The scheme incorporates resources as an official registration of virtual assets.
Deputy María Baldivieso warned about the broad discretion in the application of the norm.
With the objective of modernizing its financial system and establishing a legal framework for the activity linked to cryptoactives, Bolivia has implemented a new regulation by means of ASFI 540/2025 resolution, backed by Supreme Decree 5384.
Prepared by the Financial System Supervision Authority (ASFI), this regulation for the first time establishes a specific approach to regulate the technological platforms of the financial field, and the service providers with virtual assets – including the platforms that operate with cryptocurrencies.
The extent of the measure is broad: More than 200 companies that currently operate in the country must comply with the new legal frameworkincluding 33 payment platforms and 176 virtual asset services suppliers (PSAV).
These entities must submit their formal authorization application before December 31, 2025, deadline to align with the new regulatory requirements.
The regulations are based on three fundamental principles: Responsible innovation, which drives technological advancement without compromising system stability; interoperability, which facilitates the integration between different services and financial platforms; and confidentiality and reservation, aimed at safeguarding the privacy of users and the safety of operations.
Besides, Regulation includes complementary tools, such as a National Registry of Virtual Assetsstrict cybersecurity protocols and controlled spaces for tests, where new business models may be evaluated before their definitive market income.
The regulations indicate that foreign platforms are not obliged to legally constitute Bolivia, provided they do not maintain alliances with local financial entities.
This point was valued by Deputy María Baldivieso, who said as follows: “This is a very important point to guarantee the operation and freedom of citizens to use foreign platforms such as Binance, participating in the P2P markets and other international exchange and payment mechanisms without being subjected to regulatory and interventionist scrutiny.”
However, Fabián Espinoza, lawyer specialized in computer law and delegate of the Blockchain Bolivia Chamber (Cablock), pointed out that the regulations present gaps and legal challenges. In particular, he criticizes the lack of a clear distinction between the Fintech sector and the virtual asset ecosystem.
«It does not distinguish between the Fintech field and the ecosystem of virtual assets, which should be regulated by separate rope. The regulation should be read without making precipitated interpretations, because for that there are legal rules, ”he made clear.
In addition, it questions the retroactive nature of the standard, which forces the companies already operational to undergo an adaptation process, while the new ones must follow a different constitution procedure. This could lead to contradictory interpretations and an indirect over -regulation of foreign companies.
Deputy Baldivieso pointed out concerns about the degree of discretion that ASFI would have to apply this regulation. In the officials of the official, “the same ASFI can decide when, how and for which services open calls.” According to the specialist, this does not guarantee equanimous treatment or clear incentives for innovation.
«The ASFI is granting regulatory powers that increase their power and that enlarges the State without reporting benefits for the citizen. This must change by a reform of Law 393 on Financial Services, ”he said.
He also questioned that requirements similar to those of traditional financial institutions are required, such as a minimum capital, detailed solvency statements or business plans: “Most Fintech platforms are born as startups that, rather, seek to experience in the market to demonstrate in practice the benefits for the user.”
Another of the main criticisms focuses on The impact that this regulation could have on emerging business modelslike Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) platforms, crowdfunding and payment catwalks.
According to Baldivieso, the future of these ventures will depend on two factors: «(1) on the interpretive discretion of the ASFI in terms of what ‘technological innovation’ means, which remains a very ambiguous concept, and (2) that ASFI does not reject the specific technological innovation model that the startup presents».
For its part, Fabián Espinoza argues that the regulation does not establish a clear minimum capital and that its categories are generic, which makes it difficult to plan new investments.
