South Korea Delays Stage 2 Crypto Regulation to 2026 Amid Agency Deadlock
South Korea has delayed its Stage 2 digital asset legislation until 2026 following a deadlock between the Financial Services Commission (FSC) and the Bank of Korea. The dispute centers on a proposed mandate requiring stablecoin issuers to have 51% bank ownership.

Lawmakers push back stablecoin framework
South Korea’s government has postponed the second-stage Digital Asset Basic Law, which covers won-linked stablecoins, until 2026 after missing a 10 December 2025 deadline. The Financial Services Commission (FSC), South Korea’s top financial regulator, did not meet the government’s deadline for submitting a draft framework. This delay affects rules for issuing and supervising won-pegged stablecoins in the country. The second-stage law now moves to the 2026 legislative calendar instead of the original 2025 target.
FSC and central bank clash on design
The core dispute sits between the Financial Services Commission and the Bank of Korea, which is South Korea’s central bank. The Bank of Korea supports a bank-led stablecoin model that uses a 51 percent rule, where commercial banks hold at least 51 percent of each issuer’s equity stake. The FSC opposes this ownership structure and has not accepted the central bank’s proposal. Negotiations between the two institutions now decide how stablecoin issuers will operate under the delayed Digital Asset Basic Law.
The delay stems from the necessity for more time to align its stance with the relevant agencies. — Representative, Financial Services Commission (FSC)
Regulatory delay prolongs market uncertainty
The stalled Digital Asset Basic Law leaves South Korean stablecoin rules incomplete after an initial phase that focused mainly on user protection and market abuse. Market participants now track political discussions between the government, the FSC, and the Bank of Korea about the final shape of stablecoin oversight. Speculation: some issuers and exchanges slow new won-pegged stablecoin products while they wait for a stable legal framework. The unresolved 51 percent ownership proposal remains a central issue in these talks and shapes how future issuers structure their ownership.