Indeed, WeChat is demanding a ban on the promotion of money-making, high-yield financial fraud schemes, and related exaggerated cryptocurrency descriptions and guarantees in the accounts’ names, crypto reporter Colin Wu said on July 13. According to the company’s announcement on July 13, it was acting “in accordance with the People’s Bank of China’s Implementation Measures for the Protection of Financial Consumers’ Rights and Interests, the Notice on Further Regulating Financial Marketing and Publicity”, and other relevant regulations.” Among other decisions, users are no longer allowed to promote “diversion fraud projects” that don’t specify the daily or annualized income, nor can they advertise “high-yield wealth management fraudulent content,” or recommend fraudulent stocks.
No misleading crypto and financial guarantees
On top of that, the company also explained the fraudulent use of new technologies, including crypto, was forbidden: Moreover, the accounts are prohibited from making false and exaggerated financial “propaganda and content that is likely to cause misunderstandings by users,” such as the content that “express or imply the future effects and benefits of financial products or services, or (…) express or imply guaranteed capital, risk-free or guaranteed income.” Finally, the platform is banning financial marketing in the account’s name, if that name contains keywords related to financial businesses or services such as banking, insurance, funds, securities, borrowing and lending, public offerings, and the like, unless the business can provide appropriate financial and legal qualifications.
WeChat crypto crackdown
The recent move comes after the popular messaging app previously limited or removed all public accounts on its platform involved in the issuance, trading, and financing of crypto and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Meanwhile, WeChat, which has more than 1.1 billion daily active users, had already banned crypto-related accounts on its platform, placing “engaging in virtual currency or digital collection business” under its “Illegal business operations” clause, referring to it as “violating content,” as Finbold reported in late June.
