Skip to content

About us

eCounsel group

A boutique firm with unparalleled expertise in business and technology. We have good command of industrial ecology and legal practice, and have undertaken highly regarded cases. Because the small business scope, we pay more emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency, and choose clients with deliberation. The managing partner not only has extensive experiences in various legal issues more over than 20 years, but invests and manages several technology companies. In addition, he always checks each case rigorously. Clients’ business objectives are our primary focus. To achieve the same in the most cost-effective fashion trumps all seemingly sophisticated legal discussions.

Is Stable Coin Stable Enough?

2018 - 10 - 29

The so-called stable coin, USDT, has dropped significantly against USD on 10/15. While USDT typically values in a range of 0.99 to 1.01 when compared against USD, it dropped to as low as 0.85 on the Kraken exchange on 10/15. In this sense, whether stable coin is actually stable enough still remains a heated debate.

USDT has long come under scrutiny ever since its launch, over whether it actually holds enough reserves to match the tokens.  Since Tether is privately held, it has yet disclose any official audits, which investors have repeatedly demanded.

A study released by UT Austin further claimed that USDT was heavily used to artificially inflate bitcoin prices (significantly during the 2017 peak). “Tether seems to be used both to stabilize and manipulate Bitcoin prices,” finance professor John Griffin and co-author Amin Shams wrote in the study.

Since the “fall” of USDT (tho it is still the biggest stable coin player in the game), several numbers of stablecoins have risen, including the Gemini Dollar, PAXOS, TUSD, HUSD, etc. For these newly risen stablecoins, the question now is: can they stay stable?

Bitcoin prices have been manipulated, study says – CNN

Major cryptocurrencies jump as the controversial dollar-pegged token tether falls – CNBC

People are freaking out about Tether – Financial Times

Puerto Rico’s Noble Bank Seeks Sale Amid Crypto Slide – Bloomberg

Is Bitcoin Really Un-Tethered? – John M. Griffin

The Audio Recordings Bitfinex doesn’t want you to hear. – @Bitfinex’ed

Recommended article 

Poverty and Education

According to the Taiwanese Ministry of Health and Welfare, data shows that in the first quarter of 2016, 2 out of 10 low-income/middle-income people are children under the age of 12. More troubling, underage teenagers account…

Waterland Securities (Part 2)

The process of the crime has two steps, the first step is: “Fake Transaction, Real Transition”. 楊瑞仁的犯罪過程可以分為兩個部驟,第一個部份是「假交易,真入帳」。楊瑞仁為了取信於台灣銀行信託部[2],楊瑞仁於上班前、下班後利用公司電腦列印出不實交易成交單並且刪除電腦紀錄,使台銀看到交易單而買進楊瑞仁的偽造商業本票,然後將資金匯入國票在台銀所開的帳戶。但是這個帳戶是國票的並不是楊瑞仁所能控制,所以他還需要另一個步驟來把資金從國票的帳戶裡面套出來。 為了要把國票總公司銀行帳戶裡面的錢轉到自己的互頭裡面,楊瑞仁想了另一個辦法,就是要使國票總公司「誤認銀行帳戶中的錢是客戶的錢」。因為國票有一種業務項目是為「附買回交易」[3],而在這種交易當中,投資人提前解約是非常常見的(可能因為資金調度需求),一旦投資人解除契約國票當然得把投資人所附的價金還給投資人,楊瑞仁便是看準「國票必須在投資人解除附買回交易約定時將錢匯還給投資人」的這一點而加以利用。 再加上這些台銀所支付國票的款項,楊瑞仁知道國票總公司不會詳細的核對每一筆交易的細節(台銀匯款給國票時匯款單上匯款人欄裡面寫的是台銀,而非楊瑞仁的人頭戶的名子,如果有稍微核對匯款人的名稱,就可以發現根本沒有附買回交易之存在),而只會核對交易總金額,所以他利用偽造的收付款憑單(一樣利用公司沒人的時候利用電腦列印、做完刪除電腦上的記錄)成功使國票誤信該款項是客戶與國票達成「附買回交易」所付之款項(其實根本沒有交易),而楊瑞仁隔兩天再對公司解除契約,國票公司便把戶頭裡面的錢匯入楊的人頭戶,這樣的「假交易,真洗錢」就讓楊瑞仁獲得了巨額資金。 參考資料: 1. 楊瑞仁實際向台灣銀行信託部詐取的金額高達98億元,而於1995年當時國票公司的實收資本只有110億左右(2006年資本額已經達到約180億),換言之楊瑞仁所詐騙的金額可能快要超過國票公司的所有資產了!且國票是上市公司,其所保證在外流通之商業本票高達一千億元,此案影響層面極廣,不但包含票券業更囊括股市,造成金融市場動蕩。 2. 此時台灣銀行等於是一個投資人的角色,透過票券買賣的方式台灣銀行可以將其閒置資金移轉至需求資金的公司,台灣銀行則從中賺取利息收入。 3. 附買回交易,是指票券交易商(如本案中的國票公司)與投資人訂定的一種附條件交易,交易商將票券賣給投資人,同時約定「一定期間」後賣方必須以「約定價額」(通常是本金加上利息)贖回該票券。對於買進票券的投資人來說此交易之功能類似短期存款,可以賺取利潤,對於交易商來說則是可以方便其資金調度。

Living Wills - No More Bail Outs for Fat Cats

Since the financial crisis, American has grown tired of cleaning up after bankers who put hands in taxpayer’s pocket and are not never accountable for the mistakes they make. 金融海嘯之後,美國人厭倦了要從他們已經很薄的荷包裡掏錢,為只顧賺錢不揹責任的銀行家所犯的錯擦屁股,所以,在2010年,就通過了這個「華爾街改革及金融消費者保護法」,還以推動最力的兩位國會議員(一參Dodd、一眾Frank)為名。 這個法,要求大銀行對聯準會和聯邦存款保險公司提出詳盡、可信之計畫(反面比方,像小英的「新南向」與「亞洲矽谷」,就不屬於這種),確保萬一他們要倒了,也不會用到納稅人一毛錢。 死亡計畫-銀行的緊箍咒 “big banks are required…