The new resolution focuses exclusively on previously authorized entities.
Despite the licenses, the informal use of Bitcoin and stablecoins in Cuba has already existed for years.
The recent decision by the Central Bank of Cuba to grant licenses for the use of virtual assets in cross-border payments has, according to Forte, a member of the Cuba Bitcoin community, some positive implications for the business sector.
Resolution 4/2026 published on March 23, 2026, which grants a license to use virtual assets to ten entities—nine MSMEs and a mixed company—is considered by the expert as an advance in regulatory terms, although “very measured.”
In dialogue with CriptoNoticias. Forte points out that although the regulations do not constitute a general opening nor do they change the daily reality of the majority of citizens, it does facilitates legal operations for certain companies that previously operated in a framework of uncertainty or informally.
That is why it contextualizes this decision as a logical continuation of the 2021 regulation, which already recognized virtual assets, although with a clearly oriented towards control rather than promoting development.
“It didn’t surprise me at all,” he said, recalling the suspicion caused by cases such as the Trust Investing scheme in 2021, which generated distrust both among the population and in the authorities.
However, in the current economic scenario—marked by a high inflation and an informal dollar that far exceeds the official value—cryptocurrencies emerge as a practical tool. The positive impact mainly focuses on MSMEs authorized.
Thanks to these licenses, specific companies will be able to receive payments from abroad and make international transfers in a legal and more agile way, avoiding the severe limitations imposed by the financial sanctions of the United States.
“The sanctions make it very difficult to operate with banks, receive transfers or use payment platforms,” says Forte. In this scenario, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies cease to be just an informal solution and become, for some regulated actors, a legitimate and more efficient channel.
However, the specialist insists that it is a selective and controlled permit, only for very specific operations, through authorized suppliers and under strict supervision and reporting mechanisms. Free use of self-custodied wallets and decentralized tools is not permitted.
This distinction between the regulated business environment and individual use is key. While companies now have a legal framework, ordinary Cubans have been solving their daily problems for years with solutions created from the community itself. The LaChispa Lightning wallet, the Mostro Kmbalache P2P node, the Mint or the ElCaju wallet are some examples.
Forte compares the Cuban process with that of other countries in the region, such as El Salvador, where adoption has been faster and development-oriented.
In Cuba, however, the motivation seems more pragmatic than ideological: the need to maintain international economic flows in the face of banking isolation. “More than an ideological decision, it is a necessity,” he summarizes. In short, Forte sees this measure as a positive, albeit limited, gesture.
It helps certain companies operate more normally in the global economy and officially recognizes the usefulness of virtual assets for cross-border payments. However, it does not substantially alter the way in which the majority of Cubans already use Bitcoin in an autonomous and decentralized manner.
“It may make certain operations easier for a group of companies, but it probably won’t significantly transform the way the majority are already using cryptocurrencies in practice,” Forte concluded.