After being named by the CSRC, JPEX, a virtual asset trading platform, issued several statements in response to the CSRC, emphasizing that it had not stopped operations, and said that it sought guidance from the CSRC last year but did not receive a positive response, denouncing the CSRC as malicious targeting.

We deeply regret the breach of confidentiality

The SFC's latest response stated that it regrets that JPEX has disclosed confidential communications with the Enforcement Department of the Commission in breach of the confidentiality provisions of the Securities and Futures Ordinance and the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance.

The SFC added that JPEX claims to be a virtual asset trading platform and is not regulated, and since March 2022, the SFC has been closely monitoring the platform and has commenced investigations into the platform's alleged false and misleading statements and unlicensed activities. As JPEX has been uncooperative and has not been able to respond substantively to the Commission's request, the Commission subsequently added JPEX to the SFC's list of unlicensed companies and suspicious websites in July 3.

During the arrest of JPEX, the police seized a large amount of evidence, including 800 million yuan in cash, precious jewelry, telephones, computers and JPEX-related documents. (Photo by Zuo Langxing)

Confirm that JPEX has never approached a possible licence application

The confidential communications disclosed by JPEX on its website form part of the SFC's inquiry and investigation against JPEX. The SFC confirmed that JPEX had never approached the SFC in connection with a possible licence application, and that none of the entities of the JPEX Group had been licensed by the SFC and had not applied to the SFC for a licence to operate a virtual asset trading platform in Hong Kong. Therefore, there was no communication between the SFC and JPEX on licensing related matters.

The SFC also pointed out that the information obtained thereafter raised suspicions that the case involved fraud and referred it to the Police for handling. As the investigation is still ongoing, the SFC is unable to comment further.