Kazakhstan formalizes crypto rules, hands licensing power to central bank

Kazakhstan’s president has signed into law a package that establishes a formal supervisory framework for digital financial assets (DFAs) and crypto trading, transferring key regulatory powers to the National Bank of Kazakhstan (NBK). The legislation creates a distinct category for DFAs, prescribes issuance and investor-protection requirements, and mandates licensing for platforms that issue or trade these instruments. The NBK is empowered to license exchange operators, approve which tokens can be listed on regulated venues and set operational trading limits and permitted-asset lists; a separate financial regulator will set technical standards for issuance, redemption and custody. Stablecoins are placed under a separate set of rules, while other tokens will face disclosure, governance and risk-control obligations similar to those for traditional financial products. Practically, firms that wish to serve retail or institutional clients must obtain licences or face exclusion from the regulated market. The law is designed to shrink informal off‑ramp channels while preserving Kazakhstan’s role in crypto mining and payments innovation, creating a trade-off between regulatory friction and legal certainty. Market infrastructure providers should expect higher compliance and operational costs — from custody arrangements to reporting — and smaller noncompliant operators may exit or relocate. Kazakhstan’s approach is consistent with a broader regional pattern of anchoring crypto activity inside established financial supervision: for example, nearby Belarus has recently moved to embed digital-asset operations into its regulated banking framework, channeling token-based services through state-recognized financial operators. How the NBK applies its gatekeeping — particularly the criteria for the approved-asset list and licence terms — will determine whether the regime becomes an on-ramp for compliant innovation or a bottleneck that restricts market access. Over time, clear, transparent implementation could support supervised token issuances, institutional trading desks and regulated payments use cases, but much depends on the granularity and predictability of licensing criteria and permitted-asset policies.