Hong Kong’s SFC flags HabitTrade in a warning on unlicensed virtual asset platforms, but the broker insists it hasn’t done regulated business or marketed services to Hong Kong investors and blames unauthorized third‑party promoters. Summary Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) has warned investors about unlicensed platforms and recent promotional activity referencing HabitTrade. In response, HabitTrade says it is a licensed Australian brokerage and “has not conducted any regulated business in Hong Kong,” nor marketed such services to the Hong Kong public. The firm blames third-party promoters for unauthorized content using its brand and says it may pursue legal action, underscoring how tight Hong Kong’s virtual asset rules have become. HabitTrade has pushed back against an investor alert from Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission, saying it does not carry out regulated activities in the city and has not marketed its services to Hong Kong residents. In a statement posted on X, the brokerage said it “is a licensed Australian brokerage and compliant financial services platform” and that it “has not conducted any regulated business in Hong Kong, nor promoted or provided related services to the public in Hong Kong,” directly disputing any suggestion that it is operating there without authorization. The clarification comes after the SFC published a notice reminding the public to be wary of “unlicensed platforms and related market promotional activities,” explicitly flagging HabitTrade in the context of suspicious marketing around virtual asset trading. While the regulator’s latest web alert does not yet list HabitTrade by name on its public “suspicious virtual asset trading platforms” page, the SFC has regularly used such notices to call out firms it believes may be targeting Hong Kong investors without a license. In an earlier circular on crypto products, the SFC warned that dealing in virtual asset futures or routing related orders for Hong Kong clients is a “Type 2” regulated activity and “requires a license from the SFC regardless of whether the business is located in Hong Kong.” HabitTrade argues that any recent marketing push is not coming from the company itself. The broker said that “some third-party promotional content, video materials, and platform traffic diversion activities that have recently appeared in the market do not represent the official position of HabitTrade,” adding that it “reserves the right to trace and take legal action against any misleading promotions and violations using its brand, technological channels, or partnerships without authorization.” The firm also pledged to “adhere to a compliance-first approach and cooperate with the regulatory requirements of relevant jurisdictions to conduct necessary investigations,” signaling that it is prepared to work with authorities to identify promoters it says are misusing its name. The dispute highlights how aggressive Hong Kong’s enforcement stance around virtual assets has become. In 2023, the SFC warned unlicensed virtual asset trading platforms that making false claims about license applications or offering prohibited services such as staking could constitute a criminal offence under the Anti‑Money Laundering and Counter‑Terrorist Financing Ordinance. In February 2024, the regulator and local police jointly warned about an alleged scam using the name of MEXC, putting the platform on its alert list and reiterating that overseas exchanges cannot market or serve Hong Kong retail users without a license, as crypto.news reported in a detailed story. Those rules have only tightened. A recent crypto.news story on Hong Kong’s upcoming stablecoin and virtual asset regime noted that the city is building out parallel licensing systems for exchanges, custodians, dealers and advisers, and making it explicit that any foreign platform “targeting” Hong Kong investors via marketing or website localization is within scope. Against that backdrop, HabitTrade’s insistence that it has done no regulated business in Hong Kong is as much about legal risk as it is about reputation: under current SFC guidance, even the perception of soliciting Hong Kong users without a license can be enough to land a platform on the regulator’s alert list, with all the banking and counterparties problems that follow.
