Myanmar

No specific test exists for crypto: The official government in Myanmar has not adopted a specific legal test equivalent to the Howey Test or any other framework for classifying cryptocurrency tokens as securities. This is primarily because its stance is one of outright prohibition, rendering such classification frameworks largely irrelevant under the current official policy.

General Securities Exchange Law: Myanmar has a Securities Exchange Law (2014) which defines what constitutes a "security." However, this law predates the widespread emergence of cryptocurrencies and has not been updated or interpreted by the Securities Exchange Commission of Myanmar (SECM) to specifically address digital assets. The general definition of a "security" in the law might broadly encompass certain characteristics of investment contracts, but without specific guidance, it does not apply to crypto due to the CBM's blanket ban.

None by official government: From the perspective of the official Myanmar government (SAC), no cryptocurrency tokens are officially recognized or considered as securities for regulatory purposes. All cryptocurrencies are generally deemed illegal for use as currency or investment.

National Unity Government (NUG) stance (unofficial): It's crucial to note the parallel developments. The National Unity Government (NUG), formed by elected lawmakers ousted by the 2021 military coup, has taken a different stance. In December 2021, the NUG declared Tether (USDT) as an official currency for local use. This move, however, is not recognized by the SAC and has been met with further warnings from the CBM, reinforcing its ban on all cryptocurrencies. The NUG's action does not classify USDT as a security but rather as a currency.

Non-existent: Given the official prohibition on cryptocurrencies, there are no established registration or exemption requirements for token issuers in Myanmar. Issuing or facilitating the trading of cryptocurrency tokens would likely be viewed as an unauthorized financial activity.

Prohibited: Similarly, there are no specific rules for secondary trading of cryptocurrency tokens because all such activities are generally prohibited by the Central Bank of Myanmar. Any platforms or individuals engaging in secondary trading would be operating outside the legal framework and subject to enforcement actions.

Central Bank of Myanmar Warnings (2020/2021 onwards):

The CBM issued a strong warning in May 2020 (reiterated multiple times since, especially after the 2021 coup) stating that cryptocurrencies are not legal tender in Myanmar and that engaging in their use, trading, or mining is illegal. It warned the public about the risks involved, including financial loss, fraud, and money laundering.

Following the NUG's declaration of USDT as an official currency in late 2021, the CBM under the SAC further intensified its warnings, explicitly stating that it would take legal action against anyone trading or using digital assets like USDT.

Potential for Legal Action: Individuals or entities found to be dealing in cryptocurrencies could face charges under existing financial laws relating to unauthorized financial services, foreign exchange regulations, or potentially even broader laws depending on the specific activities involved (e.g., money laundering if large sums are involved). While specific public enforcement cases leading to conviction often receive less international media attention from Myanmar, the regulatory pronouncements themselves serve as a significant deterrent and official stance.

Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM): The primary authority issuing warnings and prohibitions.

Note: Specific press releases or directives regarding crypto might be found within their news/announcements sections if available and up-to-date.

Securities Exchange Commission of Myanmar (SECM): Responsible for traditional securities.

Note: This site is less likely to contain crypto-specific guidance due to the CBM's overarching ban.

Securities Exchange Law (2014): This is the foundational law for securities in Myanmar. While it doesn't mention digital assets, it's the framework that would theoretically be used if crypto were ever to be regulated as securities.

Note: Finding a direct, stable English-language PDF of Myanmar laws online can be difficult. It's usually available through legal databases or local government gazettes.

Reference: While specific, readily accessible CBM official statements on their website regarding a complete ban can be challenging to find due to website dynamics and political changes, numerous news outlets and financial intelligence reports confirm the CBM's prohibitive stance. For example, reports often cite CBM warnings dating back to 2020 or earlier, reiterated in subsequent periods, stating that cryptocurrencies are illegal in Myanmar.

Effective Date: Not applicable. Since the Travel Rule has not been adopted, there is no effective date.

Threshold Amounts: Not applicable. Without adoption, there are no defined threshold amounts for the Travel Rule.

Which VASPs are Covered: Not applicable. Myanmar does not have a regulated VASP sector. Any entities engaging in virtual asset services would likely be operating outside of legal frameworks or potentially in violation of existing regulations regarding financial services.

Technical Implementation Requirements: Not applicable. No regulatory framework means no technical implementation requirements for the Travel Rule.

Penalties for Non-Compliance: There are no penalties specifically for non-compliance with the FATF Travel Rule in Myanmar, as it is not law. However, individuals or entities involved in cryptocurrency activities could face penalties under existing Myanmar laws related to:

Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) Regulations: Engaging in financial activities not permitted by the CBM or using instruments not recognized as legal tender. The specific penalties would depend on the interpretation of existing laws by the authorities.

Foreign Exchange Management Law: If cryptocurrencies are considered a form of foreign exchange or unauthorized currency, engaging in their trade or use could lead to penalties under this law.

General Prohibition/Warnings: Given the CBM's stance, any involvement in cryptocurrencies could be deemed illegal, potentially leading to fines, asset seizure, or other legal consequences, although explicit legislation detailing penalties specifically for crypto use can be difficult to pinpoint publicly.

FATF statement on High-Risk Jurisdictions: https://www.fatf-gafi.org/countries-and-regions/high-risk-and-other-monitored-jurisdictions.html (Check the "Jurisdictions subject to a FATF call on members and other jurisdictions to apply enhanced due diligence" section).

Executive Order (E.O.) 14014 (February 11, 2021): Blocks property of persons contributing to the situation in Burma.

E.O. 14033 (July 20, 2021): Imposes additional sanctions in connection with the human rights abuses and undermining of democracy in Burma.

E.O. 14077 (June 10, 2022): Further expands the scope to prohibit certain new investment in Burma.

Burma Sanctions Regulations (31 CFR Part 537): Implements the Executive Orders.

OFAC's Guidance on Sanctions Compliance for the Virtual Currency Industry: Clarifies that sanctions obligations apply equally to transactions involving virtual currencies.

Blocking Sanctions: Prohibits U.S. persons from dealing in any property or interests in property of designated individuals and entities (Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons – SDNs). This includes any type of asset, including virtual assets.

Sectoral Sanctions: May target specific sectors of the Myanmar economy (e.g., state-owned enterprises, mining, timber, gems, banking).

Financial Sanctions: Prohibitions on transactions with designated financial institutions or those facilitating sanctioned activities.

OFAC Burma Sanctions Program: https://ofac.treasury.gov/sanctions-programs/country-specific-and-program-based-sanctions-programs/burma-myanmar-sanctions-program

OFAC's SDN List: https://ofac.treasury.gov/sdn-list (regularly updated with Myanmar-related designations)

OFAC Guidance for the Virtual Currency Industry: https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/2311/download?inline

Council Decision (CFSP) 2013/184/CFSP (as amended): Concerning restrictive measures against Myanmar/Burma.

Council Regulation (EU) No 401/2013 (as amended): Concerning restrictive measures against Myanmar/Burma.

EU Anti-Money Laundering Directives (AMLD5/AMLD6): Incorporate VASPs into the AML/CFT framework, providing the basis for applying sanctions to virtual assets.

Asset Freeze: Freezing of funds and economic resources belonging to, owned, held, or controlled by designated persons and entities. "Economic resources" is broadly defined and includes virtual assets.

Prohibition on Making Funds/Economic Resources Available: Prohibition on making funds or economic resources available, directly or indirectly, to designated persons or entities.

Travel Bans: For listed individuals.

Arms Embargo: And restrictions on equipment for internal repression.

EU Sanctions Map (Myanmar): https://www.sanctionsmap.eu/#/main/country/MM (Provides consolidated information and links to legal acts)

EU Consolidated List of Sanctions: https://www.sanctionsmap.eu/sanctionslist/list (Searchable list, includes Myanmar designations)

UN Security Council Resolution 2664 (2022): Provides for humanitarian carve-outs to asset freeze measures in UN sanctions regimes, but does not impose new sanctions on Myanmar.

UN Sanctions Lists: While no specific Myanmar-focused UN economic sanctions list exists, if an individual or entity in Myanmar were to be designated under a broader UN sanctions regime (e.g., counter-terrorism), those obligations would apply.

Relevance for Crypto: UN sanctions are implemented through national legislation. Therefore, UN-mandated sanctions (like the arms embargo) primarily affect states and do not directly address crypto transactions in the same way as OFAC or EU regulations. However, if a VASP were to facilitate a transaction with a person/entity subject to a UN asset freeze (e.g., related to terrorism financing) and that person were in Myanmar, the VASP would be in violation of national implementing legislation.

UN Sanctions Committees: https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/sanctions/committees (General overview of UN sanctions)

UK Sanctions List: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uk-sanctions-list (Includes Myanmar designations)

VASPs must screen all new and existing customers (individuals and entities) against relevant sanctions lists (OFAC SDN List, EU Consolidated List, UK Sanctions List, etc.) at onboarding and on an ongoing basis.

This includes beneficial ownership screening to identify any sanctioned individuals or entities behind a corporate structure.

Transactions, especially those involving parties in or linked to Myanmar, should be screened in real-time or near real-time. This can involve screening sender/receiver names and associated wallet addresses (if a link to a sanctioned entity is established).

Heightened scrutiny is required for transactions involving known high-risk indicators (e.g., opaque wallet addresses, mixing services used to obscure origin/destination).

Regularly monitor news and public sources for information that could link customers or transaction parties to sanctioned entities or activities in Myanmar.

Direct vs. Indirect Prohibitions: Sanctions prohibit both direct and indirect dealings with sanctioned persons/entities. This means a VASP cannot process a transaction for a sanctioned person directly, nor can it process a transaction that indirectly benefits a sanctioned person (e.g., through an unsanctioned intermediary).

High-Risk Jurisdiction: Myanmar is generally considered a high-risk jurisdiction for money laundering and terrorist financing, and thus for sanctions evasion. VASPs should apply enhanced due diligence (EDD) to all customers and transactions connected to Myanmar.

Providing any virtual asset service (exchange, custody, transfer, etc.) to designated individuals or entities.

Facilitating transactions that violate specific sectoral sanctions (e.g., if a VASP knows funds are destined for a sanctioned military-owned enterprise).

No Blanket Ban: It's important to note that most sanctions regimes do not impose a blanket ban on all transactions with Myanmar. However, the high-risk environment necessitates extreme caution and robust controls. The National Unity Government (NUG) of Myanmar has endorsed USDT, which complicates the landscape by potentially legitimizing certain crypto usage for some, while still requiring compliance with international sanctions that could target individuals/entities within the NUG or associated with it.

Blocking/Rejection: If a VASP identifies a virtual asset belonging to, or a transaction involving, a sanctioned entity, it must:

Reject the transaction (if no property interest is created) or block and report (OFAC/EU).

Report the blocked assets or rejected transactions to the relevant authorities (e.g., OFAC in the US, national competent authorities in the EU/UK).

SAR/STR Filing: Suspicious activity reports (SARs) or suspicious transaction reports (STRs) must be filed with financial intelligence units (FIUs) if there are red flags indicating potential sanctions evasion or other illicit activities.

Civil Penalties: Substantial monetary fines (e.g., OFAC civil penalties can reach millions of dollars per violation).

Criminal Penalties: For willful violations, individuals and corporate officers can face significant prison sentences and even larger fines.

Reputational Damage: Significant harm to a VASP's reputation, loss of trust, and potential revocation of licenses.

OFAC Enforcement Information: https://ofac.treasury.gov/recent-actions/20230222-3375 (Example of a recent enforcement action against a VASP for sanctions violations, though not Myanmar-specific, illustrates the general approach)

OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List: Contains numerous individuals and entities linked to the Myanmar military regime.

EU Consolidated List of Persons, Groups and Entities Subject to EU Financial Sanctions: Similarly lists Myanmar-related designations.

UK Sanctions List: Also includes Myanmar designations.

Regulator: The Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) is the primary financial regulator.

The Central Bank of Myanmar Directive 9/2020 banning cryptocurrencies remains formally in effect, but enforcement has shifted as the military government proposed the Anti-Online Fraud Bill in 2026 targeting specific crypto-related crimes with penalties of 10 years to life, indicating a move from a blanket prohibition to targeted prosecution of fraud.

Post-Coup Environment: Since the February 2021 military coup, Myanmar's financial and legal landscape has become highly opaque. The military junta (State Administration Council - SAC) maintains the ban.

NUG's Stance: The National Unity Government (NUG), the parallel civilian government, recognized Tether (USDT) as an official currency in December 2021 to raise funds for its resistance, creating a stark contrast to the SAC's position. This is not a recognized legal tender by the de facto government.

Nature of Enforcement: Enforcement under an outright ban is often not through public regulatory fines against entities, but rather through:

Warnings: The CBM has issued repeated warnings against crypto use.

Arrests/Seizures: Individuals found to be trading or using cryptocurrencies might face arrest under general financial laws, anti-money laundering regulations, or even emergency decrees. These arrests are rarely publicized with detailed information, specific penalty amounts, or clear "outcomes" in a transparent legal process that can be sourced.

Lack of Due Process: In the current political climate, legal processes are often opaque, and information on arrests, charges, and penalties for financial crimes, let alone crypto-specific ones, is not readily available through official channels or independent media with full details.

No Specific Crypto Enforcement Framework: Since crypto is banned, there isn't a dedicated "crypto enforcement" framework with specific "violation types" and "penalty amounts" distinct from general financial or illegal activity laws.

Regulator: Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM)

Entity Targeted: General public, financial institutions, and potentially individuals engaging in crypto transactions. Violation Type: Violation of the CBM's ban on cryptocurrencies; engaging in unauthorized financial activities; potentially money laundering or illicit financing. Penalty Amount: Not publicly disclosed in specific cases. Could range from warnings and asset seizures to imprisonment under existing financial or criminal laws.

Date: Ongoing since May 2020, with reiterated warnings post-coup.

Outcome: Risk of legal prosecution, imprisonment, and financial penalties for individuals and entities caught using or facilitating cryptocurrency transactions within Myanmar.

Central Bank of Myanmar's Stance (Ongoing since May 2020, reinforced post-coup):

Entity Targeted: All citizens and financial institutions in Myanmar. Violation Type: Engaging in activities related to cryptocurrencies (mining, trading, holding, facilitating transactions). Penalty Amount: Not specified for individual enforcement actions, but the CBM warns against legal action. The general ban implies potential penalties under existing financial and criminal laws.

Date: Ban initially issued in May 2020. Warnings have been reiterated periodically, especially as crypto use surged post-coup.

Outcome: All cryptocurrency activities are illegal. Individuals and entities found engaging in them face legal risks, including fines and imprisonment.

Eleven Myanmar (May 17, 2020): "Central Bank of Myanmar warns to not use, trade crypto currency." (While from 2020, this is the foundational ban).

[No direct URL found for the original Eleven Myanmar article from 2020, as their website architecture often changes. However, numerous news outlets reported on it.]

Bitcoin.com News (May 20, 2020): "Myanmar Central Bank Bans Cryptocurrencies, Citing Financial Risk."