Token Launches and ICOs in Hong Kong: Legal and Regulatory Framework

Introduction

Token launches, including initial coin offerings (ICOs), initial exchange offerings (IEOs), and related mechanisms, have been a defining feature of the blockchain ecosystem since 2017. In Hong Kong, the regulatory treatment of token launches has evolved significantly, particularly following the introduction of the virtual asset licensing regime under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing (Amendment) Ordinance 2022.

This article examines the legal and regulatory framework applicable to token launches in Hong Kong, including the critical question of whether tokens are securities, the SFC’s enforcement posture, and the key legal risks for issuers and promoters.

The Securities Question: Are Your Tokens Securities?

The most important legal question for any token launch is whether the tokens constitute “securities” as defined in the Securities and Futures Ordinance (SFO). If they do, the full weight of Hong Kong securities law applies, including licensing requirements for dealing and advising, prospectus requirements for public offerings, and the prohibition on market manipulation and insider dealing.

The SFO defines “securities” to include: shares in or debentures of a corporation, interests in a collective investment scheme (CIS), and options, warrants, and similar instruments relating to the above.

The most commonly triggered category for tokens is the CIS: an arrangement in respect of property of any description, including money, the purpose or effect of which is to enable the participants to participate in or receive profits or income arising from the acquisition, holding, management, or disposal of the property, where the participants do not have day-to-day control over the management of the property.

A token that: (a) gives holders an economic interest in a pool of assets or a business; (b) is promoted on the basis of expected profits from the efforts of others; and (c) is not under the day-to-day control of the token holders, is likely to constitute a CIS interest, a form of security, regardless of how it is labelled by the issuer.

The SFC’s “Look-Through” Approach

The SFC has consistently applied a “look-through” approach to token characterisation: it looks at the economic substance and the rights conferred by the token, not the label or the technology used. A token called a “utility token” that in substance gives holders economic rights in a project’s profits will be treated as a security.

The SFC’s November 2018 statement on ICOs set out this position clearly and it has been reinforced through subsequent enforcement actions and circulars. The SFC has also indicated that it will take action against platforms that facilitate the distribution of security tokens without appropriate licensing.

Utility Tokens

A pure utility token that gives holders access to a specific product or service on a platform, with no economic rights, no promise of profit, and no dependence on the efforts of others, is not a security. In practice, the line between utility and security can be blurry, particularly in the early stages of a project where the platform does not yet exist and token purchasers are motivated primarily by the prospect of price appreciation.

The SFC has indicated that tokens sold in advance of the platform being operational are more likely to be treated as securities, as the purchasers are essentially investing in the project’s success rather than accessing an existing service.

Virtual Asset Exchange Tokens

Pure exchange tokens (cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ether, which function as a medium of exchange or store of value without conferring rights in any specific issuer or project) are generally not treated as securities in Hong Kong. However, they are “virtual assets” for VASP licensing purposes, and trading platforms handling them must be licensed by the SFC.

Stablecoins

Fiat-referenced stablecoins are a distinct category. The HKMA is developing a licensing regime for stablecoin issuers. Stablecoins that are backed by a pool of assets managed by a centralised issuer may also constitute a CIS depending on the specific arrangements.

Legal Risks for Token Issuers and Promoters

Unlicensed Securities Activity

If tokens constitute securities and the issuer or promoter deals in, advises on, or manages those securities without an SFC licence, this is a criminal offence under the SFO, punishable by a fine of up to HK$5 million and imprisonment for up to 7 years.

Unlawful Offer to the Public (Prospectus Requirements)

A public offer of securities in Hong Kong must comply with the prospectus requirements of the Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 32), including registration of the prospectus with the Companies Registry, unless an exemption applies. An unregistered offer to the public of securities is a criminal offence.

Anti-Fraud and Market Misconduct

The SFO’s market misconduct provisions (insider dealing, market manipulation, disclosure of false or misleading information) apply to dealings in securities, including security tokens. The SFC has brought market misconduct proceedings in connection with token-related activities.

VASP Licensing

Even if tokens are not securities, a platform that operates a centralised exchange for trading virtual assets (including non-security tokens) in Hong Kong must be licensed as a VASP. Operators of unlicensed exchanges are committing a criminal offence under the AMLO.

Structuring a Token Launch in Hong Kong: Key Considerations

• Obtain a legal opinion on token characterisation: Before launching, get a written legal opinion from Hong Kong counsel on whether the tokens are securities under the SFO. This is essential for regulatory compliance and for demonstrating to exchanges and investors that the legal position has been considered.
• If tokens are securities, obtain the appropriate SFC licence: A Type 1 licence (dealing in securities) is required for dealing in security tokens. Type 4 (advising on securities) for advisory activities. If the token constitutes a CIS, a Type 9 (asset management) licence may be needed for managing the underlying assets.
• Restrict Hong Kong offerings: If the token is a security and the issuer does not wish to comply with Hong Kong securities law, restrict the offering from Hong Kong investors and ensure robust geo-blocking and investor eligibility verification.
• Prepare a compliant offering document: Whether a prospectus or information memorandum (for professional investors), the offering document should provide full and accurate disclosure of the token’s terms, rights, risks, and the issuer’s business.
• Comply with AML/KYC requirements: All token sales involve some form of payment that triggers AML/KYC obligations. Even for non-security token sales, robust KYC procedures are essential.

Update: what has changed since this guide was written

Hong Kong's virtual asset regulation moved substantially between late 2025 and mid-2026. The points below affect the analysis in this article and should be read alongside it.

• 3 November 2025. The SFC permitted shared order books with global affiliates, disapplied the twelve-month track record requirement for tokens offered only to professional investors and for HKMA-licensed stablecoins, allowed custody of tokens not admitted to trading and permitted distribution of products giving virtual asset exposure.
• 11 February 2026. Three circulars: margin financing by licensed corporations against Bitcoin and Ether collateral subject to a minimum 60% haircut; affiliated market makers on licensed platforms; and a framework for virtual asset perpetual contracts for professional investors.
• 10 April 2026. The HKMA granted the first two stablecoin issuer licences, to Anchorpoint Financial Limited and HSBC, from 36 applications. The first regulated Hong Kong dollar stablecoin, HKDAP, launched on 12 August 2026.
• 20 April 2026. The SFC established a framework for secondary trading of tokenised SFC-authorised investment products on licensed platforms, going beyond the primary dealing permitted under the 2023 circular.
• 27 May 2026. A joint HKMA and SFC circular gave HKMA-licensed stablecoins materially lighter treatment: licensed corporations may partner directly with the issuer for dealing and custody, the virtual asset knowledge assessment is disapplied for stablecoin-only services and the products are neither automatically complex nor restricted to professional investors.
• Four new licensing regimes are coming. Consultation conclusions on virtual asset dealing and custody were published on 24 December 2025 and on virtual asset advisory and management on 26 May 2026. All four will be implemented by amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance and the Government has said it intends to introduce the bill during 2026. Unlike the 2023 trading platform regime, there will be no deeming arrangement so affected businesses cannot continue operating while an application is processed.

For the current position across all of these regimes, see our guide to Hong Kong crypto licence requirements. Separately, crypto-asset tax reporting obligations under the OECD framework begin on 1 January 2027 and reach a wider group of businesses than the licensing regimes do: see our guide to CARF in Hong Kong.

Conclusion

Token launches in Hong Kong operate in a sophisticated and increasingly enforced regulatory environment. The securities law analysis is the threshold question: if tokens are securities, compliance with the SFO is mandatory and non-negotiable. If they are not securities, VASP licensing and AML compliance requirements still apply to exchanges and intermediaries.

The SFC has demonstrated willingness to take enforcement action against token launches that breach Hong Kong law, and ignorance of the regulatory framework is not a defence.

Alan Wong LLP advises on token launches, SFC licensing, and virtual asset regulation in Hong Kong. Contact us before launching any token or digital asset product.

To discuss how this affects your business, please get in touch.