South Korean Democratic Party lawmaker Min Byung-deok said on the 22nd that virtual asset taxation should be implemented only after passage of the Digital Asset Basic Law, marking the first public call from within the party to delay the tax timetable rather than proceed under the current framework.

In a Facebook post, Min said he supports the principle that income should be taxed and that digital assets should not be exempt. But he argued that the institutional foundation for fair collection has not yet been prepared. He said taxation should start only after lawmakers pass the basic legislation governing the sector.

Min pointed to three specific concerns: starting taxation before overseas transaction data is available, failing to apply loss carryforward deductions, and not disclosing the expected revenue effects and compliance costs. He said the National Assembly and the government should present deadlines and verification standards for each preparatory task so the process does not slip into an open-ended delay.

He also said the proposal is not intended to avoid taxation, but to ensure that taxes are collected properly. During the preparation period, he said, authorities should strengthen enforcement against unfair trading and reinforce investor protection.

Different sources describe the matter differently, and the relevant details still require official confirmation.

The remarks stand out because the debate in South Korea has increasingly focused on how to align crypto-specific legislation with tax enforcement. Available policy context indicates that the government has been preparing to tax income from digital asset transfers or lending, while the Democratic Party has also been working on a broader legal framework for issuance, trading, custody and supervision of digital assets.

Why It Matters

This is a regulatory sequencing issue with direct implications for one of Asia’s largest crypto markets. If taxation is tied more explicitly to passage of a broader digital asset law, South Korea’s crypto policy may move toward a framework-first approach rather than imposing tax collection before reporting, supervision and investor-protection systems are fully aligned.

The comments also expose a live policy split inside the ruling camp over whether implementation readiness should outweigh the push to begin taxation on schedule. That debate matters because tax policy, data access and compliance design can shape how domestic exchanges, users and regulators operate under a more formalized market structure.