Back to Markets
Crypto▲ Bullish
South Korea Crypto Tax Petition Hits 50,000, Forces Review
Petition argues taxing crypto gains while exempting stocks is unfair. National Assembly must now deliberate. Outcome could delay or scrap the 20% tax, affecting Upbit and Bithumb volumes.
Continue with
A national petition demanding South Korea scrap its planned cryptocurrency tax has crossed the 50,000 signature threshold, triggering a mandatory review by the National Assembly. The petition, posted on the assembly’s e-platform, argues that taxing crypto gains while abolishing taxes on traditional investment income creates an unfair structural imbalance. The development reopens a politically charged debate that has already delayed the tax’s implementation multiple times.
Petition Triggers Mandatory Review Under National Assembly Act
Under South Korea’s National Assembly Act, any petition collecting more than 50,000 signatures within a set period must be referred to the relevant standing committee for deliberation. The crypto tax petition has reached that mark, so lawmakers cannot ignore the public demand. The Finance Committee or the Strategy and Finance Committee will now schedule hearings and review the proposal to scrap or modify the tax.
The petitioner’s core complaint centers on unequal treatment between asset classes. South Korea recently abolished the capital gains tax on traditional stock investments for retail investors, raising the threshold to 50 million won in annual gains. Crypto investors, by contrast, face a 20% tax on gains above 2.5 million won (roughly $1,900) from January 2027, after two earlier delays pushed the original 2022 start date back. The petition claims this disparity disincentivizes retail participation in digital assets and violates the principle of horizontal equity.
The Unequal Treatment Argument Carries Political Weight
The argument is straightforward: if the government believes retail investors should not pay tax on stock gains, it should apply the same logic to crypto gains. The petition points out that both asset classes are now recognized as legitimate investment vehicles in South Korea, with regulated exchanges and real-name verification systems in place. Taxing one asset class while exempting the other, the petitioner argues, amounts to regulatory discrimination.