Modern glass building with a Bitcoin symbol, city
Crypto

ASIC extends crypto no-action relief to Sept. 30, 2026 and widens eligibility

The extension gives digital asset firms more time to pursue AFS licensing ahead of the 2027 Digital Asset Framework.

By AI News Crypto Editorial Team5 min read

Australia’s financial regulator has extended temporary “no-action” enforcement relief for digital asset businesses to Sept. 30, 2026, pushing back a prior June 30 deadline. The relief was also widened to cover more operating models as firms transition into licensing under ASIC’s updated guidance.

Key Takeaways

  • ASIC extended its temporary no-action enforcement relief for digital asset businesses to Sept. 30, 2026, from a previous June 30 deadline.
  • The relief covers firms seeking an Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence and businesses that may need market or clearing and settlement authorisations.
  • Eligibility now includes digital asset providers operating via authorised representatives or intermediary arrangements with licensed firms.
  • About 30 licence applications have been received since ASIC updated its digital asset guidance (INFO 225) in October 2025.

ASIC Pushes the No-Action Deadline to Sept. 30, 2026

ASIC has moved the expiry of its temporary no-action position for digital asset businesses to Sept. 30, 2026, extending the prior June 30 deadline. In practice, the regulator is keeping “temporary protection from enforcement” in place while firms transition into the licensing perimeter.

For Australia-facing exchanges, brokers, market makers, and service providers, the immediate impact is a reduction in near-term enforcement risk tied to timing. It is not a change in the underlying perimeter. ASIC’s posture remains that many digital asset activities already sit inside existing financial services law, and the no-action window is a transition tool rather than a reclassification of products.

ASIC also disclosed it has received about 30 licence applications since the October 2025 update to its digital asset guidance. The packet provides no breakdown of how many have been approved, rejected, or remain pending, which keeps the true pace of transition hard to handicap.

Which Crypto Business Models and Permissions the Relief Now Covers

The extended relief applies to businesses seeking an Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence, the core permission for providing regulated financial services in Australia. ASIC also framed the relief as relevant to companies that may require market authorisations or clearing and settlement authorisations, widening the set of business models that need to map their activity to specific permissions.

The notable scope change is eligibility. ASIC expanded the no-action relief to include digital asset businesses operating through authorised representatives or intermediary arrangements with licensed firms. That is an explicit acknowledgement that a meaningful slice of the market is using licensed partners as a bridge, rather than holding licences directly during the transition.

For traders, this matters less as a headline and more as a platform-continuity signal. If more firms can remain inside a supervised channel via authorised-representative structures, the odds of abrupt service changes driven purely by licensing timelines fall, at least until the new deadline.

INFO 225, Block Earner, and Why ASIC Says Many Tokens Are Already Regulated

ASIC’s October 2025 update to Information Sheet 225 (INFO 225) set the baseline: many digital asset products are already “financial products” under existing law, which means many providers require an AFS licence. ASIC’s reasoning rests on its view that Australia’s financial product definitions are broad and technology-neutral.

ASIC also pointed to the High Court’s Block Earner decision as reinforcement of that interpretation. The court found Block Earner’s former crypto yield product was a financial product under the Corporations Act, strengthening ASIC’s footing when it treats yield-style or product-wrapped crypto exposures as regulated offerings.

The extension of no-action relief does not soften that legal framing. It buys time for licensing and authorisation workstreams, but it does not narrow the set of products ASIC believes are already captured.

The 2027 Digital Asset Framework Sits Outside This Relief Window

The temporary relief is separate from Australia’s Digital Asset Framework, which passed Parliament in April 2026 and is scheduled to commence on April 9, 2027. That regime is set to bring digital asset platforms and tokenized custody platforms into Australia’s financial services licensing system.

ASIC has already warned that some firms licensed under the current INFO 225 pathway may need additional permissions once the new framework takes effect. In a May announcement, ASIC said: “Many digital asset firms that apply for a licence based on INFO 225 will also need to add DAP and TCP authorisations to their licence once that regime commences,” flagging a second compliance lift even for firms that clear the current bar.

Key dates now do the work. Sept. 30, 2026 is the next enforcement-risk waypoint for the transition relief. April 9, 2027 is the structural regime change. Between them, traders should expect more ASIC communication on when market, clearing, and settlement authorisations are required, and whether the ~30 applications are moving toward approvals or stalling.

The Compliance Runway Is Longer, but the Authorisation Stack May Grow

The extension is a pressure-release valve, not a green light. I read it as ASIC trying to keep the transition orderly while maintaining its core claim that many crypto products already fit inside existing financial product definitions, especially after the High Court’s Block Earner ruling.

The threshold that matters is whether firms can convert this extra runway into actual licence outcomes before Sept. 30, 2026, and whether ASIC clarifies the market, clearing, and settlement triggers. If the 2027 Digital Asset Framework lands with DAP and TCP authorisations layered on top of INFO 225-era licences, the setup starts to look structural rather than narrative-driven, because compliance becomes a multi-step stack instead of a one-time hurdle.

Sources