Australian Senate Economics Legislation Committee Endorses Digital Assets Framework Bill
Canberra, 16 March 2026 – The Senate Economics Legislation Committee has voted in favour of the Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025, a proposal that would bring crypto‑exchanges and token‑custody platforms under Australia’s existing financial‑services licensing regime. The committee’s recommendation pushes the legislation toward a full Senate debate later this year and marks a significant step in the Australian government’s effort to create a bespoke regulatory framework for digital‑asset service providers.
What the bill entails
First tabled by Assistant Treasurer and Financial Services Minister Daniel Mulino in November 2025, the bill seeks to treat Digital Asset Platforms (DAPs) and Tokenised Custody Platforms (TCPs) as financial products governed by the Corporations Act and the ASIC Act. In practice, most centralized exchanges and custodial services that hold client assets would be required to obtain an Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).
Key provisions include:
| Provision | Impact |
|---|---|
| Licensing requirement | DAPs and TCPs become subject to ASIC’s custodial and settlement standards, as well as tailored disclosure obligations for retail investors. |
| Governance and conduct rules | Licensed entities must comply with platform‑specific governance frameworks and conduct standards designed to protect client assets. |
| Exemptions | Providers whose annual transaction volume is below AUD 10 million (≈ US$7 million) and certain public‑blockchain infrastructure operators are excluded from the licensing mandate. |
| Future regulatory perimeter | The bill leaves room for the Treasury to refine the definition of “digital token” and “factual control” through secondary regulations, rather than amending the core legislation. |
The move is framed as a response to high‑profile collapses such as the 2022 failure of FTX, which highlighted gaps in oversight of platforms that hold customer funds.
Industry reaction
Legal and technical concerns
Law firm Piper Alderman, cited in the committee’s report, warned that the legislation’s broad “digital token” and “factual control” tests could unintentionally capture wallet software and infrastructure providers that do not exercise unilateral control over assets. The firm highlighted scenarios involving multi‑party computation (MPC) wallets, where custodial responsibilities are split among multiple parties.
Ripple Labs echoed similar concerns. While supporting the use of “control” as the regulatory hook, Ripple argued the bill should more clearly accommodate modern security architectures, noting that a strict reading of the “factual control” test could label technology‑only providers—such as those holding a single key shard—as regulated custodians. Ripple urged lawmakers to clarify that an entity only exercises factual control when it can move assets without the client’s participation.
The committee acknowledged these points but sided with Treasury’s approach of addressing perimeter questions through future regulatory guidance rather than revising the primary legislation.
Market participants
John O’Loghlen, director of Coinbase Australia and APAC managing director, welcomed the endorsement, describing it as “an important step for Australia’s standing in the global digital economy.” He stressed that clear, predictable rules are essential for the country’s burgeoning crypto sector to attract capital and talent.
O’Loghlen also raised a separate issue: the “de‑banking” of crypto firms by Australian financial institutions. He urged the government to accelerate implementation of the Council of Financial Regulators’ recommendations aimed at curbing the practice, which he said remains “rampant despite government endorsement in 2022.”
How the bill fits into the global regulatory landscape
Australia’s initiative aligns with a broader international trend of bringing crypto service providers within traditional financial‑services frameworks. The European Union’s MiCA (Markets in Crypto‑Assets) regulation and the United States’ ongoing discussions about a federal licensing regime for crypto exchanges both aim to mitigate systemic risk, protect retail investors, and clarify compliance obligations.
By anchoring DAPs and TCPs to the existing AFS licence regime, Australia leverages an established supervisory infrastructure while signalling to global investors that the market is regulated and transparent. This could position the country as a regional hub for compliant digital‑asset activity, especially for firms looking to serve the Asia‑Pacific market.
Potential challenges ahead
- Definition clarity – The “digital token” and “factual control” tests remain contentious. Ambiguities could lead to litigation or regulatory uncertainty for wallet providers and infrastructure firms not intended to be licensed.
- Compliance costs – Smaller exchanges and custodians that hover just above the AUD 10 million threshold may face significant operational and reporting burdens, potentially consolidating the market around a few large, licensed players.
- Implementation timeline – The bill still requires a full Senate debate and a final vote. Delays or amendments could affect market expectations and the strategic planning of crypto businesses operating in Australia.
- De‑banking concerns – Even with a robust licensing framework, access to traditional banking services remains a critical issue for crypto firms. Without progress on de‑banking reforms, compliance alone may not be sufficient to sustain industry growth.
Key takeaways
- Committee backing: The Senate Economics Legislation Committee’s endorsement moves the Digital Assets Framework Bill closer to becoming law.
- Licensing regime: Most centralized crypto exchanges and custodial platforms will need an ASIC‑issued AFS licence, subject to custody, settlement, and disclosure standards.
- Exemptions: Entities with annual transaction volumes under AUD 10 million and certain public‑blockchain infrastructure operators are exempt.
- Industry concerns: Legal and technical groups warn that the bill’s definitions could unintentionally capture wallet and infrastructure providers lacking unilateral control.
- Market response: Coinbase Australia welcomes the step but stresses the need to address de‑banking, while Ripple urges regulatory clarity for modern security models.
- Global context: The proposal mirrors worldwide moves to integrate crypto services into existing financial‑services oversight, potentially enhancing Australia’s attractiveness as a compliant crypto hub.
The bill now proceeds to the Senate floor for debate and a final vote. If enacted, it would represent one of the most comprehensive regulatory frameworks for digital‑asset platforms in the Asia‑Pacific region, shaping the future of crypto activity in Australia for years to come.
Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/australian-senate-committee-backs-new-crypto-bill?utm_source=rss_feed&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=rss_partner_inbound
