BRAZIL Trends and Developments Contributed by: Eduardo Castro, Pedro Nasi and Gabriel Libanori, Machado, Meyer, Sendacz e Opice
To design this framework, the BCB launched several public consultation processes to obtain market input on how the sector should be regulated, what catego - ries of VASPs should be recognised and how their activities should be supervised. As a result, BCB Res - olution Nos 519–521 were published on 10 November 2025, establishing the new obligations and operation - al requirements applicable to VASPs. One of the main regulatory challenges relates to the traceability of virtual asset transactions, considering their inherent anonymity and the widespread use of mixers to obscure transaction data. To address this issue, the BCB classified a series of virtual asset transactions – specifically, all transactions involving stablecoins – within the scope of the foreign exchange market. Brazil’s foreign exchange market is heavily regulated and requires daily reporting of transactions by authorised institutions. Consequently, all stablecoin transactions must now be reported to the BCB by entities authorised to oper - ate both in the virtual asset market and the foreign exchange market, even when the stablecoin is pegged to the Brazilian real and transacted exclusively among Brazil-based residents. The same applies to virtual asset transfers to self-custody, for the reasons noted above. The BCB’s framework also includes detailed rules on listing and delisting virtual assets, the roles and obligations of market makers and liquidity providers, custody standards, cybersecurity requirements and obligations applicable to essential service providers, with an emphasis on governance and mitigation of conflict of interest. Furthermore, staking and margin account operations may only be offered by specific categories of institutions and may trigger additional capital requirements for certain entities – eg, securi - ties distribution companies ( distribuidoras de títulos e valores mobiliários DTVMs) and securities broker - age firms ( corretoras de títulos e valores mobiliários CTVMs). A previously unregulated environment is thus becom - ing significantly more regulated, with the goal of ensuring market stability and establishing clear base - line rules for all service providers – including, for
example, by requiring foreign-based VASPs servicing Brazil-based clients to transfer such clients to a locally incorporated and regulated entity. Specific regulation relating to banking as a service BaaS refers to the white-label business relationship between a financial or payment institution regulated by the BCB – and therefore authorised to provide specific regulated services (the service provider) – and another entity, whether regulated or not (the service user). In essence, the BaaS provider contractually assumes responsibility for providing the back end operational infrastructure, as well as for offering and managing the regulatory services or products, so that the service user may offer such products under its commercial brand without having to apply for the specific licence. This type of relationship is not new in Brazil, and has never been prohibited, provided that the gen - eral rules applicable to the regulated business of the BaaS provider are complied with and no regulatory responsibilities are delegated to the non-regulated BaaS contractor. However, as certain non-regulated market participants began presenting themselves as regulated institutions or assuming certain regulatory responsibilities imposed upon the regulated entities (eg, AML procedures), the BCB decided to specifically regulate such relationship though the enactment of Joint Resolution No 16/25. The enactment took account of market inputs obtained via a public consultation that took almost three months. Throughout this process, several changes were made based on industry feedback – for exam - ple, strong market opposition to the classification of subacquirers as BaaS users of acquirers, and broad support for allowing intra-group BaaS arrangements. The Joint Resolution preserved the majority of BaaS market common practice but has imposed some important operational burdens on BaaS providers, affecting BaaS contractors from a contractual per - spective. In addition, it has created certain regula - tory restrictions. The regulation clearly defines which activities fall within the scope of BaaS, namely: • opening, maintaining and closing deposit, savings, prepaid and postpaid accounts;
119 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook