Contributed By BeesMont Law
Through its longstanding and highly respected regulatory regime, Bermuda has established itself as a leading jurisdiction for digital assets and blockchain, with a broad-based ecosystem of licensed businesses and service providers across a range of activities.
Beginning in 2018 with the Digital Asset Business Act (DABA), which introduced a licensing regime for firms carrying out “digital asset business” (defined in the following), a market-supporting framework has evolved alongside DABA to include a licensing regime for carrying out “digital asset issuance” under the Digital Asset Issuance Act (DAIA), introduced in 2020, various sandbox programmes (discussed in 4.3 Regulatory Sandbox) and detailed prudential and regulatory guidance published by the Bermuda Monetary Authority (BMA), along with active engagement across the digital finance industry in Bermuda.
The BMA, which is Bermuda’s sole financial regulator, administers a principles-based regulatory framework comprising legislation, policies, guidance, codes of practice and regular industry-wide consultations. It oversees all financial institutions in Bermuda and is a member of the Global Financial Innovation Network (GFIN), an innovative network of regulators and cross-border testing framework.
At the time of writing, there are over 40 digital asset firms licensed or operating in sandbox operations overseen by the BMA, which has specialist expert teams covering digital asset licensing, cyber-risk, anti-money laundering (AML) and compliance.
Bermuda has also seen a number of different limited test deployments focused on the adoption of cryptocurrency by Bermuda residents, including a blockchain-based stimulus token and, at a recent digital finance forum event, an airdrop of USDC stablecoin tokens to conference attendees via the onboarding of non-custodial wallets. There have also been initial exploratory projects involving decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs) and projects examining integration with artificial intelligence.
The BMA has adopted an exploratory posture, including recently calling for proposals from digital asset firms for a collaborative pilot project aimed at testing embedded supervision on deployed blockchains (with regulatory requirements or disclosures integrated into the blockchain or smart contract architecture). Equally, however, the BMA has also focused on improving and strengthening regulation, including introducing a prudential framework for issuers of stablecoins pegged to the value of fiat currencies (see 2.4 Stablecoins) and consulting on new rules for client assets applicable to DABA licensees providing custody of digital assets, as well as on additional rules on capital, solvency, wind-down plans and net asset and liquidity requirements.
DABA licensees can be authorised to carry out a wide range of activities involving digital assets (details of specific licensable activities are provided in the following). Currently, Bermuda’s digital asset firms are licensed under DABA to conduct a number of different types of business, including:
A number of activities are specified as exempt from the requirement to obtain a DABA licence (see 4.1.1 Regulatory Overview), and two activities that are not specified as exempt in the legislation but which fall outside of DABA have been conducted by Bermuda companies in and outside of Bermuda, namely the mining of cryptocurrency/digital assets and operating blockchain protocols (to the extent that these are operations that do not involve DABA-licensable activities, such as providing custodial wallet services).
Many of Bermuda’s DABA licensees offer services to institutional customers, but several large and well-known retail digital asset businesses are licensed in Bermuda, and the BMA is able to accommodate oversight of such businesses (with applicable safeguards and operating procedures).
Many DABA licensees offer services across a number of public-permissioned blockchains, and some of the larger operators have interoperability protocols to allow clients to switch between different blockchains.
Part of the DABA licensing process involves careful assessment of appropriate levels of activity for operations post licensing, and the BMA takes an active approach in setting operating thresholds (such as net asset and liquidity limits) when granting DABA licences.
In respect of DAIA, which provides for the BMA to authorise public offers (issuances) of digital assets by applicant Bermuda firms (or overseas firms) in or from within Bermuda to raise capital, there has been relatively little activity, partly because DABA licensees can issue digital assets (if carried out by way of business).
While there has not been definitive case law in Bermuda (and where Bermuda courts would likely find the decisions of English courts persuasive, including decisions that have determined that crypto-assets constituted property), there is no express statutory definition of either the ownership or transfer of digital assets in Bermuda’s digital assets legislation (although the legislation is considered to have been drafted with the presumption that digital assets constitute property interests and legal title can be transferred and held in trust).
Consistent with the importance of control in asserting title to digital assets, in guidance and rules published by the BMA (exercising powers pursuant to DABA), which DABA licensees are required to adhere to (in respect of custody of digital assets for clients), it is provided that DABA licensees must have “adequate accounting... other records… systems and controls” to accurately track the ownership and quantity of client digital assets. The beneficial ownership rights of clients to digital assets held by DABA licensees are referred to in these rules, whilst the recently introduced Digital Asset Business (Custody of Client Assets) Rules 2025 (the “Custody Rules”; see 4.1.2 Licensing) refer to holders of digital assets having “respective beneficial ownership rights”.
In general, pursuant to the Digital Asset Business Custody Code of Practice (the “Custody Code”), the BMA (and its cyber-risk team) typically considers control of private keys (even by way of authorisation procedures for a multiparty computation (MPC) wallet) essential for determining the status of control of any digital assets, and for determining the ownership interest and finality of any transfer. The Custody Code includes technical standards applicable to those DABA licensees who provide custodial wallet services to ensure effective management and control of private keys (and thereby of the digital assets themselves).
In a consultation paper published late in 2024, the BMA indicated that they expect to introduce a definition of “control” of digital assets by amendment of Section 2 of DABA in order to capture DABA licensees that do in fact have control due to their business model but had previously been able to establish themselves outside of the custodial wallet services provider activity (and therefore not being subject to strict supervisory measures in respect of such control absent such change).
Under Bermuda’s DABA legislation, the wide definition of “digital asset” (“anything that exists in binary format with the right to use and includes a digital representation of value”) encompasses uses that fall within the exchange, security and utility token definitions used in other jurisdictions, namely:
Therefore, in most projects there may not be any need for categorisation in respect of digital assets (for regulatory purposes in Bermuda) although there may be consideration as to whether the proposed activity is among those requiring licensing under DABA.
The same definition of “digital asset” applies under DAIA in respect of digital asset issuance.
Recently, Bermuda has seen a number of projects (launched by DABA licensees) that involve the tokenisation of RWAs and representations or entitlement to other underlying rights, such as interests in securities including yield bearing stablecoins (backed by US Treasuries).
As mentioned in 2.2 Categorisation, the definition of “digital asset” under DABA includes security tokens (used to represent underlying securities), enabling businesses carrying out activities in respect of tokenised securities to be licensed under DABA.
Similar to tokenised securities, activities involving stablecoins are licensable under DABA in Bermuda, and Bermuda hosts a number of stablecoin issuers as DABA licensees. In 2024, the BMA published detailed guidance (the “SCPS Guidance”) applicable to stablecoin issuances that maintain a stable value relative to a specified asset, or a pool or basket of assets, in a single fiat currency (single currency-pegged stablecoins; SCPS). The SCPS Guidance introduced a comprehensive prudential regime for stablecoin issuers with requirements in respect of:
In the guidance, the BMA does not identify algorithmic stablecoins (as being applicable); however, it should be noted that the requirement for the issuer to have backing assets with market value equal to or higher than the value of the issued stablecoin tokens in circulation would likely preclude algorithmic stablecoins from being in compliance with the SCPS Guidance.
The majority or all of Bermuda’s stablecoin issuances licensed under DABA have had fiat currency or US Treasuries as backing assets.
In respect of other digital assets beyond those mentioned in the foregoing (such as non-fungible tokens, or NFTs), the broad definition of “digital assets” under DABA captures all or nearly all other relevant use cases.
At the time of writing, there have been considered and progressed projects in Bermuda that sought licensing for the issuance of NFTs (including to represent artworks).
The definition of “digital assets” includes means of exchange/payment instruments. Payments denominated in digital assets are valid in Bermuda, with a number of pilot activations having occurred that involved airdrops of tokens that could be used as a means of payment for goods and services in Bermuda. The Bermuda government has considered potential acceptance of digital assets (stablecoins) as a means of payment for government departments, and BermudAir, the national airline, recently announced it had partnered with a DABA licensee specialising in digital asset payment and interoperability systems, Zerohash, to accept payments in stablecoins.
In addition, one of the licensable activities under DABA is “operating as a payment service provider” utilising digital assets for the transfer of funds, and a number of current DABA licensees are licensed for this activity.
In 2025, the BMA published a consultation paper considering proposals to introduce a regulatory regime for payment service providers in Bermuda, which would supersede and likely overlap the existing licensing regime for money services businesses and permit payments denominated in digital assets.
Certain of Bermuda’s DABA licensees have looked to use digital assets for collateral arrangements in a number of ways in recent years.
Most recently, several DABA licensees have been establishing facilities to issue yield-bearing stablecoins in Bermuda, with the intention that those tokens will be used as collateral for derivatives trading – a particularly high-growth sector. Second, the use of digital assets as collateral for staking was permitted with the addition of a DABA activity (operating as a digital asset lending or digital asset repurchase transactions service provider), although volumes of staking activity peaked in 2022. Finally, transactions have occurred in Bermuda in which digital assets have been granted as collateral security for regular corporate transactions (by Bermuda companies holding digital assets), including for loan transaction security.
Bermuda does not have a specific statutory legal regime for granting collateral security over digital assets, although there have been transactions where security was effected and registered by Bermuda companies pursuant to the statutory regime of granting a charge over moveable assets pursuant to the Companies Act 1981 (which involved some technically complex issues regarding the control of private keys).
To the extent they are intended to comprise binding contracts (and include the requisite elements of contracts under common law – namely offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relations and consideration), smart contracts can and will be enforceable as contracts under common law in Bermuda.
In addition, the enforceability of smart contracts (including when they comprise a contract under common law) is strengthened by a statutory presumption of effectiveness. Under the Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (ETA), legal recognition is given to electronic records (which include information inscribed on a tangible medium or any other medium and are retrievable in perceivable form), with a negative presumption that the form of electronic record/s referred to “shall not be denied” legal effect, validity admissibility or enforceability solely on the ground of their electronic form.
The ETA also contains a negative presumption in respect of legal proceedings, such that the electronic form of a record (or its status as the “best evidence” not in the original form) shall not be a sole basis to deny admissibility in evidence in any legal proceedings.
Ordinarily, however, Bermuda DABA licensees need to ensure they adopt best practice in the operation of smart contracts to accord with the technical standards set by the BMA therefor, which include the adoption of secure development practices (in respect of standards and testing environments), benchmarking against specific vulnerability standards, security assessments and reviews of design and implementation risks (as set out in the Operational Cyber Risk Management Code of Practice; the “Cyber Code”).
As mentioned in the foregoing, the focus of the DABA regulatory regime is on the licensing of digital asset business activities and the regulation of licensed persons (via the minimum criteria for licensing set out below).
Digital asset business activities are as follows:
Persons who are exempt from requiring a DABA licence are as follows:
The persons in the foregoing list are referred to as “non-specified persons”, whereas the BMA and the government of Bermuda – and any entity owned by it as well as a public authority – are “specified persons”. Each exempt undertaking is required to notify the BMA of its intention to be exempt (and file an annual declaration of continuation of exemption each year).
Under DAIA, a single digital asset issuance activity is regulated, defined as an offer to the public to acquire digital assets or to enter into an agreement to do so at a future date. The following types of digital asset issuance are exempt from requiring BMA authorisation:
A DAIA-authorised undertaking is required to publish an issuance document prior to offering digital assets to the public. The circumstances that are exempt from the obligation to file an issuance document under DAIA are as follows:
There are substantial penalties under DABA and DAIA for anyone who fails to comply with any requirement or contravenes any prohibition imposed by or under the legislation, including potential fines of up to USD10 million. In addition, the BMA has a wide range of enforcement options available to deal with any failure to comply with prudential and AML/anti-terrorist financing (ATF) requirements.
In respect of the insurance regulatory sandbox and innovation hub, please see the commentary about sandboxes in 4.3 Regulatory Sandbox.
Any company wishing to carry out digital asset business will require the consent of the BMA and the granting of a licence pursuant to DABA. A detailed and comprehensive digital asset business application must be submitted to the BMA in the appropriate form and must state the class of digital asset business licence required.
There are three classes of digital asset business licences that may be applied for, as follows.
Applicants can apply for an authorisation under the DAIA to conduct a digital asset issuance.
Minimum Criteria for Licensing (Authorisation)
The BMA will not grant a DABA licence unless it is satisfied that the minimum criteria set out in DABA are fulfilled by the applicant. The minimum criteria for licensing include standards that require:
Any licence issued by the BMA may be subject to limitations on the scope of the digital asset business activity, or the manner of operating the business, as the BMA may determine to be appropriate having regard to the nature and scale of the proposed business. Further, a licence may be revoked by the BMA if any of the minimum criteria are not (or have not been) fulfilled in respect of a licensed undertaking. There are similar minimum criteria in respect of digital asset issuances pursuant to DAIA.
Protection (and Separation) of Client and Acquirer Assets
DABA licensees are required to keep client assets separate from other business assets, whilst authorised DAIA firms are required to keep accounts containing assets of a digital asset acquirer separate from any accounts kept in respect of any other business until completion of the issuance (or as required by the BMA).
DABA includes additional requirements for custody of client assets – DABA licensees must maintain a trust account, surety bond or indemnity insurance to protect clients and maintain a sufficient amount of each type of digital asset in order to meet client obligations.
In addition to the existing technical standards in the Custody Code applicable to those providing custody of digital assets (as custodial wallet service providers), the recently introduced Custody Rules, which apply to custodial wallet service providers, shall require those providers to:
Appointment of Bermuda-Based Representatives
Both DABA and DAIA include requirements for a representative with an office in Bermuda having various duties. DABA licensees are required to appoint a senior representative, and DAIA-authorised parties are required to appoint a local representative, who shall be required to make disclosures to the BMA such as non-compliance with its obligations under legislation and the BMA guidance, including the likelihood of the entity becoming insolvent and failures to comply with the conditions imposed by the BMA.
For DABA licensees, the DABA Code of Practice (2024) incorporates several standards in respect of advertising and promotions, including that the manner of promotion must, amongst other things, be clear, fair and not misleading. Advertisements cannot contain untrue or misleading statements, cannot distort and must use clear language and include a statement of related risks. The Code prohibits mis-selling and misrepresentation, and has requirements on how information is presented to clients.
In a consultation paper published last year, the BMA indicated it will look to introduce amendments to expressly prohibit DABA licensees from publishing misleading advertising. Advertising and marketing rules are in addition to the disclosure obligations under DABA and DAIA detailed in the following.
Bermuda has implemented robust AML, ATF and international sanctions regulations, including the Proceeds of Crime Act 1997 (POCA 97), the Anti-Terrorism (Financial and Other Measures) Act 2004 and the International Sanctions Regulations 2013. As a member of the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF), Bermuda aligns with global FATF standards, conducting regular risk assessments and applying enhanced due diligence for high-risk jurisdictions.
As part of its engagement processes, Bermuda has participated in on-site visits from the CFATF (scoring highest among all jurisdictions in the CFATF Mutual Evaluation Report of 2020) and conducted multi-year national risk assessments overseen by the National Anti-Money Laundering Committee (NAMLC), most recently in 2020 (with the NAMLC commencing but not completing a money laundering and terrorist financing risk assessment in 2023, the results of which are still outstanding).
The NAMLC was established pursuant to POCA 97 for the purpose of advising the Minister of Finance and others in relation to the detection and prevention of money laundering, terrorist financing and the financing of proliferation, and to develop a national plan of action to include recommendations on effective mechanisms to enable the competent authorities in Bermuda to co-ordinate with each other concerning the development and implementation of policies and activities to combat money laundering, terrorist financing and the financing of proliferation.
Absent a full review of AML/ATF requirements, which is beyond the scope of this chapter, in addition to legislation, substantive obligations applicable to digital asset firms in Bermuda are expanded upon in general guidance published by the BMA for the financial institutions that it regulates, specific to DABA licensees. Topics covered include:
Key challenges many digital asset firms face in developing their AMLATF programme include:
Both DABA and DAIA incorporate a regime requiring the BMA to be notified of proposed changes in shareholder controllers (those with 10% shareholding) or a majority shareholder of a DABA or DAIA licensee, with the BMA having three months to either notify that it has no objection or that it does have an objection (the reasons for which could include the prospective controller not being a fit and proper person or a threat to potential clients of the licensee). The BMA can also object to any existing controller if it appears to the Authority that the person is not or is no longer a fit and proper person.
Contravention by a controller (failing to give notice or becoming a controller before the end of the notice period) is an offence, and the BMA can direct that restrictions shall apply to shares of the licensee (including on the transfer, further issuance or payment of the shares, or the exercise of voting rights).
The requirement for licensees to have a wind down plan has been introduced and is applicable to DABA licensees that issue stablecoins (with the introduction of the SCPS Guidance in late 2024). This will typically involve the licensee carrying out an assessment of winding-up costs and planning the timing of the wind-down of business and closure or transfer of client accounts, while protecting client assets. As noted in the foregoing, this is part of a prudential framework applicable to stablecoin issuers that are DABA licensees.
Following a separate consultation in 2024, the BMA indicated that DABA is to be amended to:
In addition, pursuant to the Custody Rules, a custodial wallet service provider is required to pool client assets upon certain defaults to make the assets available for clients (as discussed in 4.1.2 Licensing).
Ongoing regulatory obligations (in addition to those already discussed) for DABA licensees include the following.
Given that there is some overlap between digital asset business and investment business, there have been some examples of Bermuda-based investment business licensees carrying on activity that also falls within the scope of DABA (such as holding investments in tokenised assets or issuing RWA-backed tokens), and of DABA licensees beginning to hold investment fund instruments to back stablecoins, such as shares in funds holding US Treasuries.
To deal with the overlap, there are statutory carve-outs and guidance permitting a DABA licensee to carry out investment business – if done in an ancillary manner – within certain limits (the ancillary business generated should not exceed 25% of the total gross revenue, with a buffer zone of 25–35% requiring the DABA licensee to notify the BMA and agree a remediation plan or roadmap to reduce the revenue towards compliance with the 25% threshold).
For DABA licensees, the Class T and Class M licenses are considered as a sandbox environment overseen by the BMA, through which businesses graduate to the full Class F licence and are subject to certain limits and supervision as they develop their business models.
In addition, the BMA operates a sandbox for innovative businesses in the insurance industry, along with an innovation hub for earlier-stage business concepts, with sandbox licensees being classed as either innovative insurers (Class IIGB) or innovative intermediaries (IMP) in accordance with the Insurance Act 1978.
A number of the current companies in the insurance regulatory sandbox deploy blockchain/decentralised ledgers in their projects – such as offering insurance policies that are denominated in cryptocurrency and insurance markets administered by smart contracts. Such firms account for a proportion of the relatively large number of innovative firms developing new business models incorporating blockchain in Bermuda.
Bermuda’s DABA legislation predates the launch of the virtual asset service provider (VASP) legislative model arising from Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendation 15 (New Technologies); however, it is similar in many ways (including the listed activities for which licensing is required).
As noted in 4.1.4 Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing (AML/CTF) Requirements, Bermuda has a very robust AML/ATF framework, as confirmed by recent assessments. The BMA, as a regulator, engages regularly with peer regulators and fellow international standard-setting bodies.
As discussed in the foregoing, the BMA is the sole financial regulator in Bermuda and is entirely responsible for the regulation of digital asset firms in Bermuda.
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Bermuda (the “Privacy Commissioner”) is an independent supervisory authority responsible for overseeing implementation of the Personal Information Protection Act 2016 (PIPA).
Bermuda hosts a number of professional bodies representing interests across the financial services sector. Relevant to digital assets, NEXT – the Bermuda Digital Assets Industry Forum – is an autonomous industry advocacy group for Bermuda-based digital asset companies licensed by the BMA providing a collective voice and opportunities for collaboration within Bermuda and globally.
Founded in May 2022, at the time of writing NEXT consists of 13 companies licensed under DABA and/or the IIGB category. As well as being a voice for the industry and representing Bermuda’s interests internationally, NEXT has been involved in consultations with the BMA on behalf of its membership.
The Bermuda government plays an active role across its different departments in engaging with stakeholders, both within Bermuda and externally. The government has a strong tech focus, which extends into areas such as digital identity, education and international co-operation.
The Bermuda Business Development Agency (BDA) oversees a number of working groups and committees, which can involve members of the Bermuda Bar considering proposals for law reform including in the digital assets space. In the last year, one sub-committee staffed by lawyers with experience in the sector, and overseen by the BDA, examined the development of DAOs globally and formulated proposals that have been transmitted to the Bermuda Government and the BMA for consideration and deployment in Bermuda.
In May 2025 – in the case of Lai and others v Bermuda Monetary Authority and the Minister of Finance (2025) SC (Bda) 49 Civ (the “Bittrex case”) – the Supreme Court of Bermuda rejected a challenge by the ultimate beneficial owners (UBOs) and former directors of a digital assets exchange, Bittrex Global (Bermuda) Ltd (“Bittrex”), which held a Class F (Full) DABA licence until it ceased operations in 2024. Details of the enforcement steps taken by the BMA are set out in 5.2 Enforcement Actions.
The challenge focused on the constitutional validity of the BMA’s regulatory actions and also heard arguments in respect of the impact of such actions on the individual former directors.
The challenge was unsuccessful, and it was held that the BMA is not an “adjudicating authority” within the meaning of Bermuda’s Constitution and that the BMA does not determine civil rights obligations (a separate DABA appeal tribunal is the adjudicating authority under DABA). Additionally, the actions of the BMA (serving a warning notice and decision notice) did not determine any civil rights of the UBOs or former directors of Bittrex.
A result of the case has been confirmation of the valid status of DABA under the Bermuda Constitution and of the BMA’s use of its enforcement powers.
Due to the wide-ranging nature of regulation (in respect of both digital assets and insurance), the scope of regulation has not been shaped by regulator action or litigation.
The BMA has wide-ranging powers of investigation and discipline under DABA, DAIA and the Insurance Act, as well as under its enabling legislation, and the BMA also publishes details of certain of its enforcement actions on its website.
The BMA also publishes guidance as to the use of its enforcement powers (entitled the “Statement of Principles and Guidance on the Exercise of Enforcement Powers”).
Key disciplinary powers of the BMA under DABA include:
In the Bittrex case, it would seem from the judgment that the BMA’s use of its disciplinary powers included a warning notice and a decision notice.
There is no tax arising on the issuance, acquisition, purchase, subscription or sale of digital assets in Bermuda.
There are no taxes on income, profits, dividends or capital gains – or other taxes – in Bermuda other than a 15% corporate income tax (CIT) payable if a Bermuda company is part of a multinational group with annual revenue of EUR750 million (from 2025), to which double taxation and set-off rules shall apply.
Digital asset licensees that are structured as exempted companies can apply to the Minister of Finance for an exemption from any future imposition of tax on profits, income or any capital gain or appreciation until 31 March 2035 (although this does not apply to CIT, if payable). In addition, any conversion of the local currency (Bermuda dollars) via Bermudian banks will incur a 1% foreign currency purchase tax charge.
In the event that aspects of a transaction involving digital assets are concluded in a written agreement that is to be registered in Bermuda (such as a charge or security agreement), stamp duty will be chargeable at the rates specified in legislation.
While the BMA has been proactive in giving greater consideration to ESG and sustainable finance concerns across its areas of supervision – and expanded the risk management framework in the Insurance Code of Conduct in 2022 (to incorporate considerations of material risks arising from ESG aspects, in particular climate risks), which may impact firms that participate in the insurance regulatory sandbox – there are currently no disclosure or reporting requirements applicable to firms that are licensed under DABA or authorised under DAIA.
On 1 January 2025, PIPA came fully into force in Bermuda, and all Bermuda organisations that use personal information (whether wholly or partly by automated means, including as part of a structured filing system) are subject to it.
As in other jurisdictions, the introduction of PIPA means that Bermuda-based organisations, including digital asset firms, have to assess their own operations and establish processes to ensure compliance. These may include:
The impact on Bermuda’s digital asset firms of PIPA compliance programmes will depend on the type of personal information they are using (and the manner of use) and how such programmes interface with on-chain operations. For example, the impact will differ between an on-chain insurance market (using significant personal information of the insured) and a liquidity services provider who deals only with institutions (with little or no personal information involved).
3rd Floor
73 Front Street
Hamilton HM12
Bermuda
+1 441 400 4747
+1 441 236 1999
info@beesmont.bm www.beesmont.bm