← Regulations / Haiti / Operating Models / Self-custodial wallet

Self-custodial wallet / non-custodial software in Haiti

Publisher of software where users hold their own private keys. The publisher never holds, controls, or has access to user funds.

Conditional AI-Generated · Unreviewed

Self-custodial wallet is conditionally permitted in Haiti without local incorporation, subject to AML obligations and low licensing burden.

Verdict Details

Permitted
conditional
Local entity required
No
Licensing burden
Low
Last updated
2026-07-13

AML Obligations

  • AML/CFT obligations under the Loi du 11 novembre 2013 likely do not attach to a non-custodial software publisher since they never hold, control, or access user funds — the law defines obligations for persons engaging in financial transactions, and pure software publication without custody likely falls outside this scope.
  • If the publisher were classified as a reporting entity (unlikely on current facts), CDD obligations would apply including obtaining and verifying identity of natural and legal persons (ht.licensing.obtaining-and-verifying-the-identity), beneficial ownership identification (ht.licensing.beneficial-ownership-bo-identifying-and), and understanding purpose and nature of the business relationship (ht.licensing.purpose-and-nature-of-business).
  • If classified, suspicious transaction reporting (STR) obligations attach — reporting any transaction reasonably suspected to be proceeds of crime or related to terrorist financing, regardless of amount (ht.licensing.obligation-to-report-reporting-any), with no-tipping-off requirements (ht.licensing.no-tipping-off-prohibiting-the-vasp).
  • Record-keeping obligations (if classified): customer identification records, transaction records, STR analysis records must be retained for a minimum of 5 years after business relationship ends or transaction date (ht.licensing.retention-period-records-must-generally).
  • UCREF (Unité Centrale de Renseignements Financiers) is Haiti's FIU and would receive any STRs (ht.licensing.unit-centrale-de-renseignements-financiers).

Key Restrictions

  • BRH (Central Bank) has publicly warned that cryptocurrencies are not recognized as legal tender, are not regulated, and their use carries significant risks — this creates a non-permissive policy environment (ht.enforcement.entity-targeted-the-general-public, ht.enforcement.date-november-2021).
  • Haiti does not have a comprehensive legal or regulatory framework specifically for cryptocurrencies or VASPs (ht.enforcement.limited-framework-haiti-does-not).
  • The BRH communiqué effectively discouraged financial institutions from facilitating crypto services, which may indirectly hamper on-ramps/off-ramps for the wallet software (ht.enforcement.outcome-the-communiqu-served-to).

Key Risks

  • ["Regulatory ambiguity: no law clearly addresses whether non-custodial software publishers are deemed reporting entities — there is a risk of retroactive classification or enforcement if Haiti adopts a VASP licensing regime (e.g., FATF-style).", "Low but non-zero enforcement risk: the BRH maintains a cautious/negative stance on crypto, and a future regulatory crackdown could target software distribution as 'facilitating' unregulated virtual asset services (ht.enforcement.central-bank-stance-the-brh).", "No specific crypto regulation means no clear licensing pathway — operators cannot get 'certified' compliant, creating uncertainty and potential PR/banking-relationship exposure (ht.enforcement.absence-of-specific-enforcement-the, ht.enforcement.focus-on-broader-financial-stability)."]

Evidence

This verdict synthesizes the following facts. Each fact links to its primary source(s).

licensing 60% confidence

Loi du 11 novembre 2013 relative à la Lutte Contre le Blanchiment d'Argent et le Financement du Terrorisme (Law of November 11, 2013, relating to the Fight Against Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism): This is the cornerstone of Haiti's AML/CFT framework. It defines money laundering and terrorist financing offenses, sets out reporting obligations for designated non-financial businesses and professions (DNFBPs) and financial institutions, and establishes the powers of the UCREF.

licensing 60% confidence

Obtaining and verifying the identity of natural persons (name, date of birth, address, nationality, official identification number – e.g., passport, national ID card).

licensing 60% confidence

Beneficial Ownership (BO): Identifying and taking reasonable measures to verify the identity of the beneficial owner(s) of customers, including understanding the ownership and control structure of legal persons. This typically involves identifying individuals who own or control more than a certain percentage (e.g., 25%) of the entity, or who exercise control through other means.

licensing 60% confidence

Purpose and Nature of Business Relationship: Understanding the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship or transaction.

licensing 60% confidence

Obligation to Report: Reporting any transaction (or attempted transaction) where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that funds are the proceeds of a criminal activity or are related to terrorist financing, regardless of the amount.

licensing 60% confidence

"No Tipping-Off": Prohibiting the VASP or its employees from disclosing to the customer or any third party that an STR is being or has been filed.

licensing 60% confidence

Retention Period: Records must generally be kept for a minimum of five (5) years after the business relationship ends or after the date of the transaction.

licensing 60% confidence

Unité Centrale de Renseignements Financiers (UCREF) - Financial Intelligence Unit:

enforcement 40% confidence

Entity Targeted: The general public, financial institutions operating in Haiti. (This was a general warning, not targeting a specific crypto company or individual). Violation Type: Not a violation, but rather a warning against the inherent risks associated with using unregulated virtual assets (cryptocurrencies) and a clarification of their legal status. The BRH emphasized that cryptocurrencies are not legal tender in Haiti and are not subject to the country's financial regulations. Penalty Amount: None. This was a public advisory/warning.

enforcement 40% confidence

Date: November 2021

enforcement 40% confidence

Outcome: The communiqué served to officially inform the public and financial sector that cryptocurrencies are not recognized as legal tender, are not regulated by the BRH, and their use carries significant risks (volatility, cyber-security, money laundering, and terrorist financing). It effectively discourages their use within the formal financial system and signals that anyone engaging with them does so at their own risk. It sets a cautious tone for the country's approach to digital assets.

enforcement 40% confidence

Limited Framework: Haiti does not have a comprehensive legal or regulatory framework specifically for cryptocurrencies.

enforcement 40% confidence

Central Bank Stance: The BRH maintains a cautious stance, primarily focusing on warning the public about risks and clarifying that cryptocurrencies are not legal tender.

enforcement 40% confidence

Absence of Specific Enforcement: The lack of specific enforcement actions against crypto entities suggests either:

enforcement 40% confidence

Focus on broader financial stability and anti-money laundering (AML) efforts, rather than specific crypto regulations.

Verdict Attribution

Source:
AI-Generated · Unreviewed
AI synthesized:
2026-07-13 (deepseek-chat)
Last updated:
2026-07-13
Confidence:
low

This verdict was produced by an AI model from the underlying facts. Confirm with counsel before relying on it for material decisions.

Conditional — a non-custodial wallet software publisher likely does not trigger VASP/MSB classification under Haiti's current legal framework because it never holds or controls user funds, but the regulatory environment is undeveloped and the central bank has publicly warned against crypto, creating uncertainty and a non-permissive policy backdrop.

Questions this verdict aims to answer

  • Does software publishing trigger VASP / MSB classification?
  • Do AML obligations attach when no custody exists?
  • What disclosure or consumer-protection rules apply?