The central bank has set a stable currency for the first time, and mainland supervision continues to

2025年11月28日，中国人民银行牵头召集包括公安部、网信办、中央金融办及“两高”在内的13个部门召开虚拟货币治理专项会议，再次将“打击炒作、守住风险底线”推到台前。在全球加密市场快速扩张、创新不断加速的当下，中国的监管也进入新的关键节点——一边是事关国家金融安全的高压防控，一边是全球范围内加速推进的区块链与数字资产创新。两股力量在同一张监管天平上拉扯，而此次会议的召开，也意味着中国正尝试在“绝不放任风险”与“适度拥抱技术创新”之间，探索一条更清晰的未来路径。

会议明确强调“继续坚持对虚拟货币的禁止性政策”，并首次在官方文件中对稳定币进行了明确界定与风险警示。

与此同时，香港特区政府却正积极推进《香港数字资产发展政策宣言2.0》，致力于将香港打造为数字资产领域的全球创新中心。这一对比凸显了内地与香港在虚拟货币治理上的差异化路径。

一、内地虚拟货币监管再收紧

此次中国人民银行牵头的跨部门会议，代表了近年来在虚拟货币监管领域最高级别的协同行动

● 会议不仅重申了虚拟货币的非法定性，还特别指出“稳定币是虚拟货币的一种形式”，目前无法有效满足客户身份识别、反洗钱等方面的要求，存在被用于洗钱、集资诈骗、违规跨境转移资金等非法活动的风险。

● 十三部门联合行动的监管力度空前，展现了国家层面坚决遏制虚拟货币交易炒作的决心。

此次监管升级呈现出三个特点：

1、多部门协同，从信息流、资金流等重点环节入手，形成全方位监控网络;

2、精准界定稳定币，堵塞监管漏洞;

3、明确政策连续性，打消市场对政策可能放松的幻想。

值得注意的是，会议指出近期“虚拟货币投机炒作有所抬头”，相关违法犯罪活动时有发生，风险防控面临新形势、新挑战。这解释了此次监管升级的现实背景与紧迫性。

二、 虚拟货币的明确界定与监管范围

● 中国监管机构对虚拟货币的法律定性已经非常明确，此次会议不过是对既有政策的再次强调

会议重申，虚拟货币不具有与法定货币等同的法律地位，不具有法偿性，不应且不能作为货币在市场上流通使用，虚拟货币相关业务活动属于非法金融活动。

● 值得关注的是，此次会议首次对稳定币进行了明确界定，将其纳入虚拟货币范畴一并监管。

稳定币作为一种试图与特定资产或货币池挂钩的加密资产，近年来在全球范围内迅速发展。然而，央行明确指出其目前“无法有效满足客户身份识别、反洗钱等方面的要求”，这一判断实质上否定了稳定币在中国内地市场的合规发展空间。

● 从2021年《关于进一步防范和处置虚拟货币交易炒作风险的通知》到此次会议，中国对虚拟货币的监管政策保持了高度连贯性，监管范围覆盖虚拟货币兑换、交易、撮合、代币发行融资等全链条业务活动。

三、香港数字资产监管新动态

● 就在内地强化虚拟货币监管的同时，香港却朝着建立全面数字资产监管框架的方向稳步前行

● 2025年6月26日，香港特区政府发表了 《香港数字资产发展政策宣言2.0》 ，提出构建值得信赖和着重创新的数字资产生态圈的愿景。

该宣言提出了“LEAP”框架，重点包括四大领域：

1、优化法律与监管，由证监会担当数字资产交易和托管服务提供者的主要监管机构;

2、扩展代币化产品种类，将代币化政府债券发行常规化;

3. Promote application scenarios and cross-border cooperation;

4. Develop talents and partners.

● Leung Fung-yee, CEO of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission, said that \"the final plan is being finalized for the regulatory system for digital asset trading and custody services,\" which she described as the \"last two regulatory jigsaw pieces\" to build a A robust digital asset ecosystem.

● On November 3, 2025, the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission issued two important circulars, namely, the \"Circular on Expanding Virtual Asset Trading Platform Products and Services\" and the \"Circular on Sharing Liquidity by Virtual Asset Trading Platforms\".

These policies allow licensed platforms to cancel the \"12-month track record\" requirement when selling virtual assets to professional investors, and allow platforms to integrate listings with their overseas affiliated platforms to form a shared liquidity pool.

4. The \"Tale of Two Cities\" of virtual currency governance

The mainland and Hong Kong have different concepts and path choices in virtual currency governance

● The core concern of mainland supervision is to prevent and control financial risks, maintain financial stability and people\'s property security. The central bank meeting clearly required all units to \"regard risk prevention and control as the eternal theme of financial work.\" In contrast, as an international financial center, Hong Kong\'s policies focus more on consolidating and enhancing its status as an international financial center and seizing financial innovation opportunities.

● Paul Chan, Financial Secretary of the Hong Kong SAR Government, said: \"By combining stable and prudent regulation and encouraging market innovation, we will build a more vigorous digital asset ecosystem that is integrated with the real economy and social life, bringing benefits to the economy and society. At the same time, consolidate Hong Kong\'s leading position as an international financial center.\"

The differences in regulatory paths between the two places are rooted in different market positioning and risk considerations. Specifically:

● Mainland: focuses on preventing the potential impact of virtual currency on financial stability, currency sovereignty and capital controls, especially the risk that it may be used for illegal and criminal activities such as money laundering and illegal cross-border fund transfers.

● Hong Kong: As an international financial center, it pays more attention to integrating with international standards. It adopts the principle of \"same business, same risks, same rules\" and protects the rights and interests of investors., encourage financial innovation and develop digital asset markets.

5. Market Impact and Future Trend

Different regulatory policies are having a profound impact on the market and also bring clear guidance to investors and market entities.

● In the mainland, as supervision increases, virtual currency-related business activities will further shrink. Companies and investors need to fully understand the illegality of virtual currency-related activities and avoid participating in them. The central bank made it clear that it will continue to crack down on relevant illegal financial activities and protect the safety of people\'s property.

● In Hong Kong, the gradual improvement of the regulatory framework has provided clear guidance for the development of digital assets. Hong Kong has an increasing number of tokenized financial products, such as tokenized green bonds, as well as money market funds and retail gold products approved by the Securities and Futures Commission.

The total market size of these products with varying degrees of tokenization in Hong Kong is approximately US$3 billion.

● Some industry insiders believe that Hong Kong\'s Policy Declaration 2.0 marks a new stage of \"ecological construction\" for Hong Kong\'s digital assets. By implementing the \"LEAP\" framework, Hong Kong has set a benchmark for \"compliance innovation\" in the field of digital assets.

● In the future, mainland China is expected to continue to adhere to its high-pressure supervision of virtual currencies, especially to remain highly vigilant against emerging variants such as stablecoins.

● Hong Kong may further expand the regulatory scope and application scenarios of digital assets on the existing basis, including exploring the application of central bank digital currency in virtual asset transactions, and gradually incorporating more digital asset categories (such as RWA, DeFi protocol, etc.) into the regulatory perspective.

6. Governance wisdom under dual-track parallel

● The differentiated supervision of the mainland and Hong Kong in the field of virtual currency, reflects the precise governance strategies adopted within a country for different market environments .

● The mainland\'s strict control aims to maintain the bottom line of preventing systemic financial risks, while Hong Kong\'s prudent opening up aims to consolidate its status as an international financial center and seize the development opportunities of digital finance.

● The two paths may seem to run counter to each other, but in fact they are rational choices made based on their respective actual conditions, and together constitute China\'s multi-level governance system in the field of digital assets.

As technology continues to evolve and the market environment continues to change, it remains to be seen how the next chapter of this \"Tale of Two Cities\" will be written. But what is certain is that the governance of virtual currency will always seek a dynamic balance between risk prevention and control and innovation incentives.