Official media intensively signaling on cryptocurrencies, policies may be introduced soon
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Official media intensively signaling on cryptocurrencies, policies may be introduced soon
From a cyclical perspective, the four-year cycle is not only a pattern for Bitcoin's price fluctuations but also the timing for regulatory policies to be introduced.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsAuthor: Liu Yang
Recently, lawyer Liu Yang has noticed some unusual signals.
On November 7, 2025, the official account "Feng Lun Feng Ma Niu" reposted an article from "Unrivaled Finance" titled Who Benefits from Pardoning Zhao Changpeng? || In-depth;
On November 9, 2025, the official account "National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center" published a report titled Technical Traceability Analysis Report on the Hacking of LuBian Mining Pool Resulting in Theft of Large Amounts of Bitcoin;
On November 10, 2025, the official account "Ye Ping" published an article by "Nanmen Chouhou" titled Black-on-Black in the Digital Age – Suspicions of State-Level Hackers Behind 127,000 Bitcoins;
On November 11, 2025, the official account "Ye Ping" published another article by "Nanmen Chouhou" titled Digital Harvesting Under Technological Hegemony: How the U.S. Is Indiscriminately Draining Global Crypto Assets.
These public accounts are not traditional state media outlets like certain news agencies or newspapers, but to some extent, they represent official intentions. You can understand them as conveying mainstream viewpoints from an ordinary person's perspective using seemingly civilian identities. The content they express carries significant influence and offers reference value for gauging policy directions.
There are other similar public accounts, such as "Youli Youmian," "Xiake Island," "Yuyuan Tantian," and "Niu Tan Qin." Those interested can search and learn more about their backgrounds.
These public accounts share the following characteristics: First, they are widely shared by people within the system. Lawyer Liu Yang worked inside the system for over a decade and frequently sees old colleagues flooding his social media feeds with these articles. Observant readers will certainly notice this phenomenon. Second, nearly every article achieves 100,000+ views. Anyone familiar with running public accounts knows that reaching 100,000+ shares is no easy task. What matters most isn't follower count, but rather sharing volume. Third, the viewpoints expressed align positively with mainstream values.
Returning to the topic of this article, it's unprecedented for official or semi-official media to blow so intensively on cryptocurrencies recently. Judging from the content, these accounts generally hold negative overall evaluations toward virtual currencies. I've summarized key points from these articles—just take a look and you'll get the idea:
"On the surface, the U.S. treats Bitcoin as 'digital gold' reserves to hedge against dollar depreciation and surging Treasury yields. However, many observers believe the deeper logic lies in using on-chain dollar stablecoins like USDT and USDC to convert global investors' funds into dollar reserves, which then automatically flow back into purchasing U.S. Treasuries. This essentially opens up a completely new bloodline for servicing massive dollar debt."
"The more dramatic this reversal—from prisoner to presidential pardon—the clearer it becomes: in the game between capital and power, there is never absolute justice, only periodic co-option and tacit mutual benefit."
"The Trump administration’s cryptocurrency harvesting actions were far more than simple 'law enforcement crackdowns' or 'fiscal revenue generation.' Under pressure from debt crises, they represent a 'digital colonization' strategy leveraging technological superiority as a weapon—transforming cryptocurrencies from decentralized technological innovations into financial tools and surveillance mechanisms serving American hegemony, posing systemic threats to the global digital economy order."
"Today they can use hacking methods to conduct 'black-on-black' operations, seizing huge amounts of Bitcoin belonging to Chen Zhi and his太子group; tomorrow they could use the same means against any individual or organization deemed a 'threat.' When law enforcers become hackers and regulators turn into thieves, the very foundation of trust in our entire digital ecosystem is being shaken."
Not coincidentally, recently at the 2025 Financial Street Forum Annual Conference, Pan Gongsheng, Governor of the People's Bank of China, stated: "As a form of financial activity, stablecoins currently cannot effectively meet basic requirements regarding customer identification, anti-money laundering, etc., amplifying loopholes in global financial regulation—such as money laundering, illegal cross-border fund transfers, terrorist financing—and fostering rampant market speculation, increasing fragility in the global financial system while undermining monetary sovereignty in some developing economies."
Note that Governor Pan Gongsheng's remarks about stablecoins are entirely negative.
When evaluating something, we often discuss its 'dual nature'—its advantages and disadvantages, benefits and risks. But regarding stablecoins, Governor Pan offered no positive assessment whatsoever.
He also emphasized:
Since 2017, the People's Bank of China has jointly issued multiple policy documents with relevant departments aimed at preventing and managing risks associated with domestic cryptocurrency trading speculation, all of which remain effective today.
Going forward, the People's Bank of China will continue working with law enforcement agencies to crack down on domestic cryptocurrency operations and speculation to safeguard economic and financial order, while closely monitoring and dynamically assessing developments in overseas stablecoins.
Many media outlets claim the central bank takes a cautious stance toward stablecoins. I think this interpretation reflects wishful thinking—an overly optimistic view.
In light of all this, lawyer Liu Yang keenly senses that the country may soon introduce policies or legal documents related to virtual digital currencies.
From a cyclical standpoint, a four-year cycle is not only a pattern in Bitcoin price fluctuations but also a timing pattern for regulatory policy releases. From the December 2013 "Notice on Preventing Bitcoin Risks," to the September 2017 "Announcement on Preventing Risks of Token Issuance Financing," to the September 2021 "Notice on Further Preventing and Managing Risks of Virtual Currency Trading Speculation," Bitcoin halvings occur every four years—and our major regulatory policies have also emerged every four years. That can’t be mere coincidence.
Regarding voices within the mainstream legal community on cryptocurrencies, they are growing louder. Lawyer Liu Yang has been handling cryptocurrency cases since 2019, when discussions about them were rare in mainstream legal circles. In 2020, the PlusToken case came to light, followed by the 2021 bull market surge, leading frontline judicial authorities to encounter increasingly more crypto-related cases. At the time, everyone was feeling their way forward, resulting in inconsistent regional policies. But starting last year, the Supreme People's Court began intensive research on virtual digital currencies, and this year the Supreme People's Procuratorate joined in. With both top judicial bodies involved and conducting long-term investigations, concrete outcomes are inevitable.
From the perspective of frontline judicial needs, resolving legal issues surrounding cryptocurrencies is urgent. In criminal cases, controversy persists over whether cryptocurrencies should be treated as data or property, leading to inconsistent enforcement standards across regions—similar cases receive different rulings, creating unequal fates for practitioners. In civil cases, courts either refuse to accept filings or dismiss lawsuits outright, regardless of whether assets are classified as data or property. Viewed through the lens of overlapping criminal-civil issues, on one hand vast quantities of seized cryptocurrency assets are confiscated in criminal proceedings, while on the other hand victims whose coins were stolen, robbed, or defrauded find police refusing to file reports. Meanwhile, civil courts deem cryptocurrency-related activities contrary to public order and good customs, rendering contracts void and eliminating remedies—a situation that inevitably feels fragmented and contradictory.
In summary, lawyer Liu Yang believes upcoming regulatory policies and legal documents will likely follow these directions: First, regarding cryptocurrency regulation, as Governor Pan Gongsheng noted, existing documents dating back to 2017 remain valid. Thus, even if new policies emerge, the overall tone won't change significantly, with particular focus likely centered on stablecoins. Second, issuing a dedicated judicial interpretation specifically for cryptocurrencies would break precedent. Given that meeting minutes addressing civil cryptocurrency cases have already been released, legal documents for criminal cases may similarly take the form of internal meeting minutes, with the main challenge lying in determining the valuation of virtual digital currencies. Third, legal documents governing cryptocurrency disposal will definitely be issued—after such prolonged research by the two highest judicial bodies, there is no reason not to release them.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
