular and your current policies and procedures. We understand the complexities of regulatory requirements and provide tailored solutions to meet your specific needs and close any material gaps. Our expertise ensures adherence to regulatory standards and enhances overall compliance practices. If you have any questions, please feel free to Contact Us .

ComplianceOne Newsletter – April 2022The topics discussed in this monthly newsletter are as follows:1 JPMorgan ComplianceOne Newsletter – April 2022 ComplianceOne Newsletter – April 2022 The topics discussed in this monthly newsletter are as follows: 1. JPMorgan Chase Loses Lead Role in IPO because of its negative view of the technology sector. 2. MaiCapital becomes the first licensed asset managers to obtain SFC approval to manage its portfolio of up to 100% in virtual assets 3. Commencement of End-To-End (E2E) Test for HKIDR 4. SFC proposes changes to the Position Limit Regime 5. SFC bans Poon Choi Yung for 20 months for Unauthorized Trading MARKET NEWS 1. JPMorgan Chase Loses Lead Role on Kingsoft Cloud IPO J P Morgan Chase was removed as the most senior underwriter for Kingsoft Cloud Holdings' HK stock IPO after its analysts downgraded the ratings on 28 tech companies including Kingsoft Cloud in April., calling the China internet sector as "uninvestable " in the near term on worries about strict Covid Zero policies and a government crackdown on tech companies. In a statement, Kingsoft Cloud said it could not comment on anything related to the proposed listing, and expressed that the company highly respected “research independence". Significance: Despite the demotion could cut fees for JP Morgan, it underscores the tricky path banks must sometimes navigate when their research departments issue downbeat calls on investment-banking clients. It demonstrated to the public how research analysts at global banks are supposed to operate independently of the firms' investment bankers in order to provide to the public a different perspective for consideration. 2. MaiCapital obtains SFC approval to manage its portfolio of up to 100% in virtual assets Blockchain and virtual assets manager MaiCapital has gained approval from the Hong Kong SFC to manage portfolios that may comprise up to 100% of virtual assets ; provided that MaiCapital is subject to the SFC’s “Proforma Terms and Conditions for Licensed Corporations which Manage Portfolios that Invest in Virtual Assets” . Concurrently, Wealthking Investment ( 01140.HK ), a traditional investor, has become a new shareholder of the MaiCapital group. MaiCapital intends to further expand its offering of virtual asset fund products and regulated crypto services to investors worldwide and to grow its institutional business to a combined AUM of over USD$200m. MaiCapital currently partners with regulated exchanges and service providers like Coinbase and OSL. Significance: It conveys the message to the market practitioners how the SFC takes a pragmatic view in regulating the virtual assets regime on conditions that the Licensed Corporations can demonstrate to the regulators that they are capable of delivering complex products to the investors in accordance with rules and standards in line with expectation of the regulators. 3. Commencement of End-To-End (E2E) Test for the Hong Kong Investor Identification Regime (“HKIDR”) in May 2022 The E2E Test for systems relating to the HKIDR will commence from 16 May 2022 until 15 July 2022 . It is mandatory for all Relevant Regulated Intermediaries1 (“ RRIs ”) to participate in the E2E Test. A RRI refers to a licensed corporation which (i) carries our proprietary trading; or (ii) provides securities brokerage services for another person in respect of orders placed through an account maintained for that person. A RRI can be an EP or non-EP. There will be three rounds of test account registration/update, an RRI must complete its registration/update in any one of the three rounds depending on their readiness in order to participate in the mandatory E2E Test. To facilitate the E2E Test, SEHK has also published the templates of the five Reporting Forms for RRI’s reference and they are available on HKEX’s HKIDR web corner . RRI should also ensure that their ECP logins for E2E Test are ready for submission purpose in the rehearsal. 4. SFC proposes changes to the Position Limit Regime The SFC launched a consultation in April 2022 on proposed changes to the position limit regime for listed futures and options contracts, and the public is invited to submit their comments by 27 June 2022 . A key proposal is to set out how the statutory prescribed limits and reporting requirements should be applied to unit trusts and sub-funds under an umbrella fund . Other proposed changes involve reportable positions in contracts traded on holiday trading days and the inclusion of a broader range of contracts which may be authorized by the SFC for excess positions. “ The position limit regime is essential to prevent the build-up of positions which may threaten the stability of the Hong Kong financial market, ” said Mr. Ashley Alder, the SFC’s Chief Executive Officer. “ The proposed changes will address the needs of the market and better align the regime with the SFC’s regulatory policies and objectives. ” Significance: It seems coincident with the introduction of BCAN which further enhances the transparency of open positions held by the dominant market participants, and it extends to the unit trust regimes as well. Furthermore, position limit is merely one of factor affecting stability of the markets, bear in mind other parameters like the number of participants, market price spreads, market depths which materially affect the liquidity and thus stability of the markets. ENFORCEMENT NEWS 5. SFC bans Poon Choi Yung for 20 months for Unauthorized Trading The SFC has banned Mr. Poon Choi Yung, a former licensed representative of China Tonghai Securities Limited, from re-entering the industry for 20 months from 12 April 2022 to 11 December 2023 for breaches of the SFC’s Code of Conduct. An SFC investigation which found that between June 2019 and March 2020, Poon effected 1,002 transactions in six clients’ accounts without the clients’ specific authorisations for the trades and/or their written authorisations for him to effect the trades on a discretionary basis. The SFC considers that Poon has also failed to act with due skill, care and diligence, and in the best interests of the clients when carrying on business activities. For more details, please click on the title of the topic above. ================================= ~ Make It Right Today, Better Tomorrow ~ ================================== The Newsletter is for general information purpose only and is not intended to constitute legal or other professional advice. For enquiries, please email to support@complianceone.hk or call us at (852) 39550277. Unit 1104, 11/F, 299QRC, 287-299 Queen's Road Central, Sheung Wan, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 39550277 www.complianceone.hk To unsubscribe, please simply reply with “ I don’t like to know more about Compliance ”.

The topics discussed in this monthly newsletter for Licensed Corporations are as follows: ComplianceOne Newsletter – November 2025 The topics discussed in this monthly newsletter are as follows: Regulatory Updates SFC urges licensed firms to detect and prevent potential layering activities in money laundering SFC issues new guidance for licensed virtual asset trading platform to tap global liquidity and diversify offerings SFC consults on the Chinese version of financial resources rule enhancements Market News SFC unveils enhancement to facilitate client interaction under Cross-boundary Wealth Management Connect SFC further streamlines measures for authorized EU-regulated retail funds to implement changes efficiently Enforcement News - Intermediary SFC Reprimands and Fines Tung Tai $900,000 for Failures to Safeguard Client Assets SFC Secures First Custodial Sentence Against Finfluencer for Provision of Paid Investment Advice on Social Media Chat Group Without Licence SFC Bans Cheung Ngai Yi for Life Following Criminal Conviction for Theft of Client Assets SFC Commences Prosecution in Securities Fraud Case Involving Illegal Short Selling SFC suspended Two Licensed Companies Linked to Prince Group (太子集團) Enforcement News - LISTCO Director of Hong Kong-based LISCO FSM Holdings (01721.HK) resigns amid Cambodian crime allegations Linked to the Prince Group (太子集團) SFC Seeks Court Orders to Disqualify Former Directors of China Longevity (1864.HK) for Financial Misstatements and Disclosure Failures Regulatory Updates 1. SFC urges licensed firms to detect and prevent potential layering activities in money laundering The SFC issued a circular [1] in NOV 2025 to urge the licensed corporations and virtual asset trading platforms (the “Licensed Firms”) to stay vigilant against suspicious fund flows showing signs of layering activities in money laundering. It is found that bad actors were exploiting Licensed Firms for layering activities by obscuring the sources and destination of their illicit proceeds. The SFC pointed out that: (i) a common red flag of layering is always with frequent and swift fund deposits in the client accounts, then followed by immediate withdrawals; (ii) Licensed Firms should have robust standards to detect and prevent layering activities. What have been/to be done so far? The SFC collaborated with the HK Police Force and the Joint Financial Intelligence Unit to address the risk of increasing exploitation of Licensed Firms; The SFC hosted webinar to provide Licensed Firms with updates on supervisory observations and regulatory responses in securities and virtual assets markets; Licensed Firms agreed to facilitate the Anti-Deception Coordination Centre ‘s (“ADCC”) 24/7 stop payment mechanism to expedite the interception of crime proceeds and recovery of the funds; Senior management of Licensed Firms should be acquainted with the importance to safeguard the integrity of their operations and the financial system in HK. [1] For implementation details of detection and prevention of layering activities, please refer to the Circular. SIGNIFICANCE: As Dr Eric Yip, the SFC’ s Executive Director of Intermediaries, said, “ Watchfulness is key to detecting layering activities, which could have been prevented through effective and robust AML/CFT controls. ” The SFC further reiterated that Licensed Firms should stay alert to red flags of suspicious transactions and keep aware of the robustness and effectiveness of their internal controls to fulfil the obligation in upholding AML/CFT standards ! 2. SFC issues new guidance for licensed virtual asset trading platform to tap global liquidity and diversify offerings The SFC set out its expected standards in two new circulars [1] for SFC-licensed VATP operators (“ Platform Operators ”) to take a significant step in tapping global liquidity and broadening the range of their product and service offerings. In one circular [2] , Platform Operators are allowed to combine their orders with those affiliated overseas VATPs (“OVATP”) in a shared book to attract global platforms, order flows and liquidity providers. Under the arrangement, orders from different platforms will be permitted to be combined into an aggregate shared liquidity pool, enabling order matching and execution across platforms (“ Shared Order Book ”). And the next step by the SFC is to assess the feasibility of allowing the licensed brokers to direct client orders to regulated overseas liquidity pools within the same group. A Snapshot of the Regulatory Requirements for Shared Liquidity Book (1) Eligible OVATPs and the clients A Shared Order Book should be managed jointly by the Platform Operator and an OVATP licensed in the relevant jurisdiction for conducting its activities. A relevant jurisdiction refers to one which is a member of the FATF or has effective regulatory regime aligned with the FATF recommendations as well as the IOSCO2 Policy recommendations for Crypto and Digital Asset Markets3 with respect to market abuse and client asset protection. (2) Trading and Settlement Risk Trading Operations The Shared Order Books should be operated according to a comprehensive set of rules which cover pre-funding, order placement, trade execution, settlement and default management; Automated pre-trade verification should be implemented to confirm the pre-funding, ensuring sufficient assets available for settlement. Settlement Controls A Platform Operator should: design its operational workflow to effectively mitigate unsettled trade exposure and related operational risks; settle all trades with the OVATP at least once a day, and all client virtual assets should be held in custody by the Platform Operator’s associated entity. Compensation Arrangement A Platform Operator should: maintain a reserve fund in Hong Kong held on trust and designated for client compensation; have a compensation arrangement to cover potential loss of client virtual assets under its custody. (3) Market Misconduct Risk A Platform Operator should: implement internal policies and controls for the proper surveillance of trading activities on the trading platform; designate at least one Responsible Officer or Manager-in Charge to oversee the joint market surveillance programme, ensure compliance with the SFC’s requirements; provide Shared Order Book data to the SFC promptly on request , including all order and trade data, order originator information. (4) Approval from SFC A Platform Operator should obtain prior written approval from the SFC, and to comply with the “Terms and Conditions for operating a Shared Order Book” after being licensed. In another circular [3] , the SFC put forward some facilitating measures to the VATPs: (1) Token admission requirements the SFC allows Platform Operators to offer trading in virtual assets without a 12-month track record for professional investors and for Hong Kong Monetary Authority-licensed stablecoins. (2) Distribution of digital asset-related products and tokenized securities by VATPs In order to provide a broader range of services and products, the SFC proposes to amend the standard set of licensing conditions [4] to permit the VATPs to: (i) distribute digital asset-related products and tokenized securities in accordance with existing laws, codes, guidelines and regulations; (ii) open a trust account or client account by the VATP with the custodian of the digital asset-related product or tokenized security in the VATP’s name for holding assets on behalf of the clients. (3) Custody of tokens not traded on VATPs VATPs with intention to provide such services can apply for modification of the relevant licensing conditions. [1] The two circulars are: (1) Circular on shared liquidity by virtual asset trading platforms; (2) Circular on expansion of products and services of virtual asset trading platforms [2] Circular on shared liquidity by virtual asset trading platforms (2025.11.03) [3] Circular on expansion of products and services of virtual asset trading platforms (2025.11.03) [4] The revised licensing conditions are stated in the Appendices II and III of the Circular SIGNIFICANCE: It is a gradual realization of the ASPIRe roadmap, making a first step under Pillar A (Access) to reach out with global platforms. As Ms Julia Leung, the SFC’ s Chief Executive Officer, has said: “ Today, we take a significant step to connect with global liquidity , underscoring our commitment to striking a right balance in fostering market innovation and vitality while upholding high standards for investor protection and market integrity .” 3. SFC consults on the Chinese version of financial resources rule enhancements The SFC launched a public consultation on the Chinese version of the draft amendments to the Securities and Futures (Financial Resources) Rules (FRR). On 14 July 2025, the SFC published the English version of the draft FRR amendments for public consultation and the Chinese draft FRR amendments for public consultation was posted on 7 Nov 2025. SIGNIFICANCE: This is absolutely an unprecedented step by the SFC since the rules and guidelines in the FRR are not comprehensible to general readers particularly with the complex nature of calculation and classifications; a provision of Chinese version facilitates the relevant personnel with enhanced readability and comprehensibility of the FRR references. Market News 4. SFC unveils enhancement to facilitate client interaction under Cross-boundary Wealth Management Connect The SFC announced new enhancements to Cross-boundary Wealth Management Connect Pilot Scheme (“ Cross-boundary WMC ”) to develop closer communication between participating licensed corporations (“ Participating LCs ”) and their clients under the scheme which was published on 24 Jan 2024. For purpose of the new enhancements, the SFC set out anther circular on 13 Nov 2025 with the implementation details for client interaction, the key arrangements are : A Participating LC can now obtain one-off written consen t (valid for a year) from Southbound Scheme clients (“ SSC ”) who are not physically present in Hong Kong, thus the LC can explain the product information aligned with each client’ s needs and selected product categories; (noted: SSCs refers to Mainland investors who have open dedicated investment accounts with that LC and also have opened personal fund accounts with eligible Mainland brokers as remittance accounts under the scheme); Upon the request of the SSCs, a Mainland partner broker (i.e. a Mainland broker that has been confirmed by the relevant Mainland regulatory authorities as eligible to provide Cross-boundary WMC services) within the same corporate groups as the Participating LCs (“ Partner Brokers ”) can arrange online three-party dialogues with the Participating LCs at their respective places of business, where the Participating LCs can explain product information to their clients; With a one-off written consent as mentioned above from SSCs, Participating LCs can provide their clients with research reports on individual investment products prepared by their Partner Brokers; The enhanced arrangements above are also applicable to the Northbound Scheme. SIGNIFICANCE: As Ms Julia Leung, the SFC’s Chief Executive Officer, said, “ With enhanced communication and improved access to information, investors can be better informed when making investment decisions which would support the continuous and sustainable development of the Cross-boundary WMC. ” 5. SFC further streamlines measures for authorized EU-regulated retail funds to implement changes efficiently The SFC announced a series of streamlined post-authorisation measures for UCITS funds. UCITS funds means (i) Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities (UCITS) domiciled in France, Luxembourg, Ireland and the Netherlands, and (ii) collective investment schemes domiciled in the United Kingdom authorised as UK UCITS. In a circular to facilitate their implementation of change s that are in compliance with their home jurisdiction regulation. Recognising that UCITS funds offer robust investor protection commensurate with the standards of Hong Kong, the SFC considers further streamlining procedures can be adopted for facilitating UCITS funds in implementing changes that are subject to their home regulator’s supervision with immediate effect from 28 Nov 2025. KEY streamlined measures for UCITS funds covering the following post-authorization matters: (a) Change of key operators Prior approval from SFC is removed for changes of depository and investment delegates supervised under the fund’s home regulators; (b) Material changes in investment objectives, policies and restrictions Prior approval from SFC is removed for material changes in investment objectives, policies and restrictions which comply with the fund’s home jurisdiction requirements; (c) Post-authorization notifications To align the SFC’s notification requirements with the fund’s home jurisdiction requirements. For understanding of the latest measures in more details, the FAQs on SFC Authorization of UCITS Funds is available on SFC’s website. SIGNIFICANCE: As Ms Alexandra Yeong, the SFC’ s Interim Head of Investment Products, said, “ These enhancements are integral to the SFC’ s ongoing efforts to strengthen Hong Kong’ s competitiveness as a leading global asset management centre, enabling UCITS funds to operate efficiently in our dynamic market. ” Enforcement News - Intermediary 6. SFC Reprimands and Fines Tung Tai $900,000 for Failures to Safeguard Client Assets On 13 November 2025, the SFC reprimanded and fined Tung Tai Securities Company Limited (東泰證券有限公司) (“ Tung Tai ”) for regulatory breaches related to unauthorized sales of client securities and transfers of client funds. Case Details The SFC's investigation revealed that Tung Tai failed to adequately safeguard client assets after acting on instructions from a bogus email address impersonating an overseas limited partnership company client (the “ Client ”). Period Case Detail 13 February 2019 Authorised Person of the Client email directly to the accounting department of Tung Tai with instructions. Tung Tai executed the instruction without noticing the ROs. 6 September 2019 Two banks in Mexico and Canada rejected several telegraphic transfers processed by Tung Tai based on instructions from the bogus email address, serving as early red flags of potential irregularities. However, the ROs of Tung Tai executed the trades and approved telegraphic transfers to the * False Bank Account. *false bank account held by authorised person of the client, but not designated in the clients’ account opening form 6 September 2019 Tung Tai sold shares in the client's account and transferred the sale proceeds (US$3,301,740) via four telegraphic transfers to three false bank accounts in the United States, despite discrepancies in beneficiary addresses compared to account opening documents. Tung Tai did not respond to red flags, such as telegraphic transfer rejections by banks and discrepancies in beneficiary addresses, leading to the unauthorized transfer of sale proceeds to three overseas bank accounts not designated by the client. Additionally, Tung Tai lacked effective internal control procedures to prevent theft, fraud, or misappropriation of client assets. Enforcement Act The SFC reprimanded and fined Tung Tai HK$900,000 for regulatory breaches related to unauthorized sales of client securities and transfers of client funds. In determining the sanctions, the SFC considered the seriousness of the failures, Tung Tai's remedial actions, compensation to the client, cooperation with the investigation, and its clean prior disciplinary record. Tung Tai compensated the affected client, engaged independent reviewers to assess internal controls, and implemented remedial measures to enhance order placing and trading execution procedures. For more details of the case, please refer to STATEMENT OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION SIGNIFICANCE: This disciplinary action emphasizes the critical importance of robust internal controls and vigilance against fraud in safeguarding client assets within Hong Kong's securities industry. It serves as a reminder for all licensed corporations, including those with overlapping financial services, to implement effective procedures to detect and prevent unauthorized activities, thereby protecting investors and maintaining market integrity. 7. SFC Secures First Custodial Sentence Against Finfluencer for Provision of Paid Investment Advice on Social Media Chat Group Without Licence On 7 November 2025, the SFC secured a conviction against Mr CHAU Pak Yin (周柏賢) (“ CHAU ”), a finfluencer previously known as CHAU Kin Hei (前名周建希), in a criminal prosecution at the Eastern Magistrates’ Court. Case Details CHAU was found guilty of providing unlicensed investment advice through a subscription-based Telegram chat group he hosted, named “ Futu真。財自Private Group ” under his username “ Futu大股東 ”. During the relevant period, CHAU circulated commentaries, recommendations, and target prices on various securities, including responses to subscriber questions about Nasdaq-listed securities' performance. He charged a monthly subscription fee of US$200 or HK$1,560, earning a total of HK$43,680 from the group, which was open to public paid subscribers. Court Order This activity constituted "Type 4: advising on securities", a regulated activity under Schedule 5 of the SFO, and CHAU was charged under sections 114(1)(a) and 114(8) of the SFO for operating without an SFC licence. CHAU was sentenced to six weeks imprisonment and ordered to pay the SFC investigation costs. He was remanded in custody after his bail application was rejected, pending an appeal against the conviction and sentence. SFC Effort to Curb Activities of Unauthorised Finfluencers On 6 June 2025, the SFC issued a Press Release announcing its accession International Organization of Securities Commissions (“ IOSCO ”) efforts to combat unauthorized activities by financial influencers through a multi-pronged approach including supervisory actions, enforcement, and investor education. SIGNIFICANCE: Mr Michael Duignan, SFC’s Executive Director of Enforcement, emphasized the SFC’s commitment to tackling unlawful finfluencer activities and holding them accountable for unlicensed regulated activities. He warned that unlicensed finfluencers may not meet SFC standards, exposing investors to risks, and advised the public to verify licences via the SFC’s Public Register of Licensed Persons and Registered Institutions. This landmark case marks the SFC’s first custodial sentence against a finfluencer for unlicensed investment advice, highlighting the regulator’s intensified focus on social media and online platforms where such activities can proliferate. It serves as a strong deterrent to unlicensed individuals providing paid financial advice, reinforcing the need for proper licensing to ensure investor protection, accountability, and compliance with SFO standards. 8.SFC Bans Cheung Ngai Yi for Life Following Criminal Conviction for Theft of Client Assets On 5 November 2025, the SFC issued a lifetime ban on Mr. CHEUNG Ngai Yi (張藝議) (“ CHEUNG ”), a former relevant individual of Hang Seng Bank Limited (恒生銀行有限公司) (“ HSB ”), prohibiting him from re-entering the securities industry. Case Details The action follows CHEUNG's criminal conviction for theft, where he was found guilty of misappropriating client funds. The court established that CHEUNG misappropriated a total of HK$1,530,500 from a client's bank account through 88 unauthorized ATM withdrawals. This misconduct occurred over a period of approximately nine months, highlighting a pattern of repeated breaches of trust in handling client assets. Enforcement Act and Court Order In result, CHEUNG had been sentenced by the District Court to 30 months' imprisonment on 31 March 2025. Case No.: DCCC 425/2022 The SFC's investigation and subsequent ban were based on the determination that CHEUNG is not a fit and proper person to be registered or licensed due to his conviction, which involved dishonest conduct directly related to his regulated activities. SIGNIFICANCE: In imposing the ban, the SFC emphasized that CHEUNG's actions demonstrated a severe lack of integrity, which is fundamental to maintaining public confidence in the financial markets. This enforcement action reinforces the SFC's zero-tolerance policy toward misconduct involving client asset misappropriation, serving as a stark reminder to all licensed individuals and firms of the severe consequences for breaching ethical and regulatory standards. It underscores the importance of robust internal controls and ongoing vigilance in financial institutions to prevent theft and protect client interests, while deterring similar dishonest behaviour that could undermine the integrity of Hong Kong's securities industry. 9. SFC Commences Prosecution in Securities Fraud Case Involving Illegal Short Selling On 6 November 2025, the SFC commenced a prosecution in a securities fraud case involving illegal short selling. The SFC has initiated criminal proceedings against: Mr. CHAN Hoi Shing (陳海城) (“ CHAN ”); and Mr. LI Po Ching (李寶程) (“ LI ”) engaged in unauthorized short selling activities in the shares of certain companies, resulting in potential market distortions and illicit gains. Case Details CHEN and LI falsely claimed that CHEN held a sufficient number of shares in the 28 companies to support sell orders placed through CHEN's securities account at Black Marble Securities Limited (貝格隆証券有限公司), but this was not the fact. Consequently, the two were able to conduct illegal short selling transactions on the shares of the relevant companies and profit approximately HK$11 million. Adjourned Process The defendants did not enter a plea hearing on 6 November 2025, and the case was adjourned to 6 February 2026, for a further hearing. At that time, the prosecution will apply to transfer the case to the District Court. CHEN and LI were granted bail pending the next hearing. SIGNIFICANCE: This action demonstrates the SFC's ongoing vigilance in combating securities fraud and enforcing short selling rules to protect market integrity and investor interests in Hong Kong. It serves as a reminder for market participants to adhere strictly to regulatory requirements on short selling, as violations can lead to criminal charges, fines, and reputational damage. 10. SFC suspended Two Licensed Companies Linked to Prince Group (太子集團) The Prince Group (太子集團) founded by Chen Zhi (陳志), has been implicated in operating telecom fraud parks in Cambodia, with Chen Zhi facing US prosecution and sanctions, including the freezing of approximately HK$120 billion in Bitcoin assets. Suspended Licensed Companies According to the SFC website, two license companies Mighty Divine Investment Management Limited and Mighty Divine Securities Limited - entities linked to Prince Group, have had their licenses temporarily revoked. See below table for details: Last updated: 03 Nov 2025 These companies are noted as having " Licence suspended " and “Ceased business of regulated activities”, reflecting heightened regulatory measures in response to the ongoing investigations. Enforcement News - LISTCO 11. Director of Hong Kong-based LISCO FSM Holdings (01721.HK) resigns amid Cambodian crime allegations Linked to the Prince Group (太子集團) The Prince Group (太子集團) founded by Chen Zhi (陳志), has been implicated in operating telecom fraud parks in Cambodia, with Chen Zhi facing US prosecution and sanctions, including the freezing of approximately HK$120 billion in Bitcoin assets. Update news of Hong Kong-Listed Companies related to Chen Zhi Movements in two Hong Kong-listed companies controlled by Chen Zhi: · Geotech Holdings Ltd. (致浩達控股) ( 01707.HK ); and · Khoon Group Ltd. (坤集團) ( 00924.HK ); have attracted significant market attention following the exposure of the fraud allegations. LI Thet (李添), chairman of FSM Holdings ( 01721.HK ), has resigned after being connected to Chen Zhi. Li Thet, Prince Group's CFO, was also sanctioned, accused of overseeing Prince Group's money laundering, and large-scale cash smuggling. U.S. relevant documents did not list out any connection between LI Thet and Hong Kong List-CO, until FSM Holdings issued a statement announcing LI Thet's resignation as chairman and executive director, revealing a third listed company. ( See Sanction and Registration of Executive Directors: 2025-10-21 ) 12. SFC Seeks Court Orders to Disqualify Former Directors of China Longevity (1864.HK) for Financial Misstatements and Disclosure Failures On 31 October 2025, the SFC initiated proceedings to seek disqualification orders against three former executive directors of China Longevity Group Company Limited, formerly known as Sijia Group Company Limited (中國龍天集團有限公司, 前稱思嘉集團有限公司) (* 1864.HK ) (“ China Longevity ”). *trading in shares of China Longevity has been suspended since 4 December 2014 The three former directors of China Longevity named in the proceedings are: Mr Lin Shengxiong (林生雄) former Chairman and Executive Director Mr Zhang Hongwang (張宏旺) Executive Directors. Mr Huang Wanneng (黃萬能) Executive Directors. Case Details The action stems from the SFC's investigation, which uncovered material overstatements in the China Longevity's cash and cash equivalents, leading to misrepresentations in key financial reports. Specifically: As of 31 December 2011, China Longevity materially overstated cash and cash equivalents by RMB198.9 million, representing 13.6% of net assets. As of 30 June 2012, China Longevity materially overstated cash and cash equivalents by RMB302.4 million, representing 19.9% of net assets. These inaccuracies resulted in material misrepresentations in the China Longevity's 2011 annual report, 2012 annual report, and 2012 interim report. Additionally, the directors failed to ensure timely disclosure of the overstatements and related audit irregularities identified by the China Longevity's auditors, exacerbating the misconduct. Petition Filing and Service Proceedings The SFC filed the Petition on 25 November 2022 against the three former directors (all located in PRC) and obtained leave from the Court of First Instance to serve the Petition on them out of the jurisdiction on 28 April 2023. Judicial assistance was sought in the Mainland to effect service of the Petition on the former directors. The first direction hearing was held on 30 October 2025 and the next case management conference is scheduled for 25 February 2026. SIGNIFICANCE: This enforcement action underscores the SFC's commitment to holding corporate directors accountable for financial reporting integrity and timely disclosures, which are essential for maintaining investor confidence in Hong Kong's capital markets. It highlights the risks of disqualification for executives involved in such breaches, serving as a deterrent against similar misconduct in listed companies and reinforcing regulatory oversight in the financial sector. [End of ComplianceOne Newsletter – November 2025] For more details, please click on the title of the topic above. ================================= ~ Make It Right Today, Better Tomorrow ~ ================================= The Newsletter is for general information purpose only and is not intended to constitute legal or other professional advice. For enquiries, please email to support@complianceone.hk or WhatsApp us at (852) 95164607 . Unit 1104, 11/F, 299QRC, 287-299 Queen's Road Central, Sheung Wan, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 39550277 www.complianceone.hk

Use of generative AI language models Compliance Impact Alert: Use of generative AI language models Dec 2024 Disclaimer: Contents contained in this document including should not be regarded as a substitute legal and / or compliance advice in any circumstances and shall not be reproduced (in whole or in part), distributed or otherwise passed on to any other person without our prior written consent. Language: English version only Executive Summary On 12 November 2024, the Securities and Futures Commission (“SFC”) issued a circular addressing the risks associated with generative AI language models (“AI LMs”) for licensed corporations (“LCs”). The SFC mandates enhanced cybersecurity protocols and responsible use of AI LMs to mitigate risks such as output quality issues, data management vulnerabilities, and reliance on external providers. LCs must implement robust policies, conduct thorough testing, and ensure compliance with regulatory standards. Actions and Recommendations Review Existing AI Implementations Assess current AI systems for compliance gaps and plan corrective actions. Develop AI Risk Assessment Frameworks Create frameworks to identify high-risk applications and mitigation strategies. Implement Enhanced Monitoring and Validation Regularly evaluate AI model performance and check for biases or inaccuracies. Staff Training Educate employees on new AI governance requirements and ethical AI use. Update Third-Party AI Provider Agreements Ensure agreements meet regulatory expectations, focusing on data handling and compliance. How We Can Help Our team comprises experienced professionals with deep expertise in compliance, risk management, and policy review and development in identifying gaps between the regulatory expectations in the circular and your current policies and procedures. 1. Continuous Support: Stay ahead of regulatory changes with our continuous monitoring and updates, ensuring that you are always in compliance. 2. Gap Analysis: Identify gaps between regulatory expectations and your current policies. 3. Develop Tailored Solutions: Create solutions to meet specific needs and close material gaps. 4. Ensure Adherence: Maintain compliance with regulatory standards and enhance overall compliance practices. For any inquiries, please refer to our Ongoing Compliance Support Service or feel free to Contact us .

The topics discussed in this monthly newsletter are as follows: ComplianceOne Newsletter – June 2025 The topics discussed in this monthly newsletter are as follows: REGULATORY UPDATES A tour of recent developments of the VA Regulatory Regime in Hong Kong SFC joins global regulatory effort to curb activities of unauthorised finfluencers Rumour of mainland’s crackdown on illegal cross-border accounts opening: more Hong Kong brokers tighten onboarding rules The Government welcomed the passage of the Banking (Amendment) Bill 2025 to share information of suspicious accounts SFC proposes to further restrict use of misleading names to enhance investor protection MARKET NEWS SFC released the 2024-25 Annual Report ENFORCEMENT NEWS SFC issues restriction notice to GA (Int'l) Capital Management Limited and conducts search operation SFC suspends Pun Hong Hai for supervisory failures SFC bans WONG Lai Suen for failure in managing credit risks and detecting suspicious trading activities SFC suspends Hadiee CHUI Lai Chun for undisclosed personal trading account SFC reaches first settlement of its kind to compensate public shareholders of Combest Holdings Limited SFC bans LAW Man Wai for market manipulation Regulatory Updates 1. A tour of recent developments of the VA Regulatory Regime in Hong Kong Recent Developments (1) Hong Kong Expands Crypto Market with Derivative Trading for Professional Investors The SFC is ready to introduce virtual asset derivatives trading for professional investors as part of its efforts to increase product diversity and reinforce robust risk controls. The move is part of Hong Kong's drive to enhance its competitiveness in the global digital asset market. With this in mind, the SFC will focus on robust risk management measures to ensure orderly, transparent, and secure trading. The proposed product is designed to facilitate efficient risk transfers, increase liquidity in spot markets where cryptocurrencies area traded instantly, and assist experienced investors in implementing their hedging and leveraging strategies. The Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau is preparing a second policy statement on virtual assets, exploring how to harness traditional financial services and emerging technologies to drive growth in the VA market. More encouraging, virtual assets will be classified as qualifying transactions under Hong Kong's preferential tax regimes to attract international fintech players. (2) Second policy statement on development of digital assets issued to scale Hong Kong to new heights of global digital asset leadership On 26 June 2025, the HKSAR Government issued its long-awaited Policy Statement 2.0 on the Development of Digital Assets in Hong Kong, reinforcing its commitment to establishing Hong Kong as a global hub for innovation in the digital asset (DA) field; built upon the foundational measures outlined in its initial policy statement in October 2022. The Policy Statement 2.0 sets out a vision for a trusted and innovative DA ecosystem that prioritizes risk management and investor protection; the latest statement introduces the main theme of “ LEAP ” framework with focuses on: Legal and regulatory streamlining : The government is establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework for DA service providers, including DA exchanges, stablecoins issuers, DA dealing service providers, and DA custodian service providers. Expanding the suite of tokenised products : The government will regularize the issuance of tokenised Government bonds and incentivize the tokenisation of RWAs to enhance liquidity and accessibility. Advancing use cases and cross-sectoral collaboration : The government is fostering collaboration among regulators, law enforcement agencies, and technology providers for the development of DA infrastructures. People and partnership development : The government is strengthening talent development through partnerships with industry and academia, positioning Hong Kong as a centre of excellence for DA knowledge-sharing and international cooperation. (3) Next move is to seek opinion from market practitioners. Starting with the first “ Public Consultation on Legislative Proposal to Regulate Dealing in Virtual Assets ” (a non-exhaustive extract) (1) Scope and coverage : any person who conducted a business in providing services of spot trade of any VAs in Hong Kong will need to be licensed (2) Business types and Business models: a) simple dealing; b) more complex dealing services; c) all other VA dealing services. (3) Exemptions: a) stablecoin issuers who (i) are licensed by the HKMA and (ii) conduct offering or redemption of the stablecoins they issue in the primary market; b) peer-to-peer trading of VAs between individuals where no intermediary is involved. (4) Regulatory Requirements: a) VA dealing service providers that fall within the scope will need to be licensed or registered; b) The SFC will set out standards of the requirements. (5) Regulatory Principle: a) taking the “same activity, same risks, same regulation” principle, taking reference from the VATP licensing regime. (6) Eligibility: a) A HK company with two ROs with sufficient financial resources such as HKD5M as minimum paid-up capital or HKD3M as minimum required liquid capital; b) A licensee or registrant will have to set up a token admission and review committee establishing, implementing and enforcing the criteria for any VA to be made available for/withdrawn from trading; c) deposits/withdrawals of clients’ VAs to/from the licensees’ wallet addresses; d) Investor Protection: assessing clients’ VA knowledge, risk profiling, position limits etc. (7) Licensing Matters: no deeming arrangement to the pre-existing VA dealing service providers. (8) Powers of the Regulatory Authorities: the SFC still being the licensing and registration authority, and be empowered to impose licensing and registration conditions. (9) Sanctions: to achieve the necessary deterrent effect and to ensure regulatory parity among different regimes relating to VA activities (10) Public Consultation. (4) Then come with the next round for “ Public Consultation on Legislative Proposal to Regulate Virtual Asset Custodian Services ” (a non-exhaustive extract) (1) Definition: the provision of VA custodian service as a business is proposed to be defined as: by way of business, the safekeeping of (i) VAs on behalf of clients; or (ii) instruments enabling transfer of VAs of clients (including but not limited to private keys) on behalf of clients. (2) Incidental Exemption for SFC or HKMA regulated entities where the safekeeping of client VAs is wholly incidental to the principal business of providing the VA service. (3) Examples of VA Custodian like associated entities of SFC-licensed VATPs or banks, licensed or registered fund managers etc. (4) Eligibility: a regime similar to Type 13 regulated activity. (5) Licensing Issues: no deeming arrangement to the pre-existing VA Custodian. (6) Powers of the Regulatory Authorities: the SFC still being the licensing and registration authority, and be empowered to impose licensing and registration conditions. (7) Sanctions: to achieve the necessary deterrent effect and to ensure regulatory parity among different regimes relating to VA activities. (8) Public Consultation. Active participations from market participants (5) GF Securities (Hong Kong) issued its first tokenised securities - HashKey Chain announced that GF Securities (Hong Kong) Brokerage Limited (“ GFS ”) as the first brokerage firm to issue tokenized securities in Hong Kong, has now fully integrated with HashKey Chain as the core on-chain issuance network, and has launched the first daily redeemable tokenized security ,"GF Token". High-net-worth individual professional investors and institutional professional investors can participate in subscription and trading. "GF Token" is a tokenized security issued by GFS based on its credit rating support where the issuance to investors includes three currencies: USD, HKD, and CNH. Among them, the yield of the US dollar tokenized securities is anchored to the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”), providing users with a fair, transparent, and low-volatility cash management tool denominated in USD. HashKey Group Chairman Xiao Feng stated that the on-chain integration of Real-World Assets (RWA) requires genuine two-way integration between financial institutions and blockchain technology platforms, and the release of the "GF Token" materialized this concept. 2. SFC joins global regulatory effort to curb activities of unauthorised finfluencers The SFC is joining regulators across the globe to curb activities of unlawful financial influencers (“ finfluencers ”) who are putting millions of social media users at risk by touting financial products or services illegally. To achieve this aim, the SFC and the other members of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (“ IOSCO ”) are participating in the “Global Week of Action Against Unlawful Finfluencers” during the week of 2 June 2025. This initiative involves regulators using a combination of supervisory and enforcement powers to disrupt illegal activities of finfluencers, coupled with educational schemes and consumer awareness programmes. Some key takeaways are: A) SFC’s supervisory actions assess securities brokers’ compliance with applicable regulatory requirements when engaging finfluencers and digital platforms; review selected securities brokers’ due diligence of the finfluencers and digital platforms to ensure that these media are not involved in any unlicensed activities or improper practices; issue guidance to licensed corporations outlining expected standards when engaging finfluencers and digital platforms. B) SFC’s enforcement actions suspend the licence of a finfluencer who was criminally convicted for providing investment advice via a chat group beyond the scope of his licence; commence criminal prosecution against a finfluencer for unlicensed regulated activities; take a pro-active role to press the overseas VATP to terminate affiliate arrangements with finfluencers thus preventing them from marketing to local public; engage with social media platforms to remove social media posts and profiles impersonating public figures and promoting unauthorised investment products. C) Investor education warn the public about scammers impersonating or posing as finfluencers on social media through its Alert List system; encourage the public to utilise IOSCO’s newly revamped global warning system, the International Securities & Commodities Alerts Network (“ I-SCAN ’); make use of its ongoing “Don't be Sucker” anti-scam publicity campaign to arouse awareness of the public against finfluencers-related pitfalls and other common investment scam tactics. SIGNIFICANCE: As Julia Leung, the SFC’s Chief Executive Officer, said: “ As part of our education efforts, we must emphasise the importance of personal responsibility . Investors should serve as their own first line of defence by verifying the regulatory status and trustworthiness of the finfluencers, critically evaluating any investment ideas from them, and conducting thorough due diligence on any prospective investments before committing ”. 3. Rumour of mainland’s crackdown on illegal cross-border accounts opening: more Hong Kong brokers tighten onboarding rules Media reports in China indicate that regulatory efforts to curb mainland residents’ unauthorized use of Hong Kong accounts for cross-border investments are intensifying. Following the responses by Futu Securities International (Hong Kong) Limited and Tiger Brokers (HK) Global Limited , many Hong Kong-based securities firms—including Long Bridge HK Limited and Valuable Capital Limited —are tightening the account-opening requirements for clients originated from mainland since June. Media indicated that some brokers have already done away with the previously accepted method of using " proofs of existing accounts " (存量證明, “ PEA ”) for onboarding. Instead, mainland clients must now provide proof of cross-border residence or employment, such as utility bills or rental agreements. This explicitly strangles the flexibility that allowed mainland investors to indirectly open securities accounts in Hong Kong through loopholes. The PEA methodology had permitted mainland investors to open Hong Kong or U.S. securities accounts by verifying ownership of another already existing overseas securities account. With its removal replaced with the new “proof of life & work”, the requirement substantially raises barriers for mainland residents seeking to open new trading accounts in Hong Kong, explicitly cutting off any channels for those investors permanently residing in mainland China. The report quoted a number of Hong Kong brokerages as saying that the closure of mainland residents' account opening was carried out under the guidance of mainland regulators, and the relevant requirements were effected about three days ago, when several brokerages received a unified regulatory order restricting mainland residents from opening accounts in Hong Kong. 4. The Government welcomed the passage of the Banking (Amendment) Bill 2025 to share information of suspicious accounts Passage of the Banking (“ Amendment ”) Bill 2025 by the Legislative Council on 4 June helps facilitate the sharing of account information among banks under specified conditions to enhance the efficiency in detecting and preventing crime in Hong Kong. With the Amendment Ordinance:- a voluntary mechanism is in place for banks and relevant law enforcement agencies to share with each other, via electronic means, information of corporate and individual accounts through secure platforms designated by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (“ HKMA ”), when banks become aware of suspected prohibited conduct (i.e. money laundering, terrorist financing or financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction); legal protection provided for banks that disclose the relevant information; banks and relevant law enforcement agencies are enabled to act swiftly to intercept illicit funds and expedite intelligence gathering, thus providing better protection to the public. SIGNIFICANCE: As the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr Christopher Hui, said, " The new mechanism not only enhances Hong Kong's ability to combat fraud and associated money laundering activities , providing better protection for citizens, but also helps maintain the stability of Hong Kong's banking system and showcases the efforts made by Hong Kong, as an international financial centre, in international collaborations to combat relevant illegal activities. " And the Chief Executive of the HKMA, Mr Eddie Yue, said, " The new information sharing mechanism will further enhance the ability of the banks to detect and prevent fraud and other financial crime . The HKMA will continue to work closely with the Hong Kong Police Force and the banking sector to take forward the preparation work, including the upgrade of systems and formulation of practical guidelines, with a view to implementing the new mechanism as soon as practicable. " 5. SFC proposes to further restrict use of misleading names to enhance investor protection On 12 June 2025, the SFC launched a consultation aimed at restricting unregulated entities from improperly adopting names that may give the public a false impression that they are regulated entities. Some key points of the proposal: to cater for recent developments, including the emergence of virtual asset trading platforms (VATPs), the SFC proposes expanding the current list of restricted titles under the Securities and Futures Ordinance (SFO) which currently sets out a list of names that cannot be adopted except with the SFC's approval (e.g. "stock exchange" and "commodity exchange"); the aim of it is to ensure that businesses and operations do not adopt names that may mislead the public into believing they are regulated by the SFC when in fact they are not; to include similar restrictions under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (AMLO). The rationale is that VATPs that carry on business in Hong Kong , or actively market their services to Hong Kong investors, are required to be licensed and regulated by the SFC . The SFO regulates VATPs providing services for virtual assets that also constitute securities or futures contract s, while the AMLO regulates VATPs offering services for virtual assets that do NOT constitute securities or futures contracts; extend the restrictions to commonly used terms that are similar in meaning to “exchange” (e.g. “trading platform”) and those that refer to some of the financial products and platforms regulated under the SFO; some titles that may imply an association with established exchanges, VATPs and other similar entities are also covered under the restriction. SIGNIFICANCE: The proposed restriction is conducive in stifling the use of misleading name in the disguise of any publicly known entity for deceiving the public and conveying any fraudulent message of its legitimacy. Market News 6. SFC released the 2024-25 Annual Report Hong Kong's capital markets are experiencing a renaissance, driven by cutting-edge innovation and strengthened global ties. The SFC Annual Report 2024-25, released on 25 June 2025, paints a picture of a vibrant financial hub that's embracing the future while solidifying its position as a global leader. Innovation at the Forefront Hong Kong is rapidly evolving into a future-ready financial hub, leading the charge in virtual assets and securities tokenization. Virtual assets, such as cryptocurrencies, and tokenized securities are making markets more efficient and accessible. Last quarter (Q1 2025), it authorized the Asia-Pacific’s first batch of three tokenized money market funds for retail access[1], with total assets under management reaching HKD$736 million by March 2025. Under the SFC’s "ASPIRe" roadmap : Two virtual asset ETFs were permitted to engage in staking (earning rewards by holding certain cryptocurrencies), making them the first-of- their-kind in the Asia-Pacific region. The six Hong Kong-listed virtual asset spot ETFs have also seen their total market capitalization surge 95% since April 2024, with daily turnover rising 16%. Additionally, the SFC has licensed 11 virtual asset trading platforms, cementing Hong Kong’s role as a digital finance hub. Strengthening Global Connectivity Hong Kong’s global ties have deepened, particularly with Mainland China and the Middle East. The Stock Connect scheme has been a standout success, with cumulative southbound inflows exceeding $4.35 trillion by May 2025, and southbound trading now accounting for 22.5% of Hong Kong’s market turnover. New partnerships with the Middle East are thriving. Two Hong Kong ETFs cross-listed on the Saudi Exchange have become the largest there, boasting a market capitalization of $14.5 billion (US$1.86 billion) as of May 2025. Asia’s first Saudi ETF, listed in Hong Kong since late 2023, has seen its feeder ETFs on Mainland exchanges contribute 17% to its market cap since mid-2024. These milestones highlight Hong Kong’s growing role as Asia’s premier capital intermediary. Other Noteworthy Highlights Enforcement & Protection: The SFC secured landmark rulings, including the longest prison sentences for market manipulation and a historic settlement for Combest Holdings Limited shareholders, reinforcing market integrity. Anti-Scam Efforts : The “Don’t Be Sucker” campaign expanded via MTR commercials and TV, garnering over 1.6 million views to protect investors. Sustainability: The SFC halved its carbon emissions from the baseline, hitting its interim target five years early, showcasing its green commitment.[2] SIGNIFICANCE: The SFC’s leadership has been instrumental. Chairman Dr. Kelvin Wong emphasized, “ Our role as an effective regulator is to ensure Hong Kong remains a cornerstone of global finance, where capital flows efficiently, innovation thrives, and fairness builds trust .” CEO Ms. Julia Leung added, “ Hong Kong’s long-term success hinges on strengthening our core competence as a premier fund-raising and asset management hub and capitalizing on transformative global forces .” The numbers speak for themselves. Since April 2024, 64 Mainland enterprises have listed in Hong Kong, raising over $100 billion through IPOs. The total market capitalization of ETFs and leveraged and inverse products hit a record $520 billion, up 35% year-on-year, comprising 15% of market turnover. The SFC, collaborating with HKEX, has also slashed the average response time for new listing applications to 20 business days, boosting efficiency. [1] These include the introduction of tokenised classes to existing SFC-authorised money market funds. The AUM represents that of their tokenised classes. [2] SFC announces carbon neutrality commitment : SFC has set the interim goal of halving its carbon emissions by 2030 and ultimate goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. Enforcement News 7. SFC issues restriction notice to GA (Int'l) Capital Management Limited and conducts search operation On 6 June 2025, the SFC took decisive action against GA (Int'l) Capital Management Limited (“ GCML ”) due to concerns about its reliability, integrity, and ability to carry out its regulated activities (i.e. RA 4 & 9[1]) competently, honestly, and fairly. This has led the SFC to question GCML's fitness and properness to remain a licensed entity. The SFC issued a restriction notice to GCML, imposing the following prohibitions: GCML cannot carry on any of its licensed regulated activities without prior written consent from the SFC. GCML is barred from disposing of or dealing with any relevant property, except for paying operational expenses in the ordinary course of business. Such actions require prior written notification to the SFC and their consent. SIGNIFICANCE: In addition to the restriction notice, the SFC conducted a search operation on June 6, 2025, which included searching the premises occupied by GCML’s responsible officer. This step underscores the seriousness of the ongoing investigation. These measures are designed to protect the investing public and maintain market integrity, reflecting the SFC's assessment of the situation's severity. The SFC has emphasized that the investigation remains active, and no further comments will be provided at this stage. [1] RA4 : Type 4 Advising on securities; RA9 : Type 9 Asset management 8. SFC suspends Pun Hong Hai for supervisory failures The SFC has suspended Mr. PUN Hong Hai (“ PUN ”), a former responsible officer and chief executive officer of Freeman Commodities Limited, for 10 months, from 11 June 2025, to 10 April 2026. This disciplinary action stems from supervisory failures identified during an investigation into his oversight of the company’s operations between June 2017 and December 2018. Key Findings PUN failed to ensure Freeman Commodities Limited upheld appropriate standards of conduct and adhered to proper procedures during his tenure: PUN inadequately managed risks tied to the company’s use of customer supplied systems (CSSs) for client order placements. PUN did not sufficiently oversee suspicious money movements and trading patterns in client accounts over the specified period. SIGNIFICANCE: The SFC’s suspension of PUN reinforces its firm stance on accountability among senior management in licensed corporations. By imposing this 10-month penalty, the regulator sends a clear message about the necessity of diligent supervision and robust risk management practices. 9. SFC bans WONG Lai Suen for failure in managing credit risks and detecting suspicious trading activities The SFC has imposed a six-month industry ban on Ms. WONG Lai Suen (“ WONG ”), former responsible officer (“ RO ”) and executive director of MTF Securities Limited (“ MTF ”), effective from 4 June to 3 December 2025. This disciplinary action stems from significant lapses in managing credit risks and detecting suspicious trading activities at MTF. Case Overview & Key Findings MTF’s clients executed transactions vastly disproportionate to their financial profiles, displaying red flags suggestive of market misconduct and money laundering, with one client’s limit even reaching ten times his declared annual income. MTF failed to flag these activities as suspicious, investigate further, or report them promptly to the Joint Financial Intelligence Unit and the SFC. The SFC concluded that MTF lacked robust policies for credit risk management and monitoring suspicious trading, breaching the Code of Conduct and other regulatory standards. These shortcomings were pinned on WONG, who, as a RO and senior manager, failed to uphold her duties. SIGNIFICANCE: Christopher Wilson, SFC’s Executive Director of Enforcement, underscored the importance of accountability: " Senior management of a licensed corporation must not blindly follow marching orders from the firm’s shareholders or controllers. When faced with an unusual or suspicious request, the ROs should exercise independent judgment and, where appropriate, conduct proper due diligence before acting on the request. " He also added: " It is the duty of ROs and senior management to ensure that effective policies and controls are in place to prevent the firm from being used to facilitate wrongdoing, including market misconduct and money laundering. " 10. SFC suspends Hadiee CHUI Lai Chun for undisclosed personal trading account The SFC has suspended Ms. Hadiee CHUI Lai Chun (“ CHUI ”), a licensed representative of Rifa Securities Limited (“ Rifa ”), for seven months from 13 June 2025, to 12 January 2026. This disciplinary action follows an SFC investigation into her conduct between September 2018 and September 2021. Case Overview & Key Findings During this period, CHUI maintained a personal securities trading account at another brokerage firm without disclosing it to Rifa, her employer. CHUI conducted 20 personal trades through this undisclosed account without obtaining prior approval from any responsible officer of Rifa. Furthermore, CHUI failed to report these trades or provide the relevant trade confirmations and statements of account to Rifa. The SFC considers CHUI’s actions wilful and dishonest, raising serious concerns about her fitness and properness to remain a licensed person. By failing to disclose her trading account and conducting unauthorized trades, she undermined Rifa’s ability to oversee her activities, potentially jeopardizing the firm and its clients. SIGNIFICANCE: In imposing the seven-month suspension, the SFC took into account: The duration of her breaches, spanning approximately three years. Her cooperation in resolving the SFC’s concerns. Her otherwise clean disciplinary record. This sanction balances the severity of her misconduct with these mitigating factors. This case highlights the critical need for transparency and compliance with regulatory and company policies among licensed persons. Failing to disclose personal trading activities can lead to significant consequences, including suspension or loss of licensure. Licensed individuals must uphold their obligations to safeguard the integrity of the financial markets and maintain public trust. 11. SFC reaches first settlement of its kind to compensate public shareholders of Combest Holdings Limited On 2 June 2025, the SFC has obtained a groundbreaking court decision in the Court of First Instance, ordering former senior executives of Combest Holdings Limited (“ Combest ”) (HKEX: 08190) to pay $192 million in compensation to shareholders. This ruling also includes disqualification orders against a shadow director[1] and two former executive directors for their misconduct, please refer to: SFC’s press release dated 21 May 2020 . SFC’s press release dated 16 September 2024 . Case Overview The SFC’s investigation revealed that between 2016 and 2019, the shadow director - Mr. NG Kwok Fai (“ NG ”) and two former executive directors - Mr. LIU Tin Lap and Mr. LEE Man To in serious financial misconduct, including: Overvaluing two subsidiary group acquisitions by $229 million. Paying $64 million in fictitious loan interests and fees to entities linked to NG. Artificially inflating Combest’s revenue through transactions with NG-related entities. These actions misled shareholders and misrepresented the company’s financial position, ultimately harming independent public shareholders of the now-delisted company. [1] Shadow Director: someone who isn't officially appointed as a director of a company but exerts significant influence over its decisions, effectively acting as a director without the formal title. Court Orders The Court of First Instance delivered the following rulings: Name Roles Disqualifications Court Orders Mr. NG Kwok Fai Shadow Director Disqualified for 12 years, reflecting the severity of his misconduct. Compensation The trio must pay $192 million, to be redistributed as special dividends to independent public shareholders. Legal Cost The former executives were ordered to cover the SFC’s legal costs. Mr. LIU Tin Lap Executive Director Each disqualified for 8 years for knowingly assisting Ng. Compensation The trio must pay $192 million, to be redistributed as special dividends to independent public shareholders. Legal Cost The former executives were ordered to cover the SFC’s legal costs. Mr. LEE Man To Executive Director Each disqualified for 8 years for knowingly assisting Ng. Compensation The trio must pay $192 million, to be redistributed as special dividends to independent public shareholders. Legal Cost The former executives were ordered to cover the SFC’s legal costs. The disqualification periods bar them from serving as directors, liquidators, receivers, or managers, or being involved in the management of any corporation. Compensation Scheme Details (First-of-its-kind settlement in Hong Kong) In an innovative settlement, the $192 million compensation will be administered by Bruno Arboit of Kroll (HK) Limited, jointly appointed by the SFC and Combest. Enhanced Payouts: Two major shareholders (holding 24.4% of Combest) forfeited their entitlements, boosting independent shareholders’ dividends by 32.3%. Per-Share Amount: Eligible shareholders will receive $0.066 per share—2.75 times higher than Combest’s last closing price before its suspension on 29 May 2019. Distribution Process: Payments will be based on shareholdings as of the date the funds are deposited into the administrator’s account. The administrator will contact eligible shareholders directly. For inquiries, reach out to: Email: DL.combestholdingslimited@kroll.com Hotline: (852) 2281 0108 SIGNIFICANCE: SFC Chief Executive Officer Ms. Julia Leung highlighted the ruling’s significance: “ This court decision underscores the SFC’s power to hold de facto controllers of listed companies accountable for their misconducts, ensuring they face repercussions for their wrongdoings. The provision of direct compensation to affected shareholders marks a pioneering step, demonstrating the SFC’s unwavering devotion to exploring all avenues to achieve the most fair and efficient resolutions to protect the investing public .” This case sets a powerful precedent, reinforcing accountability for corporate misconduct and introducing a direct compensation model that prioritizes affected investors. Case Reference: HCCW 118/2020 12. SFC bans LAW Man Wai for market manipulation The SFC has banned Mr. LAW Man Wai (“ LAW ”), a former licensed representative of Cinda International Securities Limited (“ CISL ”), from re-entering the industry for three years, from 19 June 2025, to 18 June 2028. This action stems from an SFC investigation into his activities between March and September 2023. Background LAW, who was licensed to conduct RA 1 (dealing in securities) from 26 March 2020, to 8 June 2024, used accounts belonging to his sister and a friend for personal trading. These accounts were held at CISL and another brokerage. During the specified period, he executed 109 matched trades[1] or wash trades[2] across nine stocks, involving his own CISL account and those of his sister and friend. His goal was to avoid forced liquidation due to potential margin calls, disregarding the trades' impact on stock prices or trading volumes. Key Findings LAW deliberately hid his beneficial interests and personal trades in these accounts, breaching CISL’s staff dealing policy. LAW used CISL’s recorded telephone line to confirm trades with his sister and friend, submitting signed order records that falsely suggested the orders came from them. Additionally, LAW impersonated his friend to place orders for the friend’s account at another brokerage, keeping his involvement hidden from that firm. The SFC determined that LAW’s actions were dishonest, casting significant doubt on his fitness and properness to remain a licensed individual. However, the SFC noted a lack of evidence showing manipulative intent behind the trades and considered his previously clean disciplinary record when determining the three-year ban. SIGNIFICANCE: This case highlights the critical need for licensed representatives to follow regulatory and internal policies on personal trading and account usage. Unauthorized trading and concealment of interests can result in severe penalties, such as extended industry bans. Transparency and integrity are essential for maintaining trust in the financial markets. [1] Matched Trade: A trade where a person sells securities at a price nearly identical to their (or an associate’s) buy offer, creating an artificial market appearance. [2] Wash Trade: A trade with no change in beneficial ownership, effectively a self-transaction. [End of ComplianceOne Newsletter – June 2025] For more details, please click on the title of the topic above. ================================= ~ Make It Right Today, Better Tomorrow ~ ================================= The Newsletter is for general information purpose only and is not intended to constitute legal or other professional advice. For enquiries, please email to support@complianceone.hk or WhatsApp us at (852) 95164607 . Unit 1104, 11/F, 299QRC, 287-299 Queen's Road Central, Sheung Wan, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 39550277 www.complianceone.hk

解讀香港 SFC 期貨合約交易持牌人風險管理指引！天匯合規協助第 2 類持牌法團建立流動性風險控管、保證金追繳機制與交易監控政策，確保營運合規。 登入 首頁 關於我們 關於我們 專業團隊 關於我們 專業團隊 服務範圍 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 牌照轉讓 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 牌照轉讓 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 加入我們 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 參考資料 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 市場資訊 聯絡我們 監管合規 公司秘書及企業服務 合規科技系統 牌照公司轉讓 審計與內部監控 人力資源服務 Menu Close Add a Title hi complianceone 1. 2. 3. 3 xxxxxxxxx 2 A. 1. 2. B. C 1 (1) ..... (2)....... (3)....... Add a Title Add a Title Add a Title Add a Title Add a Title Add a Title Add a Title Add a Title Add a Title

涉及現金交易超過 12 萬港元？天匯合規提供一站式貴金屬及寶石交易商 B 類註冊顧問服務，協助建立客戶盡職審查 (CDD) 與內部監控體系，輕鬆符合海關合規要求。 香港上環干諾道中168-200號 信德中心西座16樓1605室 電話：+852 3955 0277 電郵：info@complianceone.hk 繁 ｜簡 ｜EN 登入 首頁 關於我們 關於我們 專業團隊 關於我們 專業團隊 服務範圍 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 加入我們 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 參考資料 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 市場資訊 聯絡我們 訂閲我們 Menu Close 香港貴金屬及寶石交易商（DPMS）前線員工合規培訓與審計 本文章專為香港貴金屬及寶石交易商（Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones, DPMS）高層管理人員、合規主任 (CO)、洗錢報告主任 (MLRO)及審計 (Audit)，深入剖析貴金屬及寶石交易商在《打擊洗錢及恐怖分子資金籌集條例，第615章》（AMLO）規範下，如何透過建構第一道防線 - 前線培訓 (Training)與第三道防線 - 審計，建立具備應對香港海關（Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department，C&ED）合規查核能力的打擊洗錢與恐怖分子資金籌集（AML／CFT）營運體系。 一、 防線構建：三道防線模型在貴金屬及寶石交易商的應用 根據香港海關發佈的打擊洗錢及恐怖分子資金籌集指引 (從事貴金屬及寶石交易的B類註冊人適用) 與財務行動特別組織（FATF）的《40 條建議》，B類註冊人必須建立明確的內部控制架構。 貴金屬及寶石交易商打擊洗錢三道防線架構 防線階層 Lines of Defense 核心執行人員 Key Personnel 法定合規職責 Compliance Duties 第一道防線 (1st Line) 前線銷售、門市收銀員、客戶服務代表 執行客戶盡職審查 (CDD)、識別 12 萬港元現金「拆單」及異常交易紅旗指標。 第二道防線 (2nd Line) 合規主任 (CO) 與 洗錢報告主任(MLRO) 制定內部 AML/CFT 政策、審批高風險交易，並向聯合財富情報組 (JFIU) 提交可疑交易報告(STR)。 第三道防線 (3rd Line) 內部審計 (Internal Audit) / 第三方獨立顧問 定期客觀評估內控有效性、抽查前線執行率，並直接向董事會報告系統缺失。 二、 第一道防線：前線員工合規培訓實務 前線員工是識別洗錢風險的第一關。若前線缺乏合規意識，再完善的打擊洗錢及恐怖分子資金籌集政策也是形同虛設。 類別 Category 項目 Item 執行標準與詳細內容 Execution Standards & Details 一、 培訓對象與頻率 適用對象 門市銷售人員、收銀員、客戶服務代表、門市經理及新入職員工。 新員工入職培訓 必須於入職30天內 完成，未完成培訓前，嚴禁獨立處理 指定現金交易。 定期在職培訓 每年至少執行 1 次 ，內容須根據香港海關最新發布的指引進行更新。 專案補強培訓 發生以下情況時立即辦理 ： 1. 法例修訂 2. 公司AML/CFT政策變更 3. 內部審計（Internal Audit）發現合規漏洞時 二、 核心課程 法例基礎與法律責任 講解AMLO、120,000 港元 指定現金交易門檻及防通風報信（Tipping-off）的刑事責任。 連繫交易與防拆單 透過真實案例教導前線人員如何識別「同一客戶拆單」或「團夥分批下單」等規避審查技巧。 可疑交易指標識別 辨識兩大異常指標： • 行為異常 ：對價格不敏感、拒絕提供身份證明。 • 資金異常 ：大量污損鈔票、第三方代付。 內部通報流程 熟悉發現異常時，於2 小時內 填寫內部STR並送交MLRO的流程。 考核機制 培訓後須進行測驗（合格分數為 80% ），未通過者必須參加補考直至合格。 紀錄保存 出席紀錄、教材副本、證書及測驗成績須妥善保存至少 5 年 。 三、 評核與紀錄管理 考核機制 培訓後須進行測驗（合格分數為 80% ），未通過者必須參加補考直至合格。 紀錄保存 出席紀錄、教材副本、證書及測驗成績須妥善保存至少 5 年 。 三、 第三道防線：審計與獨立審查機制 審計指客觀評估公司打擊洗錢及恐怖分子資金籌集體系的設計與執行是否持續有效，防止制度流於形式。 四、 關鍵合規要點 培訓紀錄即是合規證據： 香港海關查核時，首要審查的就是員工培訓紀錄或測驗紀錄。無紀錄即視同未執行。 審計頻率應與風險匹配： B類註冊人建議每兩年進行一次獨立打擊洗錢及恐怖分子資金籌集審計，若業務量極大或曾被海關提出改進意見，應每年審查一次。 五、常見問題（Q&A） Q1: B類註冊人必須設立獨立的「內部審計部門」嗎？安排第三方顧問公司處理是否合法？ A： 不是必需成立專職內部審計部門，安排第三方顧問公司處理完全合法且常見。根據海關指引與FATF標準，重點在於審查的獨立性與專業能力。第三方顧問公司具備專業 AML/CFT審計經驗，且與被審查的業務部門無直接利益關係，其出具的獨立審查報告受海關或其他機構認可。 Q2: 新員工剛入職，在尚未完成AML/CFT培訓的 30 天過渡期內，可以處理指定現金交易（HKD 120,000 或以上）嗎？ A： 絕對不行。在未完成入職培訓前，新員工嚴禁獨立處理任何達到或超過 120,000 港元的指定現金交易。若過渡期間有相關交易，必須由已完成培訓的資深員工或門市經理全程監督並共同簽核，否則將構成內控缺失。 Q3: 如果前線員工發現客戶行為異常並向 MLRO 提交了內部報告，員工可以告訴客戶「我們正在進行合規審查」嗎？ A： 嚴禁提醒，此行為已觸犯通風報信刑事罪行！ 根據第615章，任何人向他人透露公司已向MLRO或JFIU提交報告/正進行可疑交易調查，即屬違法。 前線正確做法：保持專業態度，切勿向客戶透露任何審查細節；內部通報須在2小時內送交MLRO處理。 Q4: B類註冊人的獨立AML/CFT審計應該多久做一次？ A： 應根據公司風險評估結果決定，一般規範如下： 常態頻率： 建議每兩年進行一次獨立AML/CFT審計。 高風險/特殊情況：若公司業務量極大、涉足高風險地區/客戶、推出新業務模式，或曾被香港海關提出合規改進意見，則必須調高頻率至每年一次。 Q5: 培訓紀錄及審計報告等文件，海關規定最少要保存多久？電子檔可以嗎？ A： 必須妥善保存至少 5 年。 所有合規紀錄均須保存至少 5 年。 電子化保存： 完全接受，並能在海關突擊抽查時即時調閱與列印。 六、天匯合規能為 DPMS 提供的專業服務 天匯合規顧問有限公司（”天匯合規”）已成功協助多間珠寶商及貴金屬投資公司完成 DPMS 註冊，包括 A 類與 B 類申請。我們提供以下一站式服務： 資格評估： 辨識貴公司的業務模式，推薦最合適的註冊類別 申請準備： 協助整理商業登記文件、填寫申請表格並遞交至香港海關 打擊洗錢制度建設（B 類）： 撰寫客戶盡職審查政策、建立持續監察及可疑交易報告機制 人員培訓： 為管理層及員工提供打擊洗錢合規培訓 獨立審計（B 類） ： 定期進行打擊洗錢制度的獨立審閱 年度續期： 協助處理 B 類註冊的續期申請 自動化篩查系統： 提供合規的篩查，以及反洗錢／客戶管理系統 註：天匯合規為持牌信託及公司服務提供者（TCSP 牌照編號：TC007463），具備處理各類金融及非金融合規事務的豐富經驗。 結語 面對香港海關日趨嚴格的監管執法，貴金屬及寶石交易商落實打擊洗錢合規已非單純的法規遵循，更是維護企業營運韌性與商譽的核心。透過全面的員工培訓打造合規的前線防線，結合定期且獨立的內部審計，才能確保合規體系不流於形式。天匯合規憑藉豐富的實務經驗，協助金商及珠寶商落實「風險為本」的監管要求，助您輕鬆應對海關查核，在合規穩健的基石下實現業務持續增長。

涉及現金交易超過 12 萬港元？天匯合規提供一站式貴金屬及寶石交易商 B 類註冊顧問服務，協助建立客戶盡職審查 (CDD) 與內部監控體系，輕鬆符合海關合規要求。 香港上環干諾道中168-200號 信德中心西座16樓1605室 電話：+852 3955 0277 電郵：info@complianceone.hk 繁 ｜簡 ｜EN 登入 首頁 關於我們 關於我們 專業團隊 關於我們 專業團隊 服務範圍 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 加入我們 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 參考資料 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 市場資訊 聯絡我們 訂閲我們 Menu Close 香港 TCSP 牌照獨立 AML 審計要求全解析：公司註冊處指引、開戶審查與 6 大必查項目 根據《打擊洗錢條例》（第 615 章）及公司註冊處指引，持牌 TCSP須定期進行獨立 AML/CFT 審計，以評估內部監控政策的有效性，並作為銀行開戶及牌照續期的核心憑證。面對公司註冊處（CR）日益嚴格的現場與非現場稽核，以及商業銀行對信託及公司服務提供者（TCSP）帳戶的嚴格合規審查，落實制度化的 TCSP 獨立審計 已從「選配項目」轉變為持牌機構維持營運與維護銀行關係的「剛性要求」。持牌人、合規主任（CO）及洗錢報告主任（MLRO）必須深刻理解 公司註冊處 AML 指引 的核心精神，透過獨立客觀的 TCSP AML Audit 驗證內部防線的妥善性。 一、TCSP 內部自查 vs 第三方獨立 AML 審計 許多 TCSP 持牌人常誤以為由內部的 MLRO 或合規人員進行日常檢視即可滿足合規要求，但監管機構與銀行對「內部自查」與「獨立審計」的定位與法律效力存在本質差異： 比較維度 Comparison Dimension TCSP 內部自查 Internal Self-Review (Internal CDD/AML Review) 第三方獨立 AML 審計 Third-Party Independent AML Audit (Independent TCSP AML Audit) 執行主體 內部合規主任（CO）、MLRO 或營運人員。 獨立外部專業合規顧問、執業會計師或獨立審計團隊。 核心目的 日常營運中的個案審查、客戶 CDD 補漏與日常交易監控。 客觀評估整體 AML 制度設計的合規性與執行有效性（Testing of Effectiveness）。 獨立性 (Independence) 較低。執行者往往參與日常業務操作，難以做到自我審查無偏見。 極高。完全獨立於被審計單位的日常營運與業務決策。 公司註冊處認可度 僅視為內部監控日常紀錄，不能代替獨立審計報告。 信託牌照打擊洗錢審查 的核心文件，直接作為牌照續期與巡查憑證。 銀行開戶與維護 難以滿足商業銀行對高風險行業（TCSP）的 EDD 審查要求。 銀行認可度極高，為開立及維持 TCSP 商業戶口與客戶信託戶口（Trust Account）的重要避險依據。 二、公司註冊處監管要求下的 6 大必查項目 根據 公司註冊處 AML 指引 及《打擊洗錢及恐怖分子資金籌集指引（適用於信託或公司服務提供者）》，標準的 TCSP AML Audit 必須全面覆蓋以下六大關鍵環節： 1. AML/CFT 政策與程序手冊（Policy & Procedure Review） 審查機構是否根據最新法規修訂內部 AML 手冊，政策是否涵蓋制裁審查（Sanctions Screening）、PEP（政治人物）識別、可疑交易報告流程及高風險國家應對策略。 2. 機構風險評估（Institutional Risk Assessment, IRA） 評估 TCSP 是否建立適合自身業務規模與客戶群體的 IRA 架構，定期評估業務整體面臨的洗錢與恐怖分子資金籌集風險。 3. 客戶盡職調查與實質受益人核驗（CDD & UBO Profile） 抽樣檢查客戶檔案，驗證是否妥善識別及核實客戶、代理人及實質受益人（UBO）身份；針對高風險客戶是否執行強化盡職調查（EDD）。 4. 持續監控與可疑交易呈報（Ongoing Monitoring & STR） 審核機構是否定期更新客戶 CDD 資料，以及 MLRO 是否建立明確的可疑交易識別、評估與呈報至聯合財富情報組（JFIU）的內部軌跡。 5. 紀錄保存機制（Record Keeping） 確認所有開戶文件、交易紀錄、CDD 資料及合規評估報告是否嚴格遵循法規要求保存至少 5 年，且能隨時應對監管機構的調閱。 6. 員工培訓與合規意識（Staff Training & Competency） 檢視機構是否每年為所有相關員工提供充分的打擊洗錢培訓，並留存完整的培訓內容、出席紀錄與測驗結果。 三、Q&A：TCSP 的 AML 獨立審計是否必須由執業會計師（CPA）簽署？ Q：TCSP 的 AML 獨立審計是否必須由執業會計師（CPA）簽署？ A：法律條文上未強制規定必須由執業會計師（CPA）簽署，但實務操作中，選擇具備專業資格的外部獨立機構簽署具有顯著的監管與商業優勢。 1. 法規要求層面：根據《打擊洗錢條例》（第 615 章）及公司註冊處的指引，審核的核心要求是「機能上的獨立性（Functional Independence）」與「專業勝任能力（Competency）」。審計人員必須獨立於被審核單位的日常 AML/CFT 營運職能（例如 MLRO 或 CO 不能審計自己擬定的流程）。審計可由具備適當資歷的獨立內部人員（如大型集團的獨立內審部門）或外部專業顧問執行。 2. 監管與巡查實務：公司註冊處（CR）在進行現場審查（On-site Inspection）或牌照續期抽查時，極為看重審計報告的客觀性與專業深度。由熟悉 公司註冊處 AML 指引 的外部合規顧問或執業會計師出具的 TCSP 獨立審計 報告，能顯著降低 CR 對機構內部監控體系的疑慮。 3. 銀行開戶與維護戶口硬性需求：這是最關鍵的商業考量。目前香港商業銀行在為 TCSP 辦理公司戶口或客戶信託戶口時，均將 TCSP 列為中高風險行業。銀行合規部門普遍要求 TCSP 提供由獨立第三方（如執業會計師或知名合規顧問公司）簽署的 TCSP AML Audit 報告。若僅由內部人員出具自查報告，往往無法通過銀行的定期合規審查（KYB），甚至面臨被凍結或終止戶口的風險。 結語 結語 隨著香港對信託及公司服務提供者的合規監管持續深化，定期進行 信託牌照打擊洗錢審查 已是 TCSP 確保牌照穩固與業務持續營運的基石。持牌機構應至少每年或每兩年安排一次第三方獨立 AML 審計，提前排查合規漏洞，確保在應對公司註冊處巡查及銀行合規抽查時立於不敗之地。 如欲了解更多 TCSP 審計細節或預約專家諮詢，請即瀏覽天匯合規顧問有限公司（＂天匯合規＂）的金融機構獨立 AML/CFT 打擊洗錢審計服務 或直接與我們聯絡。

專為香港證監會持牌法團（LC）提供全方位持續合規支援，包含日常監管通報、FRR 財務資源申報監控、合規審查及監管政策更新提醒。 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 香港上環干諾道中168-200號 信德中心西座16樓1605室 電話：+852 3955 0277 電郵：info@complianceone.hk 繁｜簡 ｜EN 登入 首頁 關於我們 關於我們 專業團隊 關於我們 專業團隊 服務範圍 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 加入我們 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 參考資料 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 市場資訊 聯絡我們 訂閲我們 Menu Close 監管要求日益嚴峻且不斷更新，金融機構在拓展業務的同時，須持續應對嚴格的合規審查。為協助客戶在營運與合規間取得平衡，天匯合規提供持續合規支援服務，以靈活模式擔任您的長期合規夥伴。 我們根據各機構的業務性質與風險狀況，提供定制化解決方案，協助應對合規挑戰，支持業務穩健發展。 我們的服務對象 我們專為以下持牌法團及金融機構提供專業合規支援服務： 核心客戶群: Core Client Base: 持有證監會第 1 至 10 類受規管活動牌照的持牌法團 業務類型包括：Business types include: 虛擬資產服務提供商 家族辦公室 / 外部資產管理人 資產管理公司 期貨交易商 證券交易商 典型服務場景: 監管審查應對 收到證監會等監管機構的現場審查 (Onsite Inspection) 通知，需要專業團隊協助進行預備與全程跟進。 架構變革期 企業架構發生重大變化，管理層及員工需接受定制的合規培訓以滿足新要求。 業務擴張規劃 計劃拓展新業務線，需要資深合規團隊進行前期規劃與合規架構搭建。 資源優化需求 期望將核心資源聚焦於業務發展，需將合規職能進行專業外包。 天匯合規能為您提供的服務 I. 合規及諮詢支援 就監管機構（包括但不限於證券及期貨事務監察委員會「證監會」）發佈且與《證券及期貨條例》下定義的受規管活動相關或會影響其業務運作及常規的所有適用法律／規例／守則／指引，提供實時持續的監管與合規諮詢服務。 當證監會發佈新通函或更新時，提供合規影響分析。 當證監會或香港交易及結算所有限公司提出查詢時，提供諮詢支援（包括電話及書面查詢），並負責撰寫及回覆監管機構的信函。 審閱及評估貴公司的政策、內部監控措施、手冊、程序及文件。 在市場推廣材料及客戶通信發佈或傳遞予客戶前進行審閱。 處理貴公司代表及負責人員的牌照事宜，包括但不限於進行勝任能力評估、準備書面回覆及與證監會聯絡。 協助就一般變更事件向證監會提交通知。 協助處理來自香港稅務局就有關「共同匯報標準」／自動交換財務帳戶資料門戶帳戶事宜的查詢。 協助處理來自美國國稅局就有關《外國帳戶稅收遵從法》註冊系統及申報事宜的查詢。 III. 網上培訓平台 貴公司及同事可隨時隨地透過我們的平台免費參加培訓。 員工亦可透過平台列印證書並保存妥善記錄。 有關我們的網上持續專業培訓平台詳情，請瀏覽 https://complianceone.thinkific.com/collections IV. 反洗錢篩查 透過我們的聯營公司億東金融科技有限公司，提供反洗錢篩查解決方案（由Acuris Risk Intelligence支援），針對政治人物及制裁名單上的個人／公司進行篩查。 有關我們的反洗錢篩查及客戶關係管理解決方案詳情，請瀏覽：www.edon.asia V. 持牌法團月度監管通訊 每月定期向客戶提供通訊，涵蓋市場動態、監管新聞及執法消息。 最新一期的通訊，請參考：https://www.complianceone.hk/newsletter VI. 現場審查 (Onsite Inspection) 協助根據文件清單準備檢查文件。 參與與證監會的開場會議及其他會議。 協助回應證監會對公司業務活動的查詢。 與公司共同根據證監會的建議制定及實施適當的政策與程序。 提供與該次檢查相關的其他諮詢服務。 參考資訊 1）香港證監會持牌公司對僱員的操守要求：從內部監控制度看員工個人交易與利益衝突申報 2）SFC 財政資源規則（FRR）月度申報：5 個最常見的流動資金（Liquid Capital）計算錯誤 免費下載：持續合規服務(持牌法團)指南 您的公司已取得證監會第1至10類受規管活動牌照，正面臨日益嚴峻的監管審查與營運挑戰？無論您是證券/期貨交易商、資產管理公司、家族辦公室還是虛擬資產服務提供商，如何有效應對證監會現場審查（Onsite Inspection）、監管法規更新、FRR 及 BRMQ 申報，並同時優化合規資源配置？ 全面掌握天匯合規顧問有限公司（ComplianceOne）的一站式持續合規解決方案。內容涵蓋實時監管諮詢與新通函影響分析、證監會及港交所查詢應對、代表與 RO 牌照管理、FRR/BRMQ/CRS/FATCA 審閱、現場審查全程支援、網上 CPT 培訓平台，以及自動化 Screen-X 反洗錢篩查工具，助您的金融業務穩健營運並持續符合監管標準。 立即下載 II. 內部審計諮詢支援 審閱所有須向證監會提交的、關於《財政資源規則》的文件，以確保符合《證券及期貨（財政資源）規則》。 審閱須向證監會提交的年度「業務及風險管理問卷」、經審計財務報表及核數師報告，以及審計問卷。 審閱須向港交所提交的合規問卷。

協助金融科技與匯款企業申請美國各州貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL），提供州級合規架構設計、資本金規劃及監管機構對接服務。 香港上環干諾道中168-200號 信德中心西座16樓1605室 電話：+852 3955 0277 電郵：info@complianceone.hk 繁｜簡 ｜EN 登入 首頁 關於我們 關於我們 專業團隊 關於我們 專業團隊 服務範圍 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 金融牌照申請或續期 證監會法團牌照申請 香港交易所参與者及交易權申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照申請 金錢服務經營者 (MSO) 牌照續牌 保險經紀 (IA) 牌照申請 放債人牌照申請 貴金屬及寶石交易商(DPMS)註冊 美國貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 註冊 美國貨幣傳輸許可證（MTL）牌照申請 監管合規 持續合規服務 (持牌法團) 網上持續培訓 (CPT) 證監會現場審查 持續合規服務 (保險中介人) MSO 能力評核考試 公司秘書及企業服務 公司秘書服務 基金設立服務 會計及記帳服務 信託公司註冊 信託或公司服務提供者(TCSP) 牌照申請 環境、社會及管治咨詢與報告 (ESG) 家族辦公室成立服務 審計與內部監控 反洗錢獨立審計 內部監控審閱 合規文件定制 放債人的獨立審核職能 人力資源服務 人才招聘服務 香港工作簽證 牌照公司轉讓 牌照轉讓 合規科技系統 萬利雲找換系統 東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統 eDon AML Transaction Monitoring (TM) System 中國企業查 加入我們 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 天匯合規合夥人計劃 職位空缺 參考資料 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 證券及期貨從業員資格考試自我評估 牌照申請程序 客戶及案例分享 公司及市場發展動向 市場資訊 聯絡我們 訂閲我們 Menu Close 美國貨幣傳輸許可證 (MTL) 牌照申請 提供專業美國 MTL 牌照一站式解決方案，全程協助企業完善財務、營運及監管架構，確保在各州順利取得合規資質。 前言 1.1 美國監管框架 在美國，貨幣轉移業務受雙重監管體系約束，將聯邦層級的申報與州級層級的營運牌照區分開來： 聯邦層級（MSB 註冊） ： 根據《銀行保密法》(BSA)，任何從事貨幣轉移業務的企業都必須向聯邦金融犯罪執法局 (FinCEN) 註冊為貨幣服務業務 (MSB) 。這屬於一種基礎備案而非全方位的牌照；其目的是正式通知監管機構您的營運意向，並確立您的正式反洗錢 (AML) 義務。雖然註冊是開展金融業務的強制性先決條件，但它並不授予在特定州份經營業務的權力，亦不保證能獲得企業銀行帳戶。如需了解更多有關聯邦 MSB 註冊流程的信息，請[點擊此處] 。 州級層級（MTL 牌照） ： 美國並沒有單一的全國性貨幣轉移牌照。相反，除了蒙大拿州 (Montana) 以外的 49 個州以及哥倫比亞特區，均各自設有其《貨幣轉移法》、監管機構及審查流程。貨幣轉移牌照 (MTL) 是由州政府實際核發的授權，旨在允許企業在該特定司法管轄區內，合法地代表第三方接收、儲存或轉移資金。每個州都代表著一段獨立的監管關係，其特點是擁有獨特的最低淨資產要求、擔保保證金 (Surety Bonds) 以及持續的合規報告義務。 1.2 確定 MTL 牌照的適用性 評估是否需要貨幣轉移牌照 (MTL) 的決定性因素，在於公司是否「接觸」客戶資金——具體而言，即是否接收、持有、控制或指令屬於第三方的資金。一般而言，如果公司涉及以下任何活動，則在相關的美國州份必須強制持有 MTL： 我們將評估您的營運是否涉及以下受監管活動： 直接從客戶處接收資金 持有資金，即便僅是在傳輸過程中的短暫停留 控制客戶資金的去向 作為當事人 (Principal) 執行付款指令 對於支付機構和金融科技供應商而言，上述原則體現在以下會觸發 MTL 義務的特定營運場景中： 以公司自身名義開立的帳戶接收客戶資金 在向外轉移之前持有資金（即便僅是瞬間持有） 作為當事人控制客戶資金的去向（即不僅僅是作為代理人） 以公司自身名義執行付款指令 營運儲值產品、數位錢包或預付帳戶 作為當事人促進跨境資金流動 透過公司自身的分類帳處理薪酬發放 透過公司自身帳戶向第三方賣家結算電商平台資金 任何支付服務提供商對客戶資金擁有控制權、託管權或指令權的業務模式——無論是直接控制，還是透過其自身的帳戶、分類帳或儲值產品——都將被視為貨幣轉移服務商，並必須遵守各州的 MTL 要求。 1.3 各州環境分析：各州申請審查強度 註： 等級分類基於我們的內部數據、歷史處理時程以及與州監管機構的持續互動。這些分類不代表官方政府定義，僅作為資源規劃的策略指南。 Tier(等級) Regulatory Environment(監管環境) Examples of States(代表州份) Tire III: 加速型 監管框架高效，重點在於行政準確性。是快速進入市場的理想選擇。 • 懷俄明州 (Wyoming) • 南達科他州 (South Dakota) • 堪薩斯州 (Kansas) • 喬治亞州 (Georgia) Tire II: 標準型 監管力度平衡，要求標準的營運合規性及經證實的資金流透明度。 • 特拉華州 (Delaware) • 北卡羅來納州 (North Carolina) • 佛羅里達州 (Florida) • 麻薩諸塞州 (Massachusetts) Tire I: 機構級 高強度審查。要求健全的董事會層級治理、尖端的反洗錢 (AML) 技術以及豐厚的淨資產。 • 紐約州 (New York) • 加利福尼亞州 (California) • 德克薩斯州 (Texas) • 夏威夷州 (Hawaii) 申請 MTL牌照的關鍵要求 獲得貨幣轉移牌照 (MTL) 需要向州監管機構證明您的業務財務穩健、營運安全，並由具備高度誠信的人員管理。雖然具體法規因州而異，但所有監管機構都會根據以下四個基本支柱來評估申請： A. 明確的業務活動範疇 (Defined Scope of Business Activity) 監管機構需要深入了解您的業務運作方式，最重要的是如何處理客戶資金。您必須提供一份全面的業務計劃，其中包括： 精確的服務定義 ： 對您提供的產品進行清晰解釋（例如：法幣匯款、B2B 支付、數位錢包或虛擬貨幣交易）。 資金流向圖 ： 以圖表及文字形式詳細說明交易的生命週期，準確標示您的實體何時取得資金控制權、資金存放在何處，以及如何結算給最終受益人。 B. 控權人要求與審查 (Control Person Requirements & Vetting) 州審查員會對擁有、管理或領導業務的個人進行嚴格審查。「控權人 (Control Person)」通常包括執行人員、董事以及持有公司 10% 或以上股權的股東。相關要求包括： 刑事背景調查 ： 透過全國多州牌照系統 (NMLS) 進行聯邦調查局 (FBI) 指紋採集。 誠信審查 ： 全面評估民事訴訟紀錄、過往的監管執法行動以及全球媒體報導紀錄。 財務誠信 ： 詳細的個人財務披露及信用紀錄審查。 披露對應 (Disclosure Mapping) ： 在所有州級申請中，對所有權和控制權益保持高度透明。 C. 財務先決條件：淨資產與擔保保證金 為了保護消費者免受財務損失，各州強制執行嚴格的資本化和抵押要求： 要求的有形淨資產 (Tangible Net Worth) ： 申請人必須維持最低限度的有形淨資產（不包括商譽或知識產權等無形資產）。此基準差異極大——從部分州的 10,000 美元到其他州的 1,000,000 美元以上不等——且通常會根據您的營業地點數量或交易量按比例增加。 擔保保證金 (Surety Bonds) ： 您必須獲得由合資格保險公司出具的持續擔保保證金。該保證金作為州政府及客戶的財務安全網。保證金金額最初由各州最低要求決定，但會隨着您的處理量增長而動態增加。 D. 機構級別的反洗錢 (AML) 與合規框架 每個成功的 MTL 申請核心都是一個健全、符合《銀行保密法》(BSA) 要求的反洗錢計劃。州審查員將嚴格審查您的合規手冊，以確保其針對您的數位開戶和跨境模式量身定制。完整的框架必須包括： 反洗錢/銀行保密法 (AML/BSA) 計劃 ： 詳述公司風險評估、內部控制及指定合規官職責的總體書面政策。 KYC/KYB 程序 ： 嚴格的「了解您的客戶」和「了解您的業務」協議，確保在交易前準確識別並驗證用戶身份。 制裁篩查控制 ： 自動化的實時篩查系統，根據 OFAC 及其他國際觀察名單檢查客戶及交易交易方。 交易監控框架 ： 持續的監測系統，旨在檢測異常模式、頻率異常以及可能需要進一步調查的可疑活動。 消費者投訴政策 ： 在州政府規定的時限內接收、調查及解決客戶投訴的書面程序。 記錄保存程序 ： 安全的數據保留政策，確保所有交易記錄、客戶身份和合規調查資料均妥善保存至少五年並易於查閱。 監管報告框架 ： 建立透過 NMLS 提交可疑活動報告 (SARs)、大額現金交易報告 (CTRs) 以及常規州特定財務「調研報告 (Call Reports)」的協議。 前期準備 在正式啟動 MTL 申請流程之前，企業必須鞏固其法律、財務及合規基礎。以下是成功提交申請的必要先決條件： 建立法律實體 ： 註冊有效的業務結構（例如美國有限責任公司 LLC 或股份有限公司），取得聯邦僱主識別號碼 (EIN)，並確保在您的目標州份獲得「外州業務經營權」(Foreign Qualification，即在非註冊地州份開展業務的法律授權)。 制定司法管轄區策略 ： 確定您擬開展業務的具體美國州份。您必須明確定義未來兩年的業務目標（包括預測交易量和目標客戶群），因為這份長期藍圖將決定您的資本需求以及各州申請的先後順序。 完成聯邦 MSB 註冊 ： 向美國財政部金融犯罪執法局 (FinCEN) 註冊為貨幣服務業務 (MSB)。這項聯邦備案是強制性的基礎；若缺乏有效且合規的聯邦註冊證明，州監管機構將不會處理您的 MTL 申請。 確認資本準備就緒 ： 審查您的公司財務狀況，確保符合目標司法管轄區要求的最低「有形淨資產」(Tangible Net Worth) 標準。同時，您必須確保已分配足夠的流動資金，以購買州政府規定的擔保保證金 (Surety Bonds)。 正式建立專業合作夥伴關係 ： 與您的法律、稅務、銀行及合規顧問（如 ComplianceOne）確認服務安排，以確保在嚴格的州政府審查程序中獲得全方位的專業支援。 敲定合規與營運流程 ： 針對您的特定風險狀況制定完善的書面反洗錢 (AML) 政策。編寫詳細的業務計劃，內容須包括精確的資金流向圖、客戶開戶程序以及交易監控流程。 參考資訊 免費下載：美國貨幣傳輸許可證牌照申請指南 您的公司計畫在美國拓展跨境匯款、B2B支付、數位錢包或電商平台資金結算業務？您是否清楚了解聯邦 FinCEN 的 MSB 註冊與各州 MTL 牌照的雙重監管架構？在觸發 MTL 牌照的「資金接觸」判定原則、控權人背景審查、最低有形淨資產（Net Worth）及擔保保證金（Surety Bonds）上有何具體要求？ 全面掌握美國聯邦及各州對貨幣傳輸服務商的審批標準與監管分級（Tier I 機構級、Tier II 標準型、Tier III 加速型）。內容涵蓋四個基本評估支柱、前期準備清單、5至15個月的整體申領時間表，以及 Screen-X 自動化反洗錢篩查系統，助您的支付與金融科技業務順利獲批牌照並實現持續合規營運。 立即下載 What ComplianceOne can do for you 天匯合規能為您提供的服務 天匯合規為尋求應對嚴格美國州級牌照監管環境的金融科技及支付機構，提供全面且「開箱即用」的一站式解決方案。我們的端到端服務包括： 策略性牌照申請藍圖 (Strategic Licensing Roadmap) ： 我們將您的全球支付模式與具體的州級要求進行匹配，設計分階段的落地策略，以優化您在第一、第二及第三等級司法管轄區之間的資本配置。 全方位全國多州牌照系統 (NMLS) 管理 ： 我們的團隊負責處理 NMLS 門戶網站的所有行政負擔，從為「控權人」準備複雜的個人披露和背景調查，到起草各州要求的多年期財務預測及業務計劃。 機構級合規框架 (Institutional-Grade Compliance Framework) ： 我們為「數位優先」模式量身定制「四大支柱」反洗錢/銀行保密法 (AML/BSA) 計劃。這包括健全的 KYC/KYB 程序、自動化交易監控框架，以及符合州級最高審查標準的消費者保護政策。 監管溝通與審查應對 (Regulatory Liaison & Review Defense) ： 我們擔任您與州審查員之間的主要溝通橋樑，管理所有監管往來函件、解決申請缺陷，並為高管提供模擬面試輔導，以確保審批過程順暢無阻。 財務與擔保保證金統籌 (Financial & Surety Bond Coordination) ： 我們針對如何滿足嚴格的「淨資產」要求提供建議，並利用我們的業界網絡協調保證金承保人，以具競爭力的費率獲得必要的擔保保證金，從而滿足各州的資本強制要求。 輔助服務: 為了給您的國際擴張提供真正全面的解決方案，天匯合規提供一系列輔助服務，旨在優化您的營運並確保技術合規： 聯邦 MSB 註冊與維護 ： 我們處理您的 FinCEN 註冊，為您進入美國市場奠定基礎。我們的服務包括關鍵的兩年一度續期、及時的重新註冊，並確保您的聯邦身分維持良好記錄——這是維持各州 MTL 牌照的強制性先決條件。欲了解更多關於聯邦 MSB 註冊流程的信息，請點擊此處 。 銀行與策略合作夥伴促成 ： 建立企業銀行關係是貨幣轉移服務商面臨的一大挑戰。我們利用與加密貨幣友好及專門服務 MSB 的金融機構網絡，協助您準備「機構級」的盡職調查文件包，以簡化您的銀行帳戶及支付渠道申請。 高管獵頭與專業招聘 ： 我們利用深厚的行業網絡，協助招聘合格的管理人員及合規官。我們確保所有候選人均符合高風險 MTL 領域所需的嚴格監管標準以及「適當人選」要求。 機構級金融科技解決方案 ： 透過我們的聯營公司億東金融科技有限公司 (eDon Fintech Limited)，我們提供專為貨幣服務業務量身定制的強大交易系統。該生態系統包括全面的 CRM、自動化背景調查功能，以及多州營運所需的高級持續監控模組。欲了解更多關於我們金融科技解決方案的信息，請點擊此處 。 專有的監管科技與反洗錢篩查： 我們部署先進的 AML/KYC 技術，包括我們招牌的東查查反洗錢/客戶管理系統。該系統可自動執行關鍵的合規任務，如制裁與政治人士 (PEP) 篩查、負面新聞搜索及實時交易監控，保護您的業務免受美國市場高度監管風險的影響。 預期時間表 獲得貨幣轉移牌照 (MTL) 的所需時間比標準的聯邦 MSB 註冊要長得多。由於每個州都根據其自身的監管權限運作，進度在很大程度上取決於您的司法管轄區策略。 第一階段：前期準備 此初始階段通常跨度 2 至 3 個月，涉及在進行任何州級提交之前所需的必要基礎工作。這包括美國實體的法律註冊及取得僱主識別號碼 (EIN)（約 1 個月），隨後是向 FinCEN 進行強制性的聯邦 MSB 註冊（1 個月）。同時，我們會投入 1 至 2 個月進行「前期準備」，期間我們將起草為您量身定制的「四大支柱」反洗錢 (AML) 計劃、敲定複雜的資金流向圖，並彙整公司控權人所需的詳盡個人及財務披露資料。 第二階段：州政府監管審查 一旦提交申請，時程將轉由州審查員決定。第三等級（加速型）州份通常會在 3 至 4 個月 內批准準備充分的申請。對於第二等級（標準型）司法管轄區，申請人應預期會有 4 至 6 個月 的審查期，重點在於營運合規性及財務透明度。 最後，對於像紐約州或加利福尼亞州這樣的第一等級（機構級）州份，處理流程通常會超過 9 至 12 個月；針對這些複雜的司法管轄區，我們強烈建議申請人需展示多年的成功營運歷史及雄厚的資本實力，以滿足審查員更高層級的嚴格審核。 外部參考 1)Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS) State Resource Center https://mortgage.nationwidelicensingsystem.org/knowledge/Products/nmls/stateresourcecenter/SitePages/Home.aspx 2)CSBS Money Transmission Modernization Act (MTMA) https://www.csbs.org/mtma 3)Federal Reserve Financial Services https://www.frbservices.org/ 4)The Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) Regulations https://www.fincen.gov/resources/statutes-and-regulations/bank-secrecy-act 5)Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) - Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-31/subtitle-B/chapter-X/part-1022/subpart-B/section-1022.210