Five governments that clarified crypto licensing in 2025

How regulatory frameworks became clearer (and friendlier) in 2025

For years, the cryptocurrency industry has operated under a patchwork of conflicting regulations — at times banned outright, at others welcomed with arms wide open and often left uncomfortably in between. But 2025 marked a notable shift toward greater regulatory clarity in several major jurisdictions, as governments moved away from ambiguity and toward more structured cryptoasset frameworks.

Five key jurisdictions recognized that clarity and accessibility in crypto licensing can coexist with consumer protection and financial integrity. The result has been a new generation of streamlined frameworks that balance innovation with oversight, making it easier for legitimate projects to launch and operate.

This shift matters because regulatory clarity has become a critical factor for long-term planning. When entrepreneurs know exactly what is required, how much it will cost and how long it will take, they can plan strategically instead of navigating legal uncertainty. When regulators provide clear pathways, they lower compliance friction while strengthening their ability to supervise the ecosystem.

From the passage of the GENIUS Act in the US to the full rollout of Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) in the European Union, 2025 marked a reduction in regulatory uncertainty. We analyzed the global regulatory landscape to identify five governments that made notable efforts to simplify, streamline and clarify crypto licensing during the year.

1. United States: A shift toward federal clarity

For years, the United States has been among the most challenging jurisdictions for crypto entrepreneurs to navigate. A strategy often described as “regulation by enforcement,” in which regulatory expectations were clarified primarily through litigation, contributed to uncertainty and pushed significant innovation offshore. That approach shifted in July 2025 with the passage of the GENIUS Act.

The legislation established the first comprehensive federal framework for stablecoins. It addressed long-standing uncertainty around the treatment of stablecoins under commodities and securities law, which had created friction across the industry. It also marked a shift in banking policy, as regulators revised earlier approaches that had limited crypto firms’ access to the traditional financial system.

How the GENIUS Act simplifies licensing

The GENIUS Act introduced a clear federal pathway for stablecoin issuers. It reduced reliance on a fragmented system of state-level money transmitter licenses by setting out a unified federal framework. For the first time, crypto-native firms could reference a single rulebook to understand the baseline requirements for operating legally in the US.

Did you know? Before the GENIUS Act, stablecoin issuers in the US were generally required to obtain money transmitter licenses across most states to operate nationwide. The new federal framework reduces this duplication by establishing a unified licensing pathway. As a result, compliance costs for issuers may decline, including legal and administrative expenses.

2. European Union: The power of the “passport”

While the EU’s MiCA regulation was adopted earlier, 2025 was the year implementation began in earnest. As of January, the licensing and authorization phase went live, and the benefits of the union’s passporting mechanism became operational.

MiCA introduced the concept of single authorization. A Crypto-Asset Service Provider (CASP) licensed in one member state can passport its services across all 27 EU countries without undergoing separate national licensing processes. In practice, a firm authorized in the Netherlands can extend its operations into Germany under the MiCA framework.

Germany, already a prominent jurisdiction for fintech regulation, approved 21 CASPs in the first half of the year. This positioned the country as a key entry point for institutional crypto activity in Europe.

Did you know? MiCA’s passporting mechanism allows a crypto company licensed in one EU member state, such as Malta or Lithuania, to provide services across the European Single Market under a single authorization. This framework enables access to a market of more than 450 million consumers without requiring separate licensing approvals in each country.

3. United Arab Emirates (Dubai): Clarifying regulatory scope

Dubai has long positioned itself as a crypto hub. However, its early regulatory phase was marked by frequent and iterative changes that created uncertainty for some firms.

In May 2025, the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA) released Version 2.0 of its rulebooks. This update marked a shift from an experimental regulatory approach toward a more mature framework aligned with global financial standards.

How VARA simplifies licensing:

The update replaced fragmented guidance with a consolidated, activity-based licensing regime. It explicitly defined terms that had previously been ambiguous, including concepts such as “qualified custodian” and specific collateral standards. It also set a firm compliance deadline of June 19, 2025.

The revised rulebooks provided applicants with a clear compliance checklist, reducing the need to interpret broad or unclear guidance.

Did you know? The Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA) was established as an independent regulator dedicated exclusively to the virtual assets sector in Dubai. Unlike jurisdictions where crypto oversight is handled by existing securities or banking regulators, VARA was created to focus specifically on the regulatory requirements of virtual asset activities and Web3 technologies.

4. Hong Kong: A revised stablecoin framework

Hong Kong signaled a renewed push to strengthen its position in digital assets in 2024 and followed through in 2025. A central element of this effort was the introduction of a new stablecoin regulatory framework in August. The framework followed a sandbox testing phase conducted by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA).

How it simplifies licensing:

Hong Kong recognized the growing role of stablecoins in the crypto ecosystem and introduced a dedicated licensing framework for fiat-referenced stablecoin issuers. This approach reduced uncertainty that had arisen from attempting to fit stablecoins into existing securities or stored-value facility regimes.

The framework sets out distinct capital requirements and reserve standards that are clearly defined and supervisory in nature. As a result, Hong Kong positioned itself as a regulated jurisdiction for stablecoin issuance under English-law principles, offering international firms a structured gateway into Asian digital asset markets.

Did you know? Hong Kong’s framework specifically addresses “reverse solicitation” by creating a legal safe harbor. This applies to foreign firms that do not actively market to HK residents. It simplifies the global compliance map for multinational DeFi protocols.

5. United Kingdom: The “unified regime”

The United Kingdom initially proposed a phased approach in which stablecoins would be regulated first, with broader crypto activity addressed later. In 2025, that roadmap was simplified. Draft legislation published by HM Treasury in April signaled a move toward a single, unified regime under the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA). This was followed by consultation papers issued by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in December.

How it simplifies licensing:

By integrating crypto into the existing FSMA framework, the UK moved away from treating crypto as a separate asset category and toward regulating it within established financial rules. Discussion Paper DP25/1 outlined a regime that builds on existing requirements for trading venues and intermediaries.

For banks and brokers already operating under FCA oversight, this approach reduces friction. Firms familiar with FCA expectations can extend their existing compliance processes to crypto-related activities rather than adapting to an entirely new regulatory structure.

Did you know? The UK’s unified regulatory regime extends beyond companies to individuals involved in financial promotions. Under rules incorporated by the FCA in 2025, influencers who promote non-compliant crypto assets without the required authorization may face criminal sanctions, including potential prison sentences of up to two years.

A shift toward regulatory competition

If 2024 was the year of the exchange-traded fund, 2025 was the year of the license.

The simplification seen in 2025 was not about deregulation. In fact, standards for Anti-Money Laundering, custody and consumer protection are higher than ever. What changed was the process. Governments increasingly recognized that capital tends to flow toward jurisdictions with clear and predictable rules. In this context, “best” no longer means unregulated; it means clearly regulated.

For founders and builders, the regulatory map is no longer blank. Whether through the passporting framework of the EU, the federal clarity emerging in the US or the specialized regimes of the United Arab Emirates and Hong Kong, pathways to operating compliantly are more clearly defined. The question is no longer whether a company can obtain a license; it is where it chooses to build.