Australia’s securities regulator, ASIC, has opened a public consultation on proposed capital, custody, and trading standards for crypto platforms. The proposals aim to implement the Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Act passed in April 2026, with final standards targeted for March 2027. Feedback is due by November 27.
The consultation document, CP 392, outlines three alternative capital models. One model requires operators without qualifying third-party custody arrangements to hold at least 14 million Australian dollars ($9.7 million) in net tangible assets or 10% of average revenue, whichever is greater. ASIC also proposes restrictions on platforms trading for their own account and accepting benefits to favor particular tokens, addressing potential conflicts of interest. Additionally, the regulator suggests allowing offshore custody while seeking feedback on safeguards, such as emergency access to private keys if an overseas parent or custodian fails.
Industry leaders have responded to the proposals. Amy-Rose Goodey, CEO of the Digital Economy Council of Australia, described the release as an important milestone shifting focus toward practical implementation. OKX Australia CEO Shange Chandra noted that the standards are appropriately onerous and could drive industry consolidation by rewarding operators who have already invested in compliance. The consultation forms part of ASIC’s 18-month implementation roadmap following the passage of the new legislation.
ASIC’s move to codify capital and custody requirements signals a transition from regulatory ambiguity to structured enforcement for Australia’s digital asset sector. By proposing specific financial thresholds and restricting principal trading, the regulator aims to mitigate operational risks and protect consumer assets, aligning local practices with global standards for financial stability. The inclusion of offshore custody options reflects a pragmatic recognition of the borderless nature of crypto markets, though it introduces complex jurisdictional challenges regarding asset recovery during custodial failures.
The anticipated industry consolidation highlighted by executives like Shange Chandra underscores the high barrier to entry these rules create. Smaller platforms may struggle to meet the stringent capital requirements, potentially forcing exits or mergers, while larger, well-capitalized firms gain competitive advantages. This dynamic could reshape the market structure, concentrating liquidity among compliant entities but raising concerns about reduced competition. Stakeholders must closely monitor how ASIC balances proportionality across business sizes, particularly through concessions for third-party custody, to ensure the framework does not inadvertently stifle innovation while enforcing necessary safeguards.
