The bill modernises Australia’s regulatory framework for digital assets by defining core concepts such as digital tokens, digital asset platforms and tokenised custody platforms, and by applying tailored financial services law, licensing requirements and exemptions.
It also grants ASIC and the Minister declaration and rule-making powers to oversee these platforms and ensures alignment with international ‘same activity, same risk, same regulation’ principles.
The Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025 amends the Corporations Act 2001 and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 to introduce a bespoke regime for digital assets and intermediaries. Key features include:
Commencement is 12 months after Royal Assent, with transitional provisions to minimise disruption.
By creating clear definitions and leveraging the existing financial services law, the Bill mitigates consumer and systemic risks in digital asset markets—such as misappropriation, commingling and sudden asset freezes—while preserving the benefits of programmable tokens and decentralised finance. Standardised custody and settlement requirements reduce information asymmetries and strengthen competition among platforms [Judgment].
The reforms align Australia with peer jurisdictions (e.g. EU MiCA, UK proposals), promoting cross-border interoperability and market confidence, which supports innovation in fintech, investment products and tokenisation of real-world assets. A coherent legal framework encourages responsible digital asset businesses to locate or expand in Australia, boosting economic growth and financial inclusion.
Further, tailored disclosure and minimum standards enhance transparency without imposing undue burden on startups: small platforms under $10 million are exempt from certain licensing, ensuring the regime is proportionate and future-proof against technological change.
While well intentioned, the Bill may over-engineer solutions for nascent technologies, creating compliance costs (~$28.4 million p.a.) that outstrip potential harms. Many digital asset arrangements already fall under existing financial services, consumer protection and anti-money-laundering laws; layering bespoke licensing and standards risks duplicative regulation with marginal safety gains.
The new definitions of factual control and possession of digital tokens introduce legal uncertainty—for example, joint control rules could deter multi-signature and decentralised custody models essential for self-custody and non-custodial innovation. This may undermine users’ property rights and push more activity to unregulated offshore platforms [Judgment].
Moreover, granting broad ministerial declaration powers to reclassify facilities as financial markets or clearing and settlement facilities centralises discretionary authority, exposing operators to shifting policy agendas and potential regulatory capture. A technology-neutral approach trusting existing regulators and industry best practice may better balance risk and growth.
2025-11-26
House of Representatives
Before House of Representatives
Unspecified
Treasury
Financial Regulation, Consumer Protection, Science / Technology