Australia’s Senate Tackles Crypto Chaos: New Bill to Clamp Down on Digital Dollars!

by

Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation Committee is currently debating a bill that would force crypto exchanges and tokenization platforms to play by the same rules as your average, run-of-the-mill, boring financial services. Because who needs innovation when you can have a mountain of paperwork?

Summary

  • Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation Committee has backed a bill that would bring crypto exchanges and tokenised custody platforms under the country’s financial services licensing regime. Because nothing says “trust us” like a government that’s finally catching up to the 21st century.
  • Platforms that hold customer assets would be required to meet ASIC custody and settlement standards and follow governance and disclosure rules. Because nothing says “customer protection” like making sure your crypto is as secure as a bank vault… but with more bureaucracy.

Australian regulators are pushing for the passage of the Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025, which regulators hope will bring “digital asset platforms” (DAPs) and “tokenised custody platforms” (TCPs) under a clear licensing and oversight framework. Because nothing says “clarity” like a 100-page document written in legalese.

The goal is to prevent a repeat of failures involving platforms that hold customer assets, as seen in the past with high profile collapses such as FTX. Because obviously, the only way to stop another FTX is to make sure every crypto startup has a compliance officer with a PhD in confusion.

As previously reported by crypto.news, the legislation was first introduced in November last year and would require digital asset and tokenized custody platforms to operate under the Corporations Act and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act. Because nothing says “innovation” like a government that’s terrified of anything it doesn’t understand.

To comply with the framework, platforms will have to meet ASIC set custody and settlement standards, provide tailored disclosures for retail clients, and operate under platform-specific conduct and governance requirements, while small providers with annual transaction thresholds under 10 million Australian dollars ($7 million) would be exempt. Because of course, the tiny guys get a pass-because they’re obviously less likely to crash and burn… or maybe just less likely to be noticed.

Market participants urge caution

However, some industry participants have argued that the bill’s broad “digital token” and “factual control” tests could inadvertently include wallet software and infrastructure providers within the regulatory scope. Because who wants to be a regulated custodian when you’re just trying to send a few tokens?

Concerns come at a time when firms like Ripple are looking to expand their presence in the Australian market and obtain the required regulatory licenses to operate in the country. Because nothing says “welcome to Australia” like a 100-page application form.

US blockchain firm Ripple Labs backed the concept of “control” as the “appropriate nexus” for defining the regulatory perimeter but said the framework would need adjustments to better accommodate modern security architectures such as multi party computation wallets. Because obviously, the government’s rules were designed with modern tech in mind.

Further, the company warned that under a strict reading of the “factual control” test, technology providers that only hold a single key shard in a multi party setup could be misclassified as regulated custodians even though they cannot independently move client assets. Because nothing says “fairness” like accidentally turning your software into a custodian.

The committee has acknowledged these concerns but has sided with Treasury’s proposal to refine the regulatory perimeter through future regulations rather than rewriting the core definitions in the bill. Because nothing says “progress” like kicking the can down the road… again.

Read More

2026-03-16 12:46