Context and Chronology

Kim Seung‑won of the ruling Democratic Party has tabled amendments that would require individuals who regularly publish crypto investment recommendations on social media, broadcasts or mass publications to disclose both compensation for promotions and their personal crypto holdings. The draft delegates technical thresholds and disclosure formats to executive regulation, while tying violations into the existing enforcement toolbox for market abuses — effectively folding influencer breaches into the same penalties used against manipulation and front‑running. Lawmakers presented the proposal as closing a transparency gap that leaves retail investors exposed to covertly sponsored advice and coordinated promotional campaigns.

How It Fits Into Broader Reform

The influencer disclosure proposal is proceeding in parallel with wider digital‑asset reforms being negotiated under the Digital Asset Basic Act. Other elements under discussion include converting licensed exchanges from a notification model to an authorization regime with proposed ownership caps in the 15–20% band, a new minimum capital floor (about 5 billion won) for stablecoin issuers, and tighter app‑store rules that will require proof of VASP registration for exchange and custodial wallet apps. Those companion measures — and vocal concerns from the Bank of Korea about won‑pegged stablecoins — make the disclosure draft part of a coordinated push to treat trading venues, payment rails and promotional channels as layers of regulated market infrastructure.

Enforcement Capacity and Technological Adjuncts

Regulatory capacity is being strengthened on multiple fronts: the Financial Supervisory Service has been expanding automated surveillance tools, including algorithmic scanning and network‑linkage analytics, and has budgeted for further AI investment in 2026. That intensifying surveillance posture increases the chance that undisclosed promotions could be linked to suspicious trading patterns, but successful enforcement will still hinge on cross‑platform cooperation, international data access and workable legal standards for algorithm‑driven findings. Platforms, payment processors and exchanges will be central to evidentiary chains — and rules such as Google Play’s upcoming VASP registration requirement add another compliance touchpoint for app‑based services.

Market and Competitive Effects

If adopted, the disclosure regime would raise compliance burdens for content creators and platforms, encouraging recordkeeping, labelling and possibly third‑party certification markets. Combined with ownership caps and higher capital floors, the package is likely to accelerate consolidation toward well‑capitalized, regulated operators and licensed advisers while reducing the informal promotional leverage that smaller influencers and offshore platforms currently exploit. That redistribution of promotional power could lower some speculative retail flows but also increase barriers to entry for independent promoters and smaller exchanges.

Policy Trade‑offs and Timing

Policymakers face trade‑offs between faster baseline obligations (enabled by delegating technical details to executive regulation) and the need for clear legal safeguards around algorithmic evidence and cross‑border subpoenas. Political momentum for disclosure has been strengthened by international enforcement examples and domestic concern about retail exposure, but the bill’s final shape — implementation windows, carve‑outs for licensed advisers, and interoperability with foreign investigative regimes — will determine how sharply market structure and promotional practices change.