2026-01-18 19:35:36

Many people may overlook a detail: the reason why US trading platforms have restrictions on opening up to the Chinese market is fundamentally because the US has not joined the CRS agreement system. This means that US exchanges face different regulatory constraints when managing cross-border users and exchanging information. In contrast, trading platforms in countries and regions that have joined CRS are more flexible when conducting international compliance certification. This regulatory difference directly affects the business expansion strategies of exchanges and also explains why some leading exchanges adopt differentiated operational models in different regions. Behind this is the complexity of the global cryptocurrency market regulatory framework—policy environments vary greatly, and exchanges' compliance paths are adjusted accordingly.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

15 Likes

Reward
15
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

VitalikFanboy42

· 5h ago

Ha, the real behind-the-scenes driver is that the US doesn't join CRS. I hadn't thought of this aspect before.

View OriginalReply0

SeasonedInvestor

· 8h ago

Wow, I really didn't notice these details. No wonder US exchanges are so difficult to deal with. There are so many tricks to CRS? I've gained some insight. It just feels like if the policies were a bit better, exchanges would be much smoother. Compliance, honestly, depends on where you are. Comparing like this, I really understand why leading exchanges operate with differentiation. It's not that they're deliberately being rude. Is the US not implementing CRS yet? What are they doing?

View OriginalReply0

LightningClicker

· 8h ago

Haha, the US doesn't join CRS but still dares to act big and bold, talking about opening markets. --- So in the end, it's all about different regulatory tricks; no wonder they keep playing tricks with trading gains. --- Wait, this logic is a bit confusing. CRS is actually more flexible? It sounds more like a regulatory trap. --- That's why the crypto world is always chaotic, with rules fragmented like regions. --- The US approach is just ridiculous; they don't play by the rules themselves but restrict others from entering. --- So, the core of differentiated operational models is basically each doing their own thing. --- After thinking about it, it's still better to diversify risk across multiple exchanges. Looks like there's no such thing as an absolute compliant paradise. --- CRS might seem clever, but it's actually just closing your eyes and stealing a bell; smart people all understand.

View OriginalReply0

nft_widow

· 8h ago

Haha, so the US doesn't participate in CRS, no wonder the exchanges are causing so much trouble here.

View OriginalReply0

FancyResearchLab

· 8h ago

Haha, about the CRS protocol, to put it simply, the US wants to play Mahjong alone, and the compliance flexibility has been counter-sanctioned, now they've become experts at it.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeNightmare

· 8h ago

It's the CRS system again. Frankly, it's just the US wanting to play solo, and once you calculate the compliance costs, it’s enough to make your hair stand on end. I really want to see those exchanges that claim to be "globalized"—in reality, their backend data flows are so complex—it's definitely a mix of cross-chain bridges and mountains of gas fees.

View OriginalReply0