Here, there is no place for the master, but there will always be a place for the master elsewhere.

Interview, organized by: Louis, ChainCatcher

June 30, 2025, is a red line marked on the calendar of every practitioner in the Web3 circle in Singapore.

Starting from this day, according to Section 137 of Singapore's Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA): all individuals or companies providing services related to digital tokens must obtain a Digital Token Service Provider (DTSP) license if they have a place of business in Singapore, regardless of whether their clients are in Singapore, or they will face criminal liability.

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) clearly stated in the regulatory response document released on May 30 that those who are not licensed must immediately cease overseas operations; the status of "application in progress" will not be accepted as a basis for legal existence. This wording has been interpreted by many as "the strictest crypto regulation ever."

In response, ChainCatcher consulted professional lawyers about the key points overlooked in this FSMA document. Additionally, we interviewed five practitioners based in Singapore to try to restore the real situation of Web3ers in Singapore and understand their views on the regulatory changes.

Note: In this article, MAS refers to Singapore's financial regulatory authority, PSA is the Payment Services Act launched in 2019, which primarily regulated crypto payment services, FSMA is the newer and more comprehensive regulatory bill launched in 2022, which includes the management of token-related services, and DTSP refers to individuals or companies providing services such as token trading, custody, and transfer, which are the focus of FSMA regulation.

1. Overlooked Core Points of the Legislation

During an interview with lawyer Guo Yatao, director of the Digital Economy Committee at Beijing Strategy Law Firm, we discovered several key points in the legislation worth noting:

1. FSMA is not an overseas patch, but a comprehensive upgrade; both domestic and overseas operations are subject to regulation.

Many industry insiders mistakenly believe that FSMA is merely to fill the gaps left by the original PSA in regulating Singaporean companies serving overseas clients. However, Lawyer Guo emphasized: "FSMA is a framework law for comprehensive regulation, and multiple parts apply to entities providing financial services within Singapore." This means that regardless of whether the business is aimed at domestic or overseas clients, as long as there is a place of business in Singapore or the company is registered in Singapore, they must comply with FSMA. This penetrating regulatory logic also marks the official start of MAS's comprehensive regulation of local Web3 practitioners.

2. Regulatory focus shifts from "institutional licensing" to "individual scrutiny."

PSA primarily focused on the compliance of enterprises and institutions, while FSMA has added a regulatory mechanism for individuals. Lawyer Guo pointed out: "FSMA allows MAS to bypass the traditional institutional licensing framework and directly intervene and isolate high-risk individuals in the financial market, achieving penetrating regulation of individuals." This means that even freelancers, remote developers, consultants, or KOLs who are not in management positions but engage in related services within Singapore may be recognized as regulatory subjects by MAS. "There is a requirement to fully understand the FSMA framework and possess relevant work experience," significantly raising the threshold for individual practitioners.

3. The threshold for FSMA has been significantly raised, and compliance requirements far exceed those of PSA.

Even if one already holds a PSA license, it does not automatically apply. Lawyer Guo pointed out: "Most of the currently approved crypto business licenses in the market are still based on PSA, and FSMA has significantly raised the compliance threshold. MAS has made it clear that even companies that have obtained PSA licenses must resubmit supplementary materials to meet FSMA requirements." Applying for a DTSP license not only requires an initial capital of 250,000 SGD, a resident compliance officer, but also the establishment of an independent audit mechanism, regular submission of compliance reports, and adherence to anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing processes and management systems.

2. What do Web3 practitioners in Singapore have to say?

From broad coverage to more detailed requirements and raised thresholds, the tightening of regulations has indeed caused a lot of pressure and panic among Web3ers. However, regulations on paper do not reflect whether a country's policies are welcoming to Web3; it ultimately depends on what the actual businesses and practitioners say. In ChainCatcher's interviews, we heard distinctly different voices—from startup teams forced to relocate, to individual workers choosing to wait and see, to long-term immigrants who still see potential in Singapore; their stories piece together a real picture of policy implementation:

1. Founder of a tokenized operation project, Chari: Small businesses have their own way of survival; the river will always find a way out.

We have indeed been affected. In today's crypto circle, almost all meaningful products ultimately revolve around trading. Once trading is involved, it inevitably touches the regulatory red line of DTSP. Regulation should serve companies with mature business models and clear structures, but for small teams like ours, investing a lot of time and resources to deal with regulation is almost an—unbearable burden.

It is clear that Singapore is no longer suitable for the development of early-stage projects. Perhaps Singapore has never considered becoming a cradle for startups; they only hope to be the headquarters for mature enterprises. We are not even sure what our business model will look like next month, and we do not rule out the possibility of completely relocating from Singapore in the future. However, I will maintain an optimistic attitude towards change; after all, "small businesses must have their own way of survival."

2. A veteran in OTC trading, Geek Boy (pseudonym): Singapore is a "pragmatic scoundrel"; those who have value will stay.

I feel that the Web3 industry has always been somewhat marginalized, whether it was previously driven out by China or currently marginalized among small businesses in Singapore. However, objectively speaking, as someone who has been engaged in OTC business in Singapore for many years, I have always felt that pragmatism is the underlying tone of Singapore's regulation. To put it bluntly, the Singapore government is like a "pragmatic scoundrel": whoever can bring substantial value can stay; those who only bring bubbles will be shown the door. Those who have been licensed can continue to operate, while others must be cleared out; this is a very clear signal.

However, from my perspective, this round of regulation is not as heavy-handed as it seems; it is more like—"a loud thunder, but little rain," mainly to shake the mountain and scare the tiger. The enterprises that truly need licenses have already applied; those who contribute to the government or are truly capable will not be anxious because of this new regulation.

As for why the regulation suddenly tightened, I believe it is related to the gray market and shell companies existing in the crypto circle in Southeast Asia. MAS's current goal is actually to use this wave of regulations to send a warning to some non-compliant KOLs and scattered groups. They may not be able to completely eliminate these individuals, but they hope to use the legal framework to urge them to restrain themselves.

As far as I know, some KOLs and exchange practitioners have recently chosen to pause their businesses, travel, or remain cautious, all waiting for a clearer signal.

3. John, a practitioner deeply involved in the Web3 AI field in Singapore for many years: Looking at the essence through the phenomenon, there are causes and effects.

I want to emphasize one word: pragmatism. This is my core understanding of Singapore's governance style. Singapore's efficiency and adherence to rules are essentially to ensure economic benefits and to secure a stable position in international political and financial games. The increasingly strict regulatory terms this time are actually due to some issues in the Web3 field that need to be addressed, and the government must intervene to ensure the healthy development of the ecosystem.

My project has not been directly affected, but I can see that for some exchanges that have not yet obtained licenses, as well as the project parties and ecosystem partners cooperating with them, this round of policy adjustments has indeed brought considerable impact. Especially for those KOLs who play financial advisory roles in the Web3 circle, the pressure from the policy has already been transmitted to them, and it has had a certain deterrent effect.

Recently, I have also noticed that more and more freelancers and remote workers are starting to prefer working from home and avoiding actively discussing Web3-related topics in public, as everyone is trying to lower risks and reduce unnecessary troubles.

4. Neil, founder of Reddio, who has lived in Singapore for nearly 20 years: Nothing has changed; Web3 is still part of Singapore's national strategy.

In fact, Singapore's regulatory policies in the Web3 field in recent years have not undergone drastic shifts; rather, they are more about clarifying and refining the existing framework. According to the latest clarifications from MAS and reports from Lianhe Zaobao, this round of regulation focuses on digital payment tokens (DPTs) and tokens with capital market attributes, while the utility tokens and governance tokens we often talk about are currently not at the core of their regulation.

For most startup projects, Singapore remains an environment with clear systems, clear paths, and abundant resources. MAS not only maintains high transparency over the long term but also has an open consultation mechanism. If companies want to assess their compliance status, it is not difficult. Spending a few thousand SGD can obtain legal opinions, which is quite reasonable.

From a longer-term perspective, Web3 is still part of Singapore's national strategy. In addition to a clear policy framework, the government is also promoting ecosystem development through funding support, talent cultivation, and industry alliances. The Ministry of Education in Singapore also strongly encourages universities to offer blockchain courses. I personally believe that globally, if one is looking for a place that can truly balance regulatory rationality and industry vitality, Singapore remains the most inclusive and trustworthy choice for entrepreneurs.

5. Chess, founder of GM Agents: It is a reshuffling period, but it targets financial-oriented entities rather than everyone.

For us, the current regulatory changes have not brought significant impacts. We are an AI startup and still plan to continue building in Singapore. I believe this round of regulation is more targeted at enterprises and projects with strong financial attributes, while for small teams like ours, the actual impact is relatively limited. The big players in the crypto circle are not facing much trouble, so it is not time for small teams to worry.

Speaking of Singapore's entrepreneurial environment, I have always felt that it is very suitable for small teams and even individual entrepreneurs. Especially for overseas Chinese like me, Singapore has a natural affinity in terms of language and culture, low communication costs, and faster implementation. Although some people feel that Singapore is conservative in certain policies, in my view, it is still a fair, open, and rational place to view innovation compared to many regions. On the basis of maintaining order, Singapore is indeed willing to give innovators opportunities.

Conclusion

This tightening of regulation is essentially a self-correction by Singapore as an international financial center, rather than a drive away from the Web3 industry. Web3 practitioners have not simply been divided into those who flee and those who stay; instead, they are re-evaluating and reconsidering: whether to stay and accept higher intensity regulation in exchange for long-term policy certainty, or to turn to seemingly friendlier markets that are filled with more uncertainties.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。