This Singapore-based Crypto Lender Faces Investigation for Possible Fraud

Another crypto lender, now based out of Singapore, is in major trouble. As per the latest development, Singapore Police is now investigating crypto lender Hodlnaut Pte on charges of fraud and cheating.

Alike other players in the market, the beleaguered crypto lender’s operations have come under stress this crypto winter. Hodlnaut has reportedly lost $190 million with the crash of the Terra ecosystem earlier this year.

The police said that the probe started on Wednesday, November 23, with multiple reports alleging “false representations relating to the company’s exposure to a certain digital token”. Hodlnaut halted withdrawals on its platform earlier this year in August and has received protection from the creditors.

As said, Hodlnaut is among those crypto lenders which faced major stress in its operations after the collapse of the TerraUSD ecosystem. Previously, Hodlnaut confirmed that there are “pending proceedings” with the police.

The court has appointed interim judicial managers for Hodlnaut who published a report last month stating that the firm had downplayed its exposure to the collapsed Terra ecosystem.

Tighter Regulatory Rules In Singapore

Singapore regulators have been tightening their grip on the nation’s crypto sector recently. This happened with the implosion of the Singapore-based Terra ecosystem which spread like a contagion across the crypto space.

Last month, the Monetary Authority of Singapore proposed a regulatory framework for reducing investors’ risk in crypto trading. The MAS bans retail investors from using credit cards and borrowing funds for crypto trading.

As Singapore tries to drift away from its crypto-friendly status, Hong Kong seems to capture this opportunity. As per reports, Hong Kong is likely to resume crypto trading in the country. Amid the shifting dynamics of Asia’s crypto industry, Hong Kong might take away some business from Singapore.

However, MAS chief Ravi Menon has made it clear noting:

“We don’t set ourselves out to compete with other jurisdictions, especially on regulation. We have to do what is right for us, what is necessary to contain the risks. And the risks are primarily harm to retail investors.”