CZ backs ASEAN crypto passport to cut duplicate licensing across Southeast Asia
Changpeng Zhao's proposal could reshape how crypto firms expand across Southeast Asia, but major regulatory hurdles remain before a regional framework becomes reality.
Binance co-founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao endorsed a proposal to let crypto firms licensed in one ASEAN country seek simplified approval in others, backing the idea during a fireside chat at the ASEAN Tech Summit Manila on July 28.
The concept, raised by Lito Villanueva, founding chairman of FinTech Alliance PH, stops short of creating a single license valid across all ASEAN countries. Instead, it aims to reduce repetitive regulatory procedures by recognizing portions of the due diligence already completed by another member country’s regulator.
The discussion also explored broader themes surrounding digital assets, stablecoins, and the future of financial innovation across Southeast Asia, highlighting growing interest in regional cooperation as crypto adoption accelerates.
ASEAN crypto passport could streamline regional expansion
The proposed ASEAN crypto passport would address one of the industry’s biggest operational challenges: fragmented regulation.
Today, crypto exchanges, custodians, payment providers, and other virtual asset firms must comply with entirely separate licensing systems in each ASEAN nation. Every jurisdiction imposes its own requirements covering corporate structure, capital reserves, cybersecurity, anti-money laundering controls, consumer protection, custody arrangements, and reporting obligations.
According to Zhao, recognizing regulatory work already performed by another trusted authority could eliminate unnecessary duplication while preserving each country’s right to supervise firms operating within its borders.
“The proposal is about simplifying the process, not removing regulation,” Villanueva explained during the discussion, noting that host regulators would continue evaluating applicants and could impose additional domestic requirements before granting approval.
Industry observers say such an approach could reduce compliance costs, accelerate market entry, and encourage greater investment across Southeast Asia’s rapidly growing digital asset sector.
However, Zhao’s endorsement does not represent an official ASEAN policy position. No ASEAN institution or national regulator has announced formal consultations, draft legislation, or a timeline for implementing a regional crypto passporting framework.
Existing ASEAN financial frameworks provide a possible blueprint
While cryptocurrency passporting remains only a proposal, ASEAN has already demonstrated that cross-border regulatory cooperation is possible in traditional finance.
One notable example is the ASEAN Collective Investment Schemes Framework, launched in 2014 by Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand before later expanding to include the Philippines through a supplemental memorandum signed by the participating securities regulators.
The framework enables qualifying investment funds authorized in one participating country to pursue a faster approval process in another participating jurisdiction rather than beginning from scratch.
Similarly, the ASEAN Capital Markets Forum (ACMF) Pass allows eligible investment professionals to obtain streamlined registration for advisory work across participating markets.
Although neither framework covers crypto exchanges, stablecoin issuers, or digital asset service providers, they illustrate how regulators can cooperate while preserving national oversight.
As Zhao suggested during the panel discussion, these existing models could serve as practical references if ASEAN policymakers eventually decide to develop an ASEAN crypto passport tailored to digital assets.
Each member state classifies digital assets differently, assigns oversight to different regulatory agencies, and applies unique licensing standards.
The Philippines offers a clear example of this complexity.
Binance and blockchain analytics firm BlockShoals previously participated in a regulatory sandbox overseen by the Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). However, participation in the SEC sandbox did not eliminate the need for separate approvals from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) for payment-related activities.
The SEC later authorized BlockShoals to begin sandbox testing using Binance’s infrastructure, but firms still needed to satisfy the BSP’s independent licensing requirements before offering certain financial services.
This illustrates one of the central challenges facing any future ASEAN crypto passport. Regulators would first need to determine which country serves as the “home regulator,” what responsibilities remain with host authorities, how supervisory information would be shared, and what minimum regulatory standards every participating nation must adopt.
Without consensus on these issues, regional passporting would be difficult to implement effectively.
Meanwhile, Binance continues pursuing separate regulatory approvals across Asia. Reuters reported in July that the exchange plans to expand its licensing footprint throughout the region, although it has not publicly identified every target market.
Europe offers a model—but ASEAN faces a different path
Many industry participants point to the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation as the closest example of how regional crypto passporting can work.
Under MiCA, once a crypto-asset service provider receives authorization from one EU member state’s regulator and completes the required notification procedures, it can generally provide services throughout the European Union without obtaining separate licenses in every country.
That system is possible because the EU operates under a unified legal framework with common authorization standards and coordinated regulatory cooperation.
ASEAN currently lacks an equivalent regional crypto law.
Although negotiations on the Digital Economy Framework Agreement (DEFA) have concluded and the agreement is undergoing legal review ahead of an expected signing in November 2026, publicly available documents primarily focus on digital payments, data governance, cybersecurity, and digital trade. No published provisions confirm that crypto licensing passporting forms part of the agreement.
Even if DEFA strengthens regional digital cooperation, experts say creating an ASEAN crypto passport would require extensive negotiations among national regulators, harmonized compliance standards, and robust cross-border supervisory mechanisms.
As Zhao’s remarks demonstrate, the conversation around regional crypto licensing is gaining momentum. Whether ASEAN governments ultimately embrace the proposal remains uncertain, but the discussion reflects growing recognition that regulatory coordination may become increasingly important as Southeast Asia continues emerging as one of the world’s fastest-growing digital asset markets.
For now, the ASEAN crypto passport remains a policy recommendation rather than an approved regulatory framework, leaving national licensing regimes firmly in place while policymakers weigh the benefits and complexities of deeper regional integration.
