comments

Advert

Advert – scroll down

Displaying the 5 latest comments.

view more ...
Submitted
first-name
support
concern
top-concern
message
2026-10-08 00:29:09 +02:00
Maria
No I do not
Threat to Domestic Fintech Jobs, Foreign Investment & Tax Revenue
To whom it may concern

I fear finances and financial managers will seek to keep their currencies outside of the country and not benefit our situation in any why if they get over-regulated like this.
2026-10-07 20:05:16 +02:00
Nooe
Yes I do
Anti-Competitive CASP Capital Barriers (R5 Million Locked Fiat Mandate)
Nope
2026-10-07 18:43:44 +02:00
Rory
No I do not
The Inward Self-Custody Trap (Banning transfers from non-custodial wallets)
2026-10-07 18:18:20 +02:00
Rushil
No I do not
All of the above
The Blanket Prohibition on Corporate/Business Cross-Border Payments
OBJECTION TO THE DRAFT CRYPTO ASSET MANUAL FOR CROSS-BORDER ACTIVITIES

I wish to record my objection to the proposed Crypto Asset Manual in its present form.

While reasonable measures to combat money laundering and genuinely illicit financial flows are justified, regulation should not result in the routine monitoring and reporting of the lawful financial activities of ordinary South Africans.

Crypto assets are privately owned assets. Individuals conducting legitimate transactions with their own lawfully acquired and, where applicable, properly declared or taxed funds should be entitled to a reasonable degree of financial privacy and freedom.

The proposed framework risks imposing another layer of surveillance, reporting and regulatory control upon citizens who have committed no wrongdoing. Any intrusion into financial privacy should be targeted, proportionate and based upon legitimate risk or reasonable suspicion, rather than becoming the default treatment of every individual undertaking a cross-border crypto transaction.

South Africa should encourage innovation and responsible participation in the global digital-asset economy rather than creating unnecessary barriers that may drive investment, skills and capital to more accommodating jurisdictions.

I therefore respectfully request that National Treasury and SARB reconsider those provisions that unnecessarily restrict legitimate private transactions or require disproportionate disclosure and reporting, and adopt a framework that properly balances regulatory objectives with individual privacy, property rights and financial freedom.
2026-10-07 11:29:08 +02:00
brian
Not fully
Privacy Overreach & Permanent Ledger Tracking (POPIA / Section 14)

What Supporters Say (National Treasury & SARB Stance)

    • Curbing Regulatory Arbitrage:
      Unregulated cross-border crypto movements undermine the foreign exchange framework. Bringing crypto transactions within standard balance-of-payments reporting ensures that fintech entities face the same compliance oversight as commercial banks.
    • Defending the Fiscus & National Currency:
      In an era of borderless digital finance, untracked capital outflows threaten domestic macroeconomic stability and the South African Rand. Comprehensive surveillance enables FinSurv to track the true volume of capital moving across borders.
    • Protecting International Financial Standing:
      Following South Africa’s removal from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list, closing cross-border anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) loopholes is necessary to maintain global banking relationships.
    • Ensuring Platform Solvency:
      Enforcing a minimum unimpaired capital reserve of R5 million and mandating client asset segregation protects everyday consumers from exchange collapses and fraudulent practices.
    • Structured Industry Pathways:
      The manual replaces legal ambiguity with a defined, tiered licensing model (Category 1, 2, and 3), providing institutional legitimacy for compliant operators.

What Opponents Say (Industry Coalition, Economists & Legal Scholars)

    • Breach of Technology Neutrality:
      SARB Governor Lesetja Kganyago stated that “similar payment activities should be subject to similar regulatory expectations, whether they are performed by a bank or a fintech.” The draft manual breaches this principle by permitting businesses to execute international vendor settlements via SWIFT while outright banning the exact same economic transaction if routed through regulated blockchain rails.
    • The “Cold Storage Trap”:
      Classifying inward transfers from non-custodial wallets as non-permissible penalizes the foundational property of public blockchain technology: individual self-custody. It creates a one-way street where citizens can take custody of their digital property, but are legally locked out of the domestic banking system if they ever wish to repatriate it.
    • Economic Isolation of South African Enterprise:
      Banning South African companies and trusts from cross-border crypto rails isolates the domestic tech sector, digital exporters, and Web3 startups from the global digital economy, preventing them from using efficient stablecoin settlement channels.
    • Threat to Domestic Jobs & Foreign Investment:
      The industry-led CATASTROPHE coalition (including VALR, Luno, AltCoinTrader, and EasyEquities) warns that billions of Rands in foreign direct investment into South African fintech have been frozen, putting thousands of skilled jobs and significant corporate and PAYE tax contributions at immediate risk.
    • Perverse Incentive for Unregulated Flight:
      Imposing non-workable restrictions will not stop digital asset usage; it will simply drive liquidity away from compliant domestic exchanges into unregulated offshore peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, blinding both FinSurv and SARS.
    • Administrative Cart Before the Horse:
      Requesting public commentary on operational directives while the parent Capital Flow Management Regulations remain unresolved undermines procedural fairness under PAJA.
have your say