What the FTX collapse taught crypto regulators

Which gaps did the FTX collapse expose for crypto regulators?

The record points to 3 gaps, and these gaps taught regulators where crypto rules were thin. FTX filed for bankruptcy on 11 November 2022, and the gaps appeared in the weeks and months that followed. Customer deposits reached Alameda Research, a related trading firm. A large part of that firm’s assets was FTT, a token created by FTX. John J. Ray III wrote on 17 November 2022 that he had never seen such a complete failure of corporate controls.

Each gap is an area where a rule can act. A custody rule keeps customer assets apart. A disclosure rule makes related-party links visible. A governance rule requires independent checks. The sections below show where the new texts address these areas.

What did the FSB crypto framework of July 2023 set out?

The Financial Stability Board finalised its global regulatory framework for crypto-asset activities on 17 July 2023. It promotes comprehensive and internationally consistent approaches, and it rests on the principle of same activity, same risk, same regulation. It contains high-level recommendations for crypto-asset activities and revised recommendations for global stablecoin arrangements.

The FSB states that the recommendations draw on lessons from events of the past year in crypto-asset markets. The FTX collapse falls within that period. The recommendations focus on financial stability risks, and they leave detailed national rules to each jurisdiction.

How does the EU MiCA regulation respond to crypto collapses?

MiCA sets uniform rules for crypto-assets that existing financial legislation did not cover, including asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens. Its provisions cover transparency, disclosure, authorisation and supervision, and they regulate public offers of crypto-assets so that consumers understand the risks. MiCA entered into force in June 2023.

These 4 areas match the gaps seen in the failures of 2022. A provider that needs authorisation faces a review before it serves customers, and a provider that must disclose gives outsiders information to compare.

What must a crypto-asset service provider do under MiCA?

A crypto-asset service provider needs a MiCA authorisation. Member States may offer a simplified procedure for firms already authorised under national law on 30 December 2024. Providers that ran trading platforms must keep order book records in the standard formats that ESMA specifies.

Firms that already provided services under national law before that date may continue until 1 July 2026 or until they receive or are refused a MiCA authorisation. As of October 2026 the transition window has closed, so a provider serving EU customers needs the authorisation or an exit plan.

How do the new crypto rules treat stablecoins after the collapses?

Stablecoin failures of 2022 drew attention from both texts. The FSB framework includes revised high-level recommendations for global stablecoin arrangements, and MiCA names asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens as categories with their own rules. Both ask issuers to explain what backs each token.

For a reader, this means a stablecoin issuer can be asked for a written statement of backing, redemption terms and authorisation. An issuer that answers with documents gives you facts to compare across products and across jurisdictions.

What role did courts play after the FTX collapse?

Courts carried the first response. A jury found Sam Bankman-Fried guilty on all 7 counts on 2 November 2023, and he was sentenced to 25 years in prison on 28 March 2024. The Second Circuit affirmed the conviction on 12 June 2026.

A criminal case sets a public record of what happened and gives other platforms a clear signal about custody duties. Rules and enforcement work together: rules define the standard, and courts show the cost of missing it. A platform that reads both learns what to build and what to avoid.

What does supervision of a crypto fund look like in Singapore?

The Monetary Authority of Singapore reprimanded Three Arrows Capital on 30 June 2022 for exceeding a S$250 million limit on assets under management, for providing false or misleading information, and for failing to notify changes to directorships or shareholdings.

The reprimand shows supervision at the level of limits and notices. It did not prevent the fund’s liquidation order on 27 June 2022, and it did place its breaches on the public record. For readers in Singapore, ASEAN and Hong Kong, the useful question is which authority supervises each counterparty.

What can rules not do after a crypto collapse like FTX?

Rules set a floor. A license shows that a provider passed a review on a date. It does not replace a reader’s own checks on custody, reserves and related parties. The FSB itself notes that its recommendations focus on financial stability risks and do not cover every risk category.

This is why the lessons also work as a personal checklist. Rules raise the standard for providers, and readers keep the final say on where their own money sits.

Which FTX lessons can a crypto reader turn into a checklist?

5 questions follow from the lessons. Who is authorised to hold my assets, and by which regulator? Are customer assets segregated? Does the provider or a related firm count its own token as collateral? Who audits the reserves? Who can approve a large transfer?

The EQOS Asia method page shows how such questions feed a structured score, and the contact page lets you bring a counterparty review from your own treasury.

Frequently asked questions

About the author

Stéphane Jambu

President, EQOS Forecast Asia

Stéphane Jambu leads EQOS Forecast Asia and works as a consultant in e-commerce, search visibility, and AI. LinkedIn profile