1. Legal Status and Institutional Design
This table identifies who regulates tokenized RWAs in each jurisdiction, what regulatory model applies, and when the current framework was established. It now covers all 21 jurisdictions.
| Jurisdiction | Primary Regulator(s) | Regulatory Model | Year Established | Stance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU | ESMA, EBA, NCAs (per Member State) | Multi-layered: MiCA (crypto-assets) + MiFID II/MiFIR (financial instruments) + DLT Pilot Regime (infrastructure) | 2023 (MiCA in force; DLT Pilot applicable) | Balanced |
| Switzerland | FINMA | Single regulator; DLT Act (omnibus) amending ten existing federal laws | 2021 (DLT Act in force) | Permissive |
| Germany | BaFin (sole); Bundesbank (settlement) | Single regulator; eWpG + KryptoFAV + ZuFinG + EU frameworks (MiCA, DLT Pilot) | 2021 (eWpG) | Permissive |
| France | AMF, ACPR | Dual regulator; Blockchain Ordinance + PACTE Act + MiCA transition | 2017 (Blockchain Ordinance) | Balanced |
| UK | FCA, Bank of England, HM Treasury, HMRC | Multi-regulator; FSMA framework extended + new cryptoasset regime (commences 25 October 2027) | 2024 (DSS), 2025 (Property Act), 2026 (Cryptoassets Regulations made) | Balanced |
| Liechtenstein | FMA | Single regulator; TVTG (Blockchain Act) + TVTG Refit + EEA MiCAR | 2020 (TVTG) | Permissive |
| Luxembourg | CSSF | Single regulator; Blockchain Laws I-IV + EU frameworks | 2019 (Blockchain Law I) | Balanced |
| Ireland | Central Bank of Ireland (CBI) | Single regulator via directly-applicable EU law (MiFID II, DLT Pilot, MiCAR) + CBI guidance overlay; no bespoke domestic blockchain statute | 2023 (DLT Pilot applicable); 2024 (MiCAR NCA designated) | Balanced |
| US | SEC and CFTC (plus OCC, IRS, FINRA, 50+ state regulators) | Multi-regulator; existing securities law applied (technology-neutral) | 1933 (Securities Act applied) | Restrictive |
| Brazil | BCB (non-security VASPs), CVM (security tokens) | Dual-track regulator; Law 14,478/2022 + CVM Resolution 88 + BCB SPSAV resolutions | 2022 (Law 14,478, in force 2023) | Balanced |
| Canada | CSA (13 provincial/territorial regulators), CIRO, FINTRAC, OSFI | Provincial coordination model; National Instruments + Staff Notices | 2017 (CSA Staff Notice 46-307) | Balanced |
| Cayman Islands | CIMA (single integrated regulator) | Single regulator; VASP Act + SIBA + Mutual Funds / Private Funds Acts (2026 tokenised-funds amendments) | 2020 (VASP Act Phase 1); 2026 (tokenised funds framework, in force 24 Mar) | Permissive |
| BVI | BVI Financial Services Commission (FSC); ITA (AEOI) | Single regulator; SIBA + VASP Act + Business Companies Act; no bespoke tokenization statute | 2010 (SIBA); 2023 (VASP Act in force) | Permissive |
| Singapore | MAS | Single regulator; SFA + FAA + PS Act + FSMA (DTSP regime) | 2019 (PS Act); 2020 (MAS STO/token guidance) | Permissive |
| Japan | JFSA/FSA, JSDA, JSTOA (SROs), SESC | Single regulator with SROs; FIEA ERTR classification | 2020 (FIEA ERTR amendments) | Balanced |
| Hong Kong | SFC, HKMA, FSTB | Dual regulator; SFO + AMLO + Stablecoins Ordinance | 2023 (SFC tokenization circulars) | Balanced |
| South Korea | FSC, FSS, KSD, KRX | Single regulator with CSD mandate; FSCMA + AERSB amendments | 2026 passed (effective January 2027) | Emerging |
| Australia | ASIC, AUSTRAC, RBA, Treasury | Single regulator; Corporations Act 2001 + Digital Assets Framework Act 2026 | 2026 enacted (DAF Act commences 9 April 2027) | Emerging |
| UAE | VARA, ADGM FSRA, DIFC DFSA, federal CMA (ex-SCA), CBUAE | Multi-zone multi-regulator; zone-specific frameworks | 2022 (VARA Law), 2018 (ADGM), 2021 (DIFC) | Permissive |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA) | Single regulator within ADGM free zone (English common law); FSMR + Digital Securities Guidance + DLT Foundations Regs | 2018 (FSRA VA framework); 2020 (Digital Securities Guidance) | Permissive |
| Bahrain | Central Bank of Bahrain (CBB) | Single regulator; CRA Module (Rulebook Volume 6) + SIO Module | 2019 (CRA Module) | Permissive |
2. Securities Classification Comparison
This table compares the primary test used to determine whether a tokenized asset is a security, the key statute, and what constitutes a security token.
| Jurisdiction | Primary Test | Key Statute | What Constitutes a Security Token |
|---|---|---|---|
| EU | ESMA nine classification guidelines (substance over form, technological neutrality) | MiFID II Annex I, Section C; Prospectus Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 | Token with characteristics of transferable securities (shares, bonds, CIS units); other crypto-assets fall under MiCA |
| Switzerland | FINMA economic-function test (payment, utility, asset tokens) | Code of Obligations Art. 973d (ledger-based securities); FMIA/FinSA | Asset token representing a right typically embodied in a security |
| Germany | Substance over form; financial-instrument analysis under MiFID II | eWpG, KWG, AktG; Prospectus Regulation | Bearer bonds, fund units (KryptoFAV), registered shares (ZuFinG) maintained on DLT register |
| France | AMF 2020 security token legal analysis | CMF, Prospectus Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 | Token representing a financial instrument under MiFID II |
| UK | FCA PS19/22 four-category taxonomy; specified investment analysis (RAO) | FSMA 2000, FCA Perimeter Guidance | Token meeting definition of specified investment (share, debenture, CIS unit) |
| Liechtenstein | Token Container Model -- contained right determines classification | TVTG Art. 2(1)(d); Financial Market Act | Token whose contained right qualifies as a security under financial market legislation |
| Luxembourg | Economic substance -- Digital Assets vs. Virtual Assets distinction | MiFID II / UCITS / AIFMD; Blockchain Laws I-IV | Token representing shares, bonds, or fund units under existing securities law |
| Ireland | EU two-track economic-substance test (no separate Irish statutory definition) | MiFID II (S.I. 375/2017); Prospectus Regulation; CSDR | Transferable security / financial instrument under MiFID II (MiCAR-excluded) |
| US | Howey test (investment contract); Reves test for tokenized debt/notes | Securities Act 1933, Exchange Act 1934, Investment Company Act 1940 | Token meeting all four Howey prongs; federal securities laws apply identically on-chain or off-chain |
| Brazil | CVM adapted Howey test (four questions) | Law 6,385/76 Art. 2 Item IX; CVM Guidance Opinion No. 40 | Asset-backed (security) token involving public offering, collective investment, profit expectation from third-party efforts |
| Canada | Pacific Coast Coin Exchange test (investment contract); substance over form | Provincial securities acts; CSA Staff Notices 46-307/308 | Token where value depends on efforts of identifiable parties and holders have no active role |
| Cayman Islands | Enumerated-list (Schedule 1 SIBA) substance test -- no Howey/investment-contract concept | SIBA (2020 Revision); Mutual Funds Act & Private Funds Act (2025 Revision, amended 2026) | Virtual asset representing/convertible into a Schedule 1 security or derivative; tokenised fund interest under Funds Acts |
| BVI | Fact-specific SIBA 'investment' enquiry (exhaustive list) | SIBA 2010; VASP Act 2022; Business Companies Act 2004 | Token whose rights are synonymous/referable to a listed investment (shares, fund interests, debentures, derivatives) |
| Singapore | MAS economic substance, not technological form (same as non-tokenized CMP) | Securities and Futures Act 2001 | Token that is a capital markets product (security, CIS unit, derivative) regardless of technology |
| Japan | ERTR classification (Type II rights recorded/transferable on-chain elevated to Type I) | FIEA (ERTRs; amended 2020, 2024) | Electronically Recorded Transferable Rights (bonds, CIS interests, trust beneficiary certificates) on DLT |
| Hong Kong | SFC "see-through" approach; underlying right determines classification | Securities and Futures Ordinance (SFO) | Token where underlying right is a security under SFO (shares, debentures, CIS interests) |
| South Korea | FSC two-part test (third-party effort significance + profit distribution) | FSCMA, AERSB (amended 2026, effective 2027) | DLT-registered securities conferring equity interests, dividend rights, or residual asset claims |
| Australia | ASIC functional approach -- token function determines classification | Corporations Act 2001 s 764A, s 9 (MIS), s 761D (derivative), s 763D | Token that is a financial product (security, MIS interest, derivative, or non-cash payment facility) |
| UAE | Zone-dependent: ADGM (digital securities), DIFC (Investment Tokens), VARA (ARVAs) | ADGM FSMR, DIFC Markets Law, VARA Law No. 4/2022, CMA federal regime | Token possessing characteristics of conventional securities (zone-specific definitions) |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | FSMR s. 58(2)(b) deeming power (economic/legal features of a Security, Schedule 1 Part 3) | FSMR; MKT, FUNDS Rulebooks; Digital Securities Guidance (VER02) | Token deemed a 'Digital Security' (shares, debentures, sukuk, fund units) -- case-by-case assessment |
| Bahrain | CBB characteristics-based analysis (financial entitlement, profit-share, decision-making) | CBB Rulebook Volume 6 CRA Module | Token exhibiting bond-like, equity-like, voting, or monetary-claim characteristics |
3. Licensing Comparison
This table compares license types, minimum capital requirements, indicative timelines, and cost structures for operating a tokenized securities platform.
| Jurisdiction | Primary License Type | Minimum Capital | Indicative Timeline | Estimated Annual Cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU | MiCA CASP (Class 1/2/3) + MiFID II investment firm (for financial instruments) | CASP EUR 50K/125K/150K; MiFID II PMR EUR 75K/150K/750K | CASP 25 business days completeness, 40-60 for decision; MiFID II 6 months statutory | No data |
| Switzerland | DLT trading facility (FMIA); Securities firm; Bank; FinTech license (FINMA) | DLT facility CHF 1M (no custody) / CHF 5M (with); small DLT CHF 500K; FinTech CHF 300K | Depends on complexity (NOT VERIFIED as fixed figure) | No data |
| Germany | Crypto securities registrar + crypto custody (BaFin); MiCA CASP; DLT MTF | Registrar EUR 150,000; crypto custody EUR 150,000 | Registrar/custody 6-9 months; MiCA CASP simplified ~3 months | No data |
| France | DASP/CASP registration; ISP/FIA; DLT TSS/MTF (Pilot Regime) | Per MiCA/PACTE; DLT TSS NOT VERIFIED (Pilot applies MiFID II/CSDR own-funds, case-by-case) | DLT TSS bespoke (LISE authorized 13 Oct 2025, 3-year term extendable to 6) | No data |
| UK | FCA authorisation (investment firm); MTF/OTF; DSS participant; future cryptoasset authorisation (Oct 2027) | Investment firm PMR GBP 75K-750K; MTF/OTF GBP 150K-750K; future CATP GBP 150K | Investment firm 6 months statutory (complete); median 106 days (2024-25) | No data |
| Liechtenstein | TVTG TT Service Provider registration (11 categories); MiCA CASP | Minimum capital varies by category (no uniform amount stated) | Statutory maximum 3 months for complete application | CHF 1,500 base (first service) + CHF 700 per additional |
| Luxembourg | Credit Institution; Investment Firm (PFS); UCITS ManCo; AIFM; MiCA CASP | Credit Institution EUR 8.7M; Investment Firm EUR 50K-730K; UCITS ManCo EUR 125K+; AIFM EUR 125K-300K+ | 6-12 months for credit institutions and investment firms | No data |
| Ireland | MiFID investment firm; MiCAR CASP; DLT Pilot infrastructures; fund vehicle + manager (UCITS/AIF/ICAV/AIFM) | MiFID EUR 75K/150K/750K; MiCAR CASP EUR 50K/125K/150K; AIFM/UCITS ManCo EUR 125K (self-managed EUR 300K) | MiFID 6-12 months in practice (NOT VERIFIED as statutory); MiCAR 25+40 working days; QIAIF 24-hour fast-track | No data |
| US | Broker-dealer, ATS, transfer agent, RIA, SPBD (optional); state money transmitter | Rule 15c3-1: USD 5,000 (introducing BD) to USD 250,000+ (carrying/ATS) | Form D 15 days; Reg A 2-6 months; BD+ATS 6-18 months | High (multi-regulator fees) |
| Brazil | SPSAV authorization (BCB) for non-security VASPs; CVM registration for securities | BRL 10.8M-37.2M by modality (Chainalysis-reported; per-category breakdown NOT VERIFIED against official texts) | 270-day adaptation period (deadline 30 Oct 2026); reporting from 4 May 2026 | No data |
| Canada | Investment Dealer (+CIRO); Exempt Market Dealer; Marketplace/ATS (Restricted Dealer being phased out) | Restricted Dealer CAD 50,000 min; EMD CAD 50,000+; Investment Dealer higher (CIRO-determined) | CTPs transitioning restricted-to-investment-dealer (2025-2026); 12+ months | No data |
| Cayman Islands | Tokenised fund registration; VASP licence (custody/trading) or registration; SIBA licensed/registered person | Funds: no statutory minimum (registered mutual fund route min US$100,000 per investor); VASP custody/platform enhanced prudential -- specific amount NOT VERIFIED | Fund registration notification/filing-based (days to weeks); private funds within 21 days of accepting capital | No data |
| BVI | VASP registration (standard/custody/exchange); SIBA investment-business licence; fund regimes; FSC sandbox | VASP Act: no fixed minimum ('adequate paid-up capitalisation and liquidity'); SIBA per-category base-capital NOT independently re-verified | FSC initial comments ~6 weeks; service-standard target ~6 months | VA-exchange registration: US$10,000 application / US$25,000 initial |
| Singapore | Capital Markets Services (CMS) licence; RMO / Approved Exchange; PSA SPI/MPI; FSMA DTSP licence | CMS base capital S$250K (single) / S$1M (multiple); DTSP S$250K; PSA SPI S$100K / MPI S$250K | CMS statutory review 4-6 months; 6-12 months in practice; DTSP no transition period | No data |
| Japan | Type I FIBO (dealing/brokering + PTS); Type II FIBO (self-offering CIS); Investment Management Business | Type I FIBO JPY 50 million (~USD 340,000), capital adequacy ratio >=120%; Type II FIBO JPY 10 million (~USD 68,000) | ERTR framework in force since May 2020; registration processing not specified | No data |
| Hong Kong | SFO Type 1/7/9 licenses; VATP licence under AMLO; pending VA dealing/custody/advisory regimes | FRR: Type 1/7/9 holding client assets HKD 5,000,000 paid-up + HKD 3,000,000 liquid | VATP licensing since 1 June 2023 (13 platforms licensed early 2026); new AMLO regimes targeted LegCo 2026 | No data |
| South Korea | Financial Investment Business License; Issuer Account Management Institution; Exchange License (via KRX) | NOT VERIFIED (issuer account management institution requires capital adequacy + system requirements; figures not stated) | Licensing effective January 2027 (one-year preparation); OTC designees apply for full licence within 6 months | No data |
| Australia | Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL); DAP/TCP authorizations from 9 Apr 2027; AUSTRAC DCE registration | AFSL base-level requirements vary; DAP/TCP capital quantum NOT VERIFIED (ASIC consultation pending) | DAF Act commences 9 Apr 2027 + 6-month transition; no-action position until 30 June 2026 | No data |
| UAE | VARA VASP (7 categories); ADGM FSP; DIFC DFSA license; CMA (8 activity licences); CBUAE payment-token | VARA per Company Rulebook (not public); ADGM MTF 6 months opex + buffer; CMA AED 500K-4M + 6-month opex floor | NOT VERIFIED (CMA transition runway reported ~90 days, not independently verified) | No data |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | FSP for intermediaries; MTF (FSP); RIE (Recognition Order); DSF (FSP Custody); RCH; Fund Manager FSP; DLT Foundations | Issuer qua Issuer: no ongoing prudential capital; RIE/Digital Securities RIE 12 months opex; VA MTF 6 months + buffer; VA custody higher of US$250,000 or 6 months; DLT Foundation min US$50,000 assets | NOT VERIFIED -- FSRA does not publish median Digital Securities timelines; Exempt Fund fast-track ~10-12 days | No data |
| Bahrain | Four CRA categories (Cat 1 advisory; Cat 2 agent/custody; Cat 3 principal/OTC; Cat 4 exchange) | Cat 1 BHD 25,000; Cat 2 BHD 100,000; Cat 3 BHD 200,000; Cat 4 BHD 300,000 (stablecoin issuers BHD 250,000) | NOT VERIFIED (no specific timeline stated) | No data |
4. DLT Trading Infrastructure
This table compares the type of DLT trading venue, thresholds and restrictions, and authorized entities.
| Jurisdiction | Venue Type | Volume/Size Thresholds | Authorized Entities | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU | DLT MTF, DLT SS, DLT TSS (Pilot Regime) | EUR 6B initial admission / EUR 9B transition; Market Integration Package (4 Dec 2025) proposes EUR 6B->100B + permanence | MiFID II firms, market operators, CSDR-authorized CSDs | 6 authorized DLT market infrastructures (CSD Prague, 21X, 360X, Axiology, LISE, Securitize) per ESMA register Jan 2026 |
| Switzerland | DLT trading facility (FMIA Art. 73a-73e) | Standard CHF 1M-5M capital; small CHF 500K with volume thresholds | Swiss legal entities meeting capital/organizational requirements | SDX (exchange + CSD); BX Digital sole DLT facility (12 Mar 2025, effective 14 May 2025) |
| Germany | Crypto securities register (eWpG) + DLT Pilot (as EU) | Per EU Pilot Regime thresholds | BaFin-licensed registrars; ESMA-authorized DLT infrastructures | 360X DLT MTF (Siemens bond secondary trade Aug 2025; Kraken xStocks Feb 2026); 21X AG DLT TSS |
| France | DLT Pilot Regime (EU) + Banque de France DL3S | LISE EUR 6 billion admitted-securities cap; SME/mid-cap focus (issuers <EUR 500m) | MiFID-authorized firms; AMF/ACPR joint approval for DLT TSS | LISE SA (first French DLT TSS, 13 Oct 2025; first onchain IPO ST Group, subscriptions 9 Apr 2026) |
| UK | Digital Securities Sandbox (DSS) under FSMA 2023 | Sandbox-specific limits; broader scope, longer duration | FCA-authorized firms (+ Bank of England for DSS) | 16 Gate 1 entrants as of Dec 2025; no firm yet at Gate 2; operational until Dec 2028 |
| Liechtenstein | TVTG TT Trading Platform Operator (2024 Refit) + EEA frameworks | Per TVTG and financial-market legislation | FMA-registered TT Service Providers | NOT VERIFIED for DLT Pilot authorization; tokenized AIFs/equity (AARGOS, Amazing Blocks, Celsion Bank) |
| Luxembourg | EU DLT Pilot (via Blockchain Law III); Clearstream D7 / FundsDLT infrastructure | Per EU Pilot Regime thresholds | CSDR-authorized CSDs, Luxembourg-based infrastructure | Clearstream D7; FundsDLT; LuxSE; EIB digital bond program |
| Ireland | EU DLT Pilot Regime (Reg (EU) 2022/858); CBI is competent authority | Instrument caps (shares <EUR 500m, bonds/MMI <EUR 1bn, UCITS <EUR 500m, aggregate EUR 6bn) | MiFID firms / CASPs (with ESMA coordination); NOT VERIFIED that any Irish DLT-MTF/SS is live | No live CBI-authorised DLT Pilot infrastructure; Irish MMFs underlie external platforms (JP Morgan Kinexys, Archax) |
| US | ATS (Reg ATS, Form ATS-N); Nasdaq SEC-approved for tokenized securities (Mar 18, 2026, Release 34-105047) | No DLT-specific thresholds; ATS Reg requirements apply | Registered broker-dealers with ATS filing; Nasdaq | Securitize Markets, tZERO, INX, Prometheum Ember ATS; Nasdaq go-live targeted Q3 2026; DTC pilot (3-year, no-action Dec 2025) |
| Brazil | No dedicated DLT-venue statute; B3 tokenization platform + BRL stablecoin planned 2026 | CVM Resolution 88 crowdfunding (BRL 15M per offering; reform to BRL 25M/50M proposed, not enacted) | CVM-registered crowdfunding platforms | B3 planned 2026; Mercado Bitcoin (BRL 1B+ private credit tokenized); Drex Phase 3 collateral 2026-2027 |
| Canada | No dedicated DLT-venue pilot; CTPs register as marketplace (NI 21-101); CSA Project Tokenization | No DLT-specific thresholds | Registered investment dealers with CIRO membership | Project Samara (EDC, BoC, RBC, TD) -- first regulator-approved tokenized bond (CAD 100M); near-instant atomic settlement (experimental) |
| Cayman Islands | No domestic DLT market-infrastructure regime; closest analogue is VASP virtual asset trading platform licence | AML/prudential (not securities-market-infrastructure) | VASP licensees; no recognised securities exchange for tokenized RWA secondary trading | Tokenised fund interests transferred via operator-approved transfers; VASP Phase 3 Sandbox Licence pending |
| BVI | No dedicated DLT market-infrastructure regime; trading via VASP virtual-asset-exchange registration | VA-exchange registration US$10,000 application / US$25,000 initial; SIBA rules where token is an investment | Registered VASPs (custody/exchange/transfer/issuer financial services) | 14 registered VASPs as at 30 July 2025; Regulatory Sandbox open since Oct 2020 (VASPs permitted) |
| Singapore | RMO or Approved Exchange under SFA (technology-neutral; includes DLT facilities); Project Guardian | S$5M small offers exemption; MAS licensing thresholds | CMS-licensed entities, MAS-approved RMOs / Approved Exchanges | ADDX, InvestaX, DBS Digital Exchange, Marketnode operational; Project Guardian 40+ participants; BLOOM/GL1 |
| Japan | Type I FIBO with PTS (proprietary trading system); JSTOA-approved infrastructure | No DLT-specific thresholds | JFSA-registered Type I FIBOs; JSTOA members | BOOSTRY/ibet for Fin; ODX START secondary market (8 tokens / JPY 33.6bn as of 31 Mar 2026); Securitize Japan |
| Hong Kong | SFC-licensed VATPs; 24/7 retail secondary trading of tokenised SFC-authorised products (20 Apr 2026 circular) | No DLT-specific thresholds | SFC Type 7 licensees; AMLO-licensed VATPs | 13 licensed VATPs early 2026; Project Ensemble / EnsembleTX real-value pilot (from Nov 2025) |
| South Korea | OTC fractional-investment / STO platforms; dedicated KRX security-token market (planned) | No data (effective January 2027) | Licensed securities companies; KSD registration required | NXT (Nextrade) and KDX (KRX) consortia preliminary designation (Feb 2026, conditional); 18-firm bank STO consortium |
| Australia | DAP (operator-held, trading+custody) and TCP (single token per asset) from 9 Apr 2027 | Low-value exemption (from 2027): <AUD 5,000/customer AND <AUD 10m/year | AFSL/markets-licence holders (proposed) | Act commences 2027; no authorized platforms; Project Acacia final report 18 May 2026 (20 wholesale use cases); ASX CHESS non-DLT replacement |
| UAE | ADGM MTF/RIE; DIFC Tokenisation Sandbox; VARA exchange category; CMA alternative trading system | Zone-specific thresholds | Zone-licensed entities (ADGM FSP, DIFC DFSA, VARA VASP, CMA) | DFSA sandbox launched March 2025 (96 EOIs); DLD real estate tokenization; Dubai XRP Ledger USD 5m offering (Feb 2026) |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | Digital Securities traded on RIE (primary+secondary) or MTF (mainly secondary); OTF not permitted | Per FSMR/MIR; Exempt-Offer MTF limited to non-retail clients | FSP/RIE/MTF licensees; DSF for custody/settlement | Realize T-BILLS Fund (first ADGM tokenized fund, 31 Oct 2024, $RBILL on Ethereum & IOTA); RegLab/Digital Lab sandboxes |
| Bahrain | CBB Category 4 exchange license (order-book) | No DLT-specific thresholds | CBB Category 4 licensees | ATME operational (tokenized gold, 1kg/token); Rain, CoinMENA; CBB Regulatory Sandbox (~30 companies) |
5. Custody and Settlement
This table compares the custody model, settlement finality approach, and asset segregation requirements for tokenized securities.
| Jurisdiction | Primary Custody Model | Settlement Finality | Asset Segregation Required |
|---|---|---|---|
| EU | MiCA crypto custody (Class 2, EUR 125,000); MiFID II ancillary safekeeping; CSDR for CSDs | Settlement Finality Directive (98/26/EC); DLT Pilot targeted exemptions; Market Integration Package proposes SFD-as-Regulation | Yes (MiCA client-asset segregation; MiFID II Delegated Directive; ART 1:1 reserves) |
| Switzerland | Art. 242a DEBA bankruptcy segregation; FINMA Guidance 01/2026 custody standards | SDX atomic settlement incl. wCBDC under Project Helvetia III (production-grade) | Yes (Art. 242a DEBA; per-client segregation per FINMA Guidance 01/2026) |
| Germany | Crypto custody business (Kryptoverwahrgeschaft, KWG, min EUR 150,000) + crypto securities registrar (eWpG) | CSDR unless DLT Pilot exemptions; Bundesbank Trigger Solution links DLT to central bank money | Yes (KWG safeguarding of crypto assets/keys; tamper-proof register) |
| France | Custody via DASP/CASP (ACPR/AMF); tokenized fund assets segregated with depositary (bankruptcy-remote) | CSDR principal obstacle for listed; DLT Pilot temporary exemptions; LISE DLT TSS holds and settles tokens itself | Yes (AMF/ACPR DASP/CASP segregation; depositary segregation) |
| UK | CASS Chapter 6 for security tokens that are specified investments; bespoke crypto custody rules being designed | Within DSS, DSDs need not obtain SFR designation (rely on contractual provisions); Project Meridian synchronisation targeted 2028 | Yes (CASS segregation, reconciliation, third-party custody standards) |
| Liechtenstein | TVTG custodian role (TT Key Custodian + TT Token Depositary merged in 2024 Refit); Celsion Bank MiCAR Art. 60(1) custody | NO DATA -- file does not describe a Liechtenstein settlement-finality regime (TVTG provides civil-law transfer infrastructure) | Yes (TT Token Depositary safekeeping; Celsion segregated-account custody; FMA AML/KYC) |
| Luxembourg | Control Agent role (Blockchain Law IV) as alternative to Central Account Keeper; depositary for UCITS/AIFs | Within EU framework; Financial Collateral Law clarified to cover DLT-held instruments | Yes (central administration agent reconciles DLT register; depositary oversight) |
| Ireland | Depositary mandatory for UCITS/AIFs; MiFID CAR + MiCAR Art. 75 custody/segregation/reconciliation | Tokenised instruments settle within EU CSDR framework unless DLT Pilot exemption; tracks EU-level (CSDR, T2S) arrangements | Yes (MiFID CAR / MiCAR Art. 75 segregation, daily reconciliation; depositary safeguards) |
| US | RIA qualified custodian (Rule 206(4)-2); BD custody via Rule 15c3-3; SPBD optional; SAB 121 rescinded by SAB 122 | T+1 via existing NSCC/DTC rails; no statutory on-chain atomic settlement-finality regime; DTC remains golden record in pilot | Yes (Customer Protection Rule 15c3-3 possession/control) |
| Brazil | BCB SPSAV framework (Resolution 520 client-asset segregation); CVM platform custody | NO DATA / not applicable -- no specific on-chain settlement-finality regime; Drex Phase 1 centralized | Yes (BCB Resolution 520 segregation of client virtual assets from firm assets) |
| Canada | CIRO Digital Asset Custody Framework for CTP dealer members | No general T+0/DvP statutory regime; Project Samara settled in wholesale central bank deposits (experimental atomic settlement) | Yes (CIRO Digital Asset Custody Framework; granular standards NOT VERIFIED) |
| Cayman Islands | VASP custody licence (Phase 2, eff 1 Apr 2025): segregation, custody contracts, cybersecurity; no extra custodian mandate solely for tokenisation | No Cayman-mandated settlement-finality regime; NO DATA FOUND for statutory finality specific to on-chain tokenized RWAs | Yes (segregation of client virtual assets from proprietary; parity rule; operator-approved transfers; CIMA inspection) |
| BVI | VASP custody (Section 27 written safekeeping, IT best practices); ownership follows private-key control; unhosted wallets excepted | No atomic-settlement or DvP statute; NO DATA FOUND for a BVI-specific settlement-finality regime | Yes (client assets identified/identifiable, segregated, accounted for separately; encumbering prohibited unless agreed) |
| Singapore | CMS custody (SF(LCB)R) -- control of access (incl. one key/key shard) may be custodial; VCC independent custodians; DPT trust account | BLOOM settlement-asset layer enabling exchange with finality; tokenized MAS bills settled via CBDC (Nov 2025) | Yes (customer assets segregated; DPT trust account + distinct blockchain addresses; VCC independent custodians) |
| Japan | Custody-type via Type I FIBO; Investment Management Business for portfolios; native token pilot phase | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | Yes (FIEA client asset segregation for Type I FIBOs) |
| Hong Kong | Proper custody per SFC requirements; pending technology-neutral VA custody regime; HKMA CMU integration | Offering documents must disclose on-chain vs off-chain finality; Project Ensemble / EnsembleTX testing real-value settlement | Yes (proper custody per SFC; pending VA custodian regime protects client assets) |
| South Korea | KSD mandatory registration (effective January 2027); VAUPA custodian-bank model for non-security VA | Transfer effective on debit/credit in electronic register (amended AERSB) | Yes (VAUPA: customer assets in custodian bank accounts, real-name accounts; security-token custody under FSCMA/KSD) |
| Australia | AFSL custody; TCP one-to-one asset-to-token ratio; DAP/TCP asset-holding standards to be set by ASIC | Acacia tested wholesale settlement; ASX CHESS Release 2 (settlement) non-DLT, targeted 2029; DAP/TCP finality NOT VERIFIED | Yes (AFSL client-asset arrangements; DAP/TCP segregation standards to be set by ASIC, NOT VERIFIED) |
| UAE | Per zone; ADGM separately licensed custody entity (DSF/RCH); VARA custody category; CBUAE payment-token custodian | ADGM DvP standard; XRP Ledger settlement for Dubai tokenized real estate (Feb 2026) | Yes (ADGM legal-entity segregation of custody; VARA AML/risk rulebook; reserve management for ARVAs) |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | Custody via separately licensed entity (DSF holding FSP for Custody, or RCH); CSD functions under COBS Ch.10 | DvP (irrevocable, unconditional) standard via RCH or DSF; trading venue cannot self-settle; Remote Clearing Houses not permitted | Yes (legal-entity segregation between trading and custody/settlement; independent third-party reconciliation >=annually) |
| Bahrain | CRA Module custody requirements; independent custody arrangements; insurance/compensation arrangements | NOT VERIFIED (not addressed in file) | Yes (client assets segregated from licensee; regular reconciliation) |
6. Investor Protection
This table compares retail access rules, prospectus/disclosure thresholds, and compensation scheme eligibility for tokenized securities.
| Jurisdiction | Retail Access to Tokenized Securities | Prospectus/Disclosure Threshold | Compensation Scheme |
|---|---|---|---|
| EU | Yes (subject to MiFID II suitability); DLT Pilot may allow direct retail access under conditions | EUR 12M single small-offer threshold (from 5 Jun 2026, Listing Act); qualified-investor / <150 persons exemptions | National Investor Compensation Schemes (ICFs) where applicable |
| Switzerland | Yes (retail access permitted at DLT trading facilities, Art. 73c FMIA) | FinSA prospectus for public offerings; exemptions for professional clients / min CHF 100,000 / total <CHF 8M over 12 months | No specific compensation scheme for tokenized assets |
| Germany | Yes (subject to MiFID II suitability via BaFin); only registered (not bearer) shares may be crypto securities | EU Prospectus Regulation thresholds; Germany-specific retail caps not stated in file | German Investor Compensation Scheme (EdW) |
| France | Yes (subject to MiFID II/MiCA suitability) | EU Prospectus Regulation thresholds; LISE issuer eligibility capped at EUR 500m market cap; EUR 305 de minimis tax exemption | French FGDR for authorized investment firms |
| UK | Limited; mandatory risk warnings, cooling-off period; qualifying cryptoassets classified Restricted Mass Market Investments | FCA financial promotions regime (PS23/6); existing securities prospectus requirements; full COBS for security tokens | FSCS up to GBP 85,000 for claims against FCA-authorized firms |
| Liechtenstein | Yes (subject to EEA-aligned investor protection); some offerings professional-only (e.g. Union Bank Equity Token) | Prospectus required per EEA-aligned regulation unless exemption applies; MAR applies to admitted security tokens | No data |
| Luxembourg | UCITS funds: yes; AIFs investing in virtual assets: well-informed investors only; SIF reserved for well-informed investors | EU Prospectus Regulation thresholds; KID/KIID per EU framework | Luxembourg SIIL (investor compensation) |
| Ireland | UCITS/RIAIF barred from digital-asset exposure; retail tokenised-fund exposure limited to tokenised units of traditional-asset funds; QIAIF qualifying investors only (min EUR 100,000) | Prospectus Regulation (EU) 2017/1129; UCITS/PRIIPs KID; MiCAR white papers | Investor Compensation Scheme (ICCL) for authorised firms |
| US | Reg A+ Tier 2 retail-accessible with caps (10% income/net worth); Reg D 506(c) accredited only; 506(b) +35 sophisticated | Reg A+ Tier 2: USD 75M/year; Reg CF: USD 5M/year; Reg D: unlimited | SIPC up to USD 500,000 per customer at FINRA-member broker-dealers |
| Brazil | Yes via CVM Resolution 88 crowdfunding (BRL 20,000/year individual limit; issuer revenue cap BRL 40M) | BRL 15M per offering (reform to BRL 25-50M proposed, not enacted) | No specific compensation scheme |
| Canada | OM exemption: retail CAD 10,000/yr; eligible investors CAD 30,000/yr (CAD 100,000 with advice); accredited no limit | NI 45-106 exemptions; OM (Form 45-106F2) with audited financials | CIPF (for CIRO members) |
| Cayman Islands | Professional/sophisticated only; registered mutual fund route commonly US$100,000 minimum; no broad retail-marketing regime | Mandatory token-risk disclosure (cybersecurity, transferability) + mitigation in offering documents (2026 framework) | No statutory compensation scheme |
| BVI | Professional funds min US$100,000; Private Investment Funds limited to 50 investors/private offers with professional gating | SIBA conduct-of-business, disclosure, suitability where token is an investment; exchange mandatory risk disclosures | No general statutory investor-compensation scheme (NO DATA FOUND for FSCS-style fund) |
| Singapore | Mostly accredited/institutional-only; retail access opening -- Franklin Templeton-DBS tokenized MMF (min US$20, retail from Q1 2026) | S$5M small offer; S$300K-equivalent institutional/AI exemptions; Part 13 SFA prospectus | No specific compensation scheme |
| Japan | Market dominated by 'custody-type' retail products; native on-chain tokens still in pilot | FIEA Type I disclosure/registration/conduct obligations; civil liability for STO-document misrepresentation | Japan Investor Protection Fund |
| Hong Kong | Non-complex tokenized securities to retail (since Nov 2023); complex products PI-only (HKD 8m portfolio); 24/7 retail secondary trading of tokenised SFC-authorised products (Apr 2026, initial focus tokenised MMFs) | SFO offering/disclosure regime; SFC authorization for fund products | No statutory compensation scheme for tokenized securities |
| South Korea | No data (framework effective Jan 2027; sandbox limited to designated participants); OTC trading limits to be revised by FSC (July 2026) | FSCMA disclosure obligations; mandatory KSD registration for issuers | No data |
| Australia | Proposed under AFSL regime (PDS, DDO obligations); no specific tokenized-RWA retail restriction stated | PDS requirements; design and distribution obligations (DDO) with target market determinations | No specific compensation scheme |
| UAE | VARA/DIFC professional/qualified emphasis; DLD fractional property from AED 2,000; VARA Cat 2 distribution via Licensed Distributors | Per zone; VARA 9 Apr 2026 whitepaper + risk-disclosure approach; ADGM prospectus/exempt-offer rules | No statutory compensation scheme |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | MTF as primary venue for Exempt-Offer Digital Securities limited to non-retail; full retail MTF secondary trading only where Approved Prospectus registered on primary RIE | Prospectus must be comprehensible to retail, avoid boilerplate, give prominence to 'other rights' (e.g. voting), present audited IFRS financials | No statutory compensation scheme (Market Abuse FSMR Part 8 + transaction reporting apply) |
| Bahrain | Yes (via CBB-licensed platforms); investor suitability assessment required | CBB DTO disclosure requirements; issuer classifies tokens and submits classification to CBB | No statutory compensation scheme |
7. Tax Treatment
This table compares capital gains tax rates, withholding tax, stamp duty, and reporting framework for tokenized securities.
| Jurisdiction | CGT Rate (Tokenized Securities) | Withholding Tax on Distributions | Stamp Duty | Reporting Framework |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU | Member state level (Germany 25% flat; France 30% flat); holding-period exemptions vary | Member state variation | Member state variation | DAC8 (applicable 1 Jan 2026) |
| Switzerland | Generally tax-free for private investors (payment tokens; wealth tax on holdings) | 35% federal WHT (refundable for residents) | Securities transfer tax 0.15% domestic / 0.30% foreign; 1% capital issuance tax on equity tokens | Standard Swiss tax reporting |
| Germany | Crypto held >1 year tax-free (Section 23 EStG); within 1 year 14-45% + 5.5% solidarity surcharge; annual exemption EUR 1,000 | 25% flat withholding on bond coupons (Abgeltungsteuer) | No data | BMF letter 10 May 2022, updated 6 Mar 2025 |
| France | 30% PFU (12.8% income + 17.2% social); elective 0-45% progressive scale + 17.2%; EUR 305/year de minimis | 30% PFU on security token income | NOT VERIFIED (file does not state a France-specific stamp duty) | Standard French reporting (PFU regime) |
| UK | Up to 24% (2025-26 higher/additional rate); annual exempt amount GBP 3,000; Section 104 pooling | 0% on most fund distributions (depending on structure) | SDRT 0.5% may apply to security tokens that are 'chargeable securities' (case-by-case) | HMRC crypto reporting guidance (existing tax laws by nature/use of token) |
| Liechtenstein | No capital gains tax on trading participations (incl. equity security tokens) | 0% withholding on security token distributions | No data | Standard Liechtenstein reporting (substance-based) |
| Luxembourg | Non-residents generally exempt on disposal of tokenized fund units/securities; corporates ~24.94% CIT | 0% on SICAV/SIF/RAIF distributions; 15% on Soparfi dividends (reducible) | Subscription tax: 0.05% (UCITS), 0.01% (SIF/RAIF) | Standard Luxembourg reporting |
| Ireland | Non-resident/exempt investors: no Irish tax/WHT on fund distributions; resident exit tax 41%->38% from 2026; direct non-fund crypto CGT 33% | No Irish WHT on fund distributions/redemptions for non-resident/exempt investors | Fund unit transfers stamp-duty exempt (s.88 SDCA) | Funds under gross roll-up (no entity-level tax); 8-year deemed disposal; DAC8 |
| US | 0%/15%/20% long-term + 3.8% NIIT; 10-37% short-term (property; Form 8949, Schedule D) | 30% NRA withholding (reducible by treaty) | No federal stamp duty; state varies | Form 1099-DA broker reporting (from 1 Jan 2025); IRS Notice 2014-21 property classification |
| Brazil | 15% (up to BRL 5M) to 22.5% (above BRL 30M) graduated; BRL 35,000 monthly sales exemption in force (MP 1,303/2025 flat rate REJECTED 8 Oct 2025) | No data | No data | CARF adopted via IN RFB 2,291/2025 (DeCripto); monthly reporting from July 2026 |
| Canada | NO DATA -- token tax classification not addressed in file | NO DATA -- not addressed in file | NO DATA -- not addressed in file | NO DATA -- not addressed in file |
| Cayman Islands | None -- no capital gains tax (tax-neutral: no income, corporate, CGT, or withholding tax) | None (no withholding tax) | No stamp duty (on tokenized securities) | CRS/FATCA and CARF/updated CRS; economic-substance regime applies |
| BVI | None -- no capital gains tax on disposal of tokens/tokenized assets (tax is a matter for beneficial owners' home jurisdictions) | None (no withholding tax) | No stamp duty (source-based system) | Economic substance + CRS/FATCA; CRS 2.0 eff 1 Jan 2026; CARF effective 2027 (first reports 2028) |
| Singapore | 0% (no capital gains tax; capital vs revenue depends on facts) | 0% withholding on most fund distributions | No stamp duty on tokenized securities | IRAS 'Income Tax Treatment of Digital Tokens' (17 Apr 2020) |
| Japan | 20.315% separate self-assessment for securities (15.315% national + 5% local) | 15.315% WHT on bond interest (residents); dividends as dividend income | No data | Standard JFSA/NTA reporting (income taxed by nature of underlying right) |
| Hong Kong | 0% (no capital gains tax) | 0% (territorial source; no withholding on profits-tax scope items) | Stamp duty on 'Hong Kong stock' -- application to tokenized equity not formally clarified | Standard IRD profits tax reporting (16.5% corporations / 15% unincorporated if HK-sourced) |
| South Korea | Securities: existing rates (CGT on listed stock above thresholds); non-security crypto: 20% deferred | 14% WHT on interest; 15.4% on dividends (incl. local surtax) | Securities transaction tax (0.18% KOSPI, scheduled reductions) | No dedicated security token guidance |
| Australia | CGT at marginal rate; 50% discount for 12+ month holding | Varies by distribution type | No data | ATO crypto-asset guidance; AUSTRAC reporting; GST-free for 'digital currency' (may not cover all tokenized RWAs) |
| UAE | None for individuals (no personal CGT); 9% corporate (>AED 375K; free zones may qualify for 0%) | 0% (no withholding tax) | No stamp duty | 5% VAT (no specific tokenized-securities guidance); tokenized real estate raising VAT questions |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | None for individuals; 9% corporate above AED 375K; QFZP 0% on Qualifying Income; tokenization-specific QFZP ruling NOT VERIFIED | 0% domestic withholding tax | No specific stamp duty (token generally transparent) | UAE federal VAT (5%) with financial-services exemptions; FATCA & ADGM CRS Regulations 2017 |
| Bahrain | None (no income tax, no CGT) | 0% (no withholding tax) | No stamp duty | 5% VAT (financial services generally exempt; application to tokenized assets not specifically addressed) |
8. Cross-Border Recognition
This table compares the mechanisms available for cross-border provision of tokenized securities services.
| Jurisdiction | Passporting | Equivalence/Recognition | Bilateral MoUs | Reverse Solicitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU | Yes: MiCA CASP passport (27 EU + EEA) + MiFID II passport | EU/EEA single-market recognition; DLT Pilot permissions EU-wide; no MiCA third-country equivalence regime | IOSCO MMoU signatory | MiCA Art. 61 (narrow, strict conditions) |
| Switzerland | No (not EU/EEA member); no automatic passport | EU MiFID II equivalence granted Dec 2017 but not renewed from 1 July 2019; close ties with Liechtenstein but no bilateral tokenized-securities agreement | IOSCO MMoU; bilateral Swiss-EU cooperation | No formal framework; cross-border to professional clients under FinSA where home jurisdiction equivalent |
| Germany | Yes (as EU member): MiCA + MiFID II passports (MiCAR Art. 60 streamlined notification) | Per EU framework; ESMA register of authorised DLT market infrastructures | Per EU framework; IOSCO MMoU | Per MiCA Art. 61 |
| France | EU/EEA MiFID II and MiCA passporting; Pilot Regime permissions EU-wide but capped/time-limited | Per EU framework; AMF/CONSOB joint position paper advocates permanence | Per EU framework; IOSCO MMoU | Per MiCA Art. 61 |
| UK | Not available post-Brexit -- UK firms cannot passport into EU/EEA | Overseas Persons Exemption NOT extended to regulated cryptoasset activities; HMT engaging IOSCO/FSB on future deference/equivalence | MAS-FCA joint report (Nov 2025); IOSCO MMoU | Overseas firms serving UK retail must obtain FCA authorisation; limited 'directly related gateway' exception |
| Liechtenstein | Yes (as EEA member): MiCA CASP + MiFID II passports across 30 EEA states | MiCAR incorporated into EEA Agreement (June 2025); dual TVTG + MiCAR framework | IOSCO MMoU | Per MiCA Art. 61 |
| Luxembourg | Yes (as EU member): MiCA + UCITS/AIFMD passports | EU/EEA single-market recognition; MiCA complements domestic blockchain laws | Per EU framework; IOSCO MMoU | Per MiCA Art. 61 |
| Ireland | Yes -- EU passporting core mechanism: MiFID, MiCAR CASP (30 EEA states), AIFMD/UCITS, DLT Pilot permissions | No domestic mutual-recognition beyond EU framework; aligns with ESMA convergence | Per EU framework; IOSCO MMoU | MiCAR reverse-solicitation / limited carve-outs; AIFMD NPPRs |
| US | No passporting regime; Reg S used for offshore (non-US) offerings | No formal mutual-recognition regime; cross-border coordination a Crypto Task Force priority | IOSCO MMoU; bilateral SEC cooperation agreements | Reg S safe harbors (Rules 903/904); smart-contract transfer restrictions prevent US flowback |
| Brazil | None stated; aligns with IOSCO 'same activity, same risk, same regulation' | BCB participation in BIS Innovation Hub; OECD CARF adoption (IN RFB 2,291/2025) | IOSCO MMoU signatory | No formal framework |
| Canada | No passporting (provincial model coordinated by CSA) | Reflects IOSCO 18 Policy Recommendations (Nov 2023); FATF mutual evaluations via FINTRAC | IOSCO MMoU; CSA bilateral cooperation | No formal framework |
| Cayman Islands | No passporting (non-EU/non-US third country); EU investors via national private-placement regimes (NPPR) | No bespoke mutual-recognition regime; classification determined independently under SIBA/Funds Acts on substance | FATF-aligned (removed from grey list Oct 2023); CRS/FATCA/CARF information exchange | No formal framework |
| BVI | None -- not part of any EU/EEA-style passporting bloc; no mutual-recognition passport for VASPs | No bespoke foreign-offering recognition; NO DATA FOUND for any bilateral tokenized-securities mutual-recognition agreement | NO DATA FOUND for a bilateral tokenized-securities agreement; OECD AEOI (CRS, CRS 2.0, CARF) | No formal framework (VASP Act designed to FATF standards; Travel Rule) |
| Singapore | No broad mutual-recognition framework for foreign-issued tokenized securities; recognised offers (s276) pathway | No broad mutual recognition; bilateral DTAs facilitate cross-border activity | MAS-FCA joint report (Nov 2025); MAS-China MoU; IOSCO MMoU | Case-by-case; DTSP regime extraterritorial |
| Japan | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file |
| Hong Kong | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed; single-regime system (SFC/HKMA) | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | IOSCO MMoU signatory | Pending VA dealing regime has extraterritorial reach to activities targeting HK investors |
| South Korea | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed (mandatory KSD registration more centralized than Singapore/UAE) | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file |
| Australia | Passporting treatment for new DAP/TCP categories NOT VERIFIED (pending ASIC consultation) | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | NOT VERIFIED / not addressed in file | No-action conditions include foreign-company registration for non-Australian entities; AFCA membership |
| UAE | Fund passporting between ADGM/DIFC and onshore UAE exists for funds; no general securities-venue passport | CMA federal regime operates alongside (not over) VARA and ADGM/DIFC; no broad mutual-recognition of foreign digital securities | IOSCO MMoU; bilateral cooperation | No third-country securities passport stated (FATF Travel Rule; removed from grey list Feb 2024) |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM) | No automatic passporting of ADGM Digital Securities authorisations; UAE fund-passporting permits ADGM/DIFC retail funds marketed onshore | No broad mutual-recognition regime for foreign-issued Digital Securities beyond conventional Offer/Exempt-Offer routes | IOSCO MMoU signatory (cooperation with 100+ regulators) | Relies on IOSCO MMoU, bilateral cooperation, case-by-case FSRA engagement |
| Bahrain | No formal passporting regime stated; CBB license shows portability in Gulf (Rain expanded to ADGM/Abu Dhabi) | NOT VERIFIED (no formal mutual recognition regime stated) | IOSCO MMoU signatory | NOT VERIFIED (FATF Travel Rule compliance for VA transfers) |
Notes on Data Completeness
- This comparison now covers all 21 jurisdictions in the repository, including the four added in the June 2026 refresh: Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Ireland, and Abu Dhabi (ADGM).
- "No data", "NOT VERIFIED", and "NO DATA FOUND" indicate that the corresponding jurisdiction file or fact matrix does not contain verified information on that dimension; these are reproduced honestly rather than filled with inference.
- All data points mirror the per-jurisdiction fact matrix (the verified source of truth) and the underlying regulation and guidance files within this repository.
- Capital requirements, timelines, and costs are indicative and may vary based on specific activity scope and firm structure.
- Tax rates reflect the most recent verified data; rates may change following enacted or pending legislation. Notable corrections in this refresh: US Nasdaq tokenized-securities trading was SEC-approved (Release 34-105047) on 18 March 2026; Brazil's Provisional Measure 1,303/2025 (flat crypto tax / exemption removal) was rejected on 8 October 2025; Australia's Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Act 2026 was enacted (Royal Assent 8 April 2026, commencing 9 April 2027); and the EU now has six authorized DLT market infrastructures per the ESMA register (January 2026).
- Cross-border recognition mechanisms reflect the status as of 4 June 2026; equivalence determinations and bilateral agreements are subject to change.
Verification Notes
- Source of truth: the canonical per-jurisdiction fact matrix (
.claude/rwa-regulation-fact-matrix.json) covering all 21 jurisdictions across thematic fields t1-t8, mirrored 1:1 into the eight tables above (§1<-t1 ... §8<-t8). - The four new jurisdictions are integrated into every table (no orphan rows): Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands among the Americas/offshore rows; Ireland among the European rows; Abu Dhabi (ADGM) among the Middle East rows.
- Aggregate "X of N" claims are derived against N=21 where used; this document is itself the authoritative cross-country tabular source and is not a re-derivation of any narrower count.
- Tags use only the canonical
type/andregion/sets; the prior singleregion/middle-east-africatag has been expanded to the four regions actually covered (europe, americas, asia-pacific, middle-east-africa). - Wikilinks use canonical file slugs (cayman-islands, british-virgin-islands, abu-dhabi, ireland); no Wikipedia/Reddit/Quora/X/Twitter/Medium sources are cited.