Is the inability to withdraw money useless? ACE was put out of service and then resold, the Financial Regulatory Commission and the VASP Guild were unable to intervene, and the identity of the new person in charge was misrepresented

After the Taiwan Exchange ACE was involved in the fraud case, in October 2024, the legal representative of "Aipu New Energy Co., Ltd." was appointed and taken over by the person in charge, Zhang Jiren; However, after experiencing the pressure of registration system compliance and labor disputes, all employees have resigned, resulting in no one operating the company, unable to log in to the APP, and currently only the web version can be operated. Although the announcement claims that the withdrawal application will be processed in order, a large number of users cannot withdraw funds for more than a month, resulting in users being confused. However, there are more brutal realities that reflect the weakness of consumers during the transition period of the dictatorship.

( exclusive: only one employee left at the exchange ACE? Former employees came forward to break the news: these reasons dragged down the company's )

Regulation has just stepped in! The ACE buyer changed hands for the second time and was misrepresented as the board of directors of Beijing Securities

ACE buyer "Aipu New Energy Co., Ltd." changed its name to "Runtong Digital Innovation Co., Ltd." after acquiring the exchange ACE, and the person in charge was changed to Zhang Jiren, according to many former employees of ACE, the new buyer was passive about the operation, and eventually fell into a state of no employee operation, and users began to be unable to withdraw funds.

After the ACE users fell into helplessness, they began to complain to Taiwan's VASP regulator, the FSC, and the VASP Association for help, and relevant units also began to intervene, asking the person in charge, Zhang Jiren, to deal with the aftermath.

Unexpectedly, on 4/10, the person in charge was replaced by "You Zhicheng" without warning, indicating that the company may have changed hands again, which made everyone stunned.

Because the name "You Zhicheng" has the same name and surname as the board of directors of Beijing Securities, it also makes the media falsely believe that it is the board of directors of Beijing Securities who has entered the owner.

Disaster strikes! The competent authorities and guilds may not be able to help, who does the encryption law protect?

Since Taiwan's crypto law is still in the draft stage, the competent authority can only require "still operating" operators to enter the registration system to operate legally, however, the exchange ACE has ceased to operate, is no longer a member of the VASP Association, and there is currently no special law to blame it, so who is in charge of it?

At present, it seems that the FSC can only formulate and implement supporting measures after the shutdown through the VASP Guild, which now has relatively detailed and standardized self-regulatory norms, but there is no effective penalty to protect the affected users affected by the shutdown.

For the VASP guild, the main norm is VASP members, but the exchange ACE is no longer eligible for membership, so is there still a need to intervene in the company to clean up the mess?

At present, multiple sources of information are mixed, ACE users are divided into general users and debt buyers, and the person in charge of the exchange ACE has not publicly explained whether the company's assets are insolvent.

During the transition period of the crypto law, if some operators choose to malignantly fail, it seems that they still fall into the three-way zone.

There is no liquidation mechanism, and the legal window has become a nightmare for users

The current crypto asset registration system, established under the authority of the Money Laundering Prevention Law, focuses on preventing money laundering and terrorist financing, and cannot deal with asset liquidation and user protection issues after the business is closed or closed. Although the draft Virtual Asset Services Law preliminarily designs an exit mechanism, it is still incomparable to the special law liquidation procedures and special protection mechanisms possessed by the banking or insurance industry.

Therefore, under the current legal system, if an enterprise fails well or even malignantly fails, it can only be dealt with in accordance with the general enterprise debt settlement mechanism, such as claiming bankruptcy. However, Taiwan's bankruptcy system itself has many loopholes and practical difficulties, resulting in such cases often falling into an unsolvable legal window, and it is difficult for injured users to recover their assets, so they can only wait helplessly.

Self-help risk warning: There are many people with intentions, and they should pay attention to the leakage and utilization of personal information

At present, some victimized users have gathered to create self-help groups, integrate reporting materials, hire lawyers and other activities, which may help follow-up rights and interests.

However, there have been many similar incidents in the past, and the following risks need to be noted:

People with intentions blend into self-help groups to deliberately destroy divisions

Specific media inertia creates relevant communities under various booms

Specific business groups solicit business by acting as consultants

Beware of phishing links and unnecessary personal information disclosure

This article can't be withdrawn is useless? ACE is out of service and then resold, the Financial Regulatory Commission and the VASP Guild are unable to intervene, and the identity of the new person in charge is misinformation First appeared in Chain News ABMedia.