Crypto Regulation in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore Compared

Taiwan currently requires anti-money-laundering (AML) registration for covered virtual-asset services, while Hong Kong and Singapore license specified activities. The right route depends on the service, the token and where the business operates or markets its services. This comparison reflects official material reviewed on 4 November 2026, including Taiwan’s newly announced draft rules.

Taiwan retains AML registration; Hong Kong and Singapore license by activity

Taiwan’s registration regime remains in place while its licensing Act awaits commencement. Hong Kong has separate regimes for trading platforms and stablecoin issuers; Singapore regulates digital payment token (DPT) services under the Payment Services Act.

	Taiwan	Hong Kong	Singapore
Regulator	Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC)	Securities and Futures Commission (SFC; platforms); Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA; stablecoin issuers)	Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)
Current route for covered services	AML registration under the Money Laundering Control Act, in force 30 November 2024	SFC licensing for centralised trading platforms; the non-security-token regime began in June 2023	Payment Services Act licence for DPT services, unless exempted; scope widened from 4 April 2024
What is changing	Virtual Asset Service Act awaits commencement; implementing drafts announced on 3 November 2026	Proposed licensing for VA dealing, custody, advisory and management; legislation targeted for 2026	Stablecoin amendments to the Payment Services Act; consultation closed 16 October 2026
Stablecoin issuers	Licence under the new Act, with central bank consent (not yet in force)	Licence under the Stablecoins Ordinance (Cap. 656) since 1 August 2025	Framework finalised in 2023; legislation still proposed

Taiwan requires VASP registration before launch and safeguards for customer money

A business providing covered virtual-asset services in Taiwan must complete an anti-money-laundering registration with the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) before operating. Article 6 of the Money Laundering Control Act prohibits providing virtual-asset services without that registration, and a business set up abroad must first register a company or branch in Taiwan under the Company Act. Article 6 took effect on 30 November 2024 (amendment history).

The registration regulations, in force since the same date, cover exchange, trading-platform, transfer, custody and issuance-related services. Key points:

• The application includes the AML internal-control and audit system, an internal-control checklist reviewed by a CPA with a review opinion, and a register of beneficial owners (Art. 5).
• A registered provider must normally start operating within six months, subject to an approved extension, and must join the national virtual-currency industry association before operating (Art. 6).
• Customer fiat money retained by the provider must be held in a dedicated bank account and placed in trust or fully covered by a bank performance bond (Art. 11).
• Platforms need written listing and delisting criteria covering, among other things, the token’s white paper, its issuer and its money-laundering risk (Art. 19).
• Providers that had filed the earlier compliance declaration had to apply by 31 March 2025 and complete registration by 30 September 2025, or stop operating (Art. 30).

Taiwan’s Act awaits commencement; November draft announcements do not start the transition

No. The Virtual Asset Service Act was promulgated on 22 July 2026, but the official database still records its commencement date as undetermined. Article 56 leaves that date to the Executive Yuan.

Once commenced, the Act will require separate licences for its service categories, including exchange, trading platforms, transfer, custody, underwriting and lending (Arts. 6–7). It also provides for segregation of assets held for customers (Art. 18). Registered providers will have 12 months from commencement to apply and 21 months to obtain a licence. The 21-month licensing deadline may be extended once by three months (Art. 55).

The NFT exclusion is narrow: Article 3 excludes non-fungible tokens whose represented value is irreplaceable. An NFT label alone does not establish that exclusion. Securities and financial assets issued under other laws are also outside the Act’s virtual-asset definition.

On 3 November 2026, the FSC announced eight implementing drafts for the VASP regime. The release said formal preannouncement would follow shortly, with a 40-day comment period beginning the day after that notice. These are proposals intended to commence with the Act. The announcement does not activate the new licensing regime or start the statutory transition period.

For an existing operator, the practical next step is to compare its services and controls with the proposed licence categories while maintaining its current registration obligations.

Stablecoin rules are in force in Hong Kong, but pending in Taiwan and Singapore

Hong Kong has a stablecoin issuer regime in force. Taiwan’s enacted regime awaits commencement, and Singapore’s implementing legislation remains proposed.

Hong Kong: permitted offerors must still check retail stablecoin eligibility

The Stablecoins Ordinance took effect on 1 August 2025. Its licensing requirement covers the business of issuing specified fiat-referenced stablecoins in Hong Kong and issuing Hong Kong-dollar-referenced stablecoins outside Hong Kong, subject to statutory exclusions and exemptions.

Offering restrictions are a separate test. The HKMA explanatory note identifies permitted offerors: licensed stablecoin issuers, authorized institutions, licensed stored-value-facility operators, SFC-licensed virtual-asset trading platforms and SFC Type 1 licensed corporations. Subject to statutory exemptions, retail offerings are restricted to specified stablecoins whose issuance is authorized by an HKMA licence. Being a permitted offeror does not make every stablecoin eligible for retail distribution.

Check the HKMA register for the issuer’s current licence. The government’s June 2026 explanation also warns that people acquiring unregulated stablecoins through unregulated channels bear the resulting risks.

Taiwan: stablecoin licences will require central bank consent after commencement

Article 34 of the Virtual Asset Service Act requires an FSC licence for stablecoin issuance, with central bank consent. This requirement is not yet in force.

The FSC separately announced stablecoin implementing drafts on 3 November 2026, covering licensing and management alongside AML rules. As with the VASP package, formal preannouncement was to follow, with 40 days for comments from the following day. The drafts are intended to take effect with the Act.

Singapore proposes par redemption and an interest ban for regulated stablecoins

The 1 September 2026 MAS consultation proposed Payment Services Act amendments to implement the single-currency stablecoin framework. Its core scope is stablecoins issued in Singapore and pegged to the Singapore dollar or a G10 currency. Proposals address redemption at par and prohibit interest on MAS-regulated stablecoins, alongside conditions for multi-jurisdictional issuance and recognition of some foreign-issued stablecoins.

Comments were due on 16 October 2026. The consultation is therefore closed, and the cited announcement provides no commencement date for the proposed legislation.

Offshore centralised crypto exchanges actively marketing to Hong Kong need a licence

Centralised virtual-asset trading platforms that carry on business in Hong Kong, or actively market their services to Hong Kong investors, must be licensed by the SFC (SFC). Platforms trading non-security tokens need a licence under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (Cap. 615), and platforms trading security tokens need one under the Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571). Because a token’s classification can change, the SFC says it is appropriate to apply under both.

The SFC publishes the list of licensed platforms; check it before using or partnering with a platform. Separate licensing regimes for dealing, custody, advisory and management services are still being drafted. The government published the dealing and custody consultation conclusions on 24 December 2025 and reiterated on 30 October 2026 that it planned to submit amending legislation in 2026. This is a legislative target, not an effective date for those new regimes.

Singapore regulates DPT custody and facilitation, with customer-asset safeguards

Carrying on a business of providing a DPT service in Singapore requires a Payment Services Act licence unless an exemption applies. The MAS licensing guidelines set out the application framework for payment service providers.

Two different dates matter under the April 2024 amendments:

• 4 April 2024: wider regulated scope. DPT custody and facilitation of DPT transfers and exchanges came within scope, including where the provider does not possess the money or tokens.
• 4 October 2024: customer-asset safeguards. The safeguarding amendments took effect six months later. They include segregating customer assets, placing them in a trust account for customers, maintaining records and implementing controls to protect those assets.

Use the separate dates when checking a provider’s historical licensing and safeguarding obligations.

Covered transfers need basic information even below travel rule thresholds

Covered provider-to-provider transfers require originator and recipient information, with extra information at different thresholds. Hong Kong’s SFC AML Guideline, Chapter 12 describes this as the travel rule under FATF Recommendation 16.

Regime	Basic information for covered transfers	Higher-value requirement
Taiwan, AML regulations Art. 7	Originator and recipient names and wallet information	Above NT$30,000: additional originator and recipient details, with different fields for each, as set out below
Hong Kong, SFC Guideline paras. 12.11.5–6	Originator and recipient names and account or unique reference numbers	HK$8,000 or more: add the originator’s address, identification or customer number, or date and place of birth
Singapore, MAS PSN02 paras. 13.4–6	Originator and beneficiary names and account or unique transaction reference numbers	Above S$1,500: add the originator’s address, unique identification number, or date and place of birth, incorporation or registration, as applicable, with the required verification

Under Taiwan’s Article 7, the additional fields above NT$30,000 are:

• Individual originator: date of birth and residential address.
• Corporate originator: official identification number and registered address.
• Individual recipient: country and city of residence.
• Corporate recipient: official identification number, country and city of registration.

For those higher-value transfers, the receiving VASP must compare the recipient’s name and wallet information supplied by the sending VASP with its own records. Article 7 assigns implementation scope and timing to the industry association, subject to FSC approval. The FSC’s 20 October 2026 release describes a phased rollout starting with transfers between domestic VASPs. The threshold should not be read as an immediate, universal rule for every cross-border or self-hosted-wallet transfer.

Singapore’s MAS Notice PSN02 also permits abbreviated messages in the specific Singapore-intermediary circumstances described in paragraphs 13.5 and 13.8. In each market, check the applicable transfer scope, counterparty checks and verification duties alongside the monetary threshold.

Singapore companies serving only overseas customers may still need a digital-token service licence

Check where the provider operates and where it solicits customers as separate questions. Hong Kong’s inbound marketing test and Singapore’s overseas-only provider regime address different situations.

• A foreign provider entering Taiwan: Article 6 of the Money Laundering Control Act requires local company or branch registration before AML registration. Once the new Act commences, a foreign provider establishing a Taiwan branch will require FSC permission and a licence under Article 7.
• A centralised platform marketing into Hong Kong: Active marketing to Hong Kong investors can trigger the SFC requirement, even where the platform operates abroad. This is a test for the covered platform service, not every Web3 activity.
• A Singapore-connected provider serving only overseas customers: From 30 June 2025, the separate Financial Services and Markets Act regime applies to covered digital-token service providers, subject to exemptions. It can cover corporations formed in Singapore even when operating abroad, and individuals or partnerships carrying on the business from a place of business in Singapore. MAS said it would generally not issue these licences and that unlicensed providers had to cease the regulated activities. The regime concerns DPTs and tokens of capital-markets products; services relating only to utility or governance tokens are outside this particular regime (MAS clarification, DTSP licensing guidelines).

MAS distinguishes those overseas-only providers from providers serving customers in Singapore under the Payment Services Act, Securities and Futures Act or Financial Advisers Act. Its clarification says such licensed providers may also serve overseas customers.

Before choosing an entity, map the service, token, operating location and target customers to the relevant regime. For the wider activity-based comparison, see our guide to Web3 regulation for founders and investors.

Frequently asked questions

Does an NFT automatically fall outside Taiwan’s new Act?

No. Article 3 excludes NFTs whose represented value is irreplaceable. Classification depends on the token’s characteristics, and other laws may still apply. The Act itself has not yet commenced.

Do Taiwan’s November draft announcements start the licensing transition?

No. The Act’s commencement date, to be set by the Executive Yuan, starts the statutory transition. The 3 November announcements concern proposed implementing rules and the formal notice process.

Is a Hong Kong licence enough to expand into Taiwan or Singapore?

A Hong Kong licence does not establish compliance with either market’s separate requirements. Check the proposed service and local legal scope before expanding, including Taiwan’s local registration requirements and the applicable Singapore regime.