Skip to content

Invest Not yet confirmed elsewhere1 publisher 3 min read Published

ASIC's crypto capital draft sets a A$14 million floor for platforms that lack third-party custody

ASIC has opened consultation on CP 392, which offers crypto platforms three alternative capital models, with feedback due Nov. 27. Final standards are due in March 2027, at most 38 days before the law takes effect on April 8.

The Investor · Invest desk

How we use AI Send a correction

Illustration accompanying ASIC's crypto capital draft sets a A$14 million floor for platforms that lack third-party custody
Generated illustration
Capital share rises as platform revenue falls Capital the A$14 million model requires, as a share of a platform's average revenue; the A$50 million case is an illustration.

Key figures: a platform averaging A$50 million in revenue would hold 28% of that revenue as capital under the A$14 million model (illustration). Any platform below the crossover holds more than 10%, and the share rises as revenue falls. The two prongs cross at A$140 million of average revenue.

Capital share rises as platform revenue falls
FigureValueNoteClaim
Capital at A$50 million average revenue, illustration28% of revenue15
Capital share below the crossover, more than10% of revenuerises as revenue falls17
Crossover, average revenueA$140 million14

What happened

  • ASIC also proposes restricting platforms from trading for their own account and from accepting benefits to favor particular tokens, which it frames as a conflict-of-interest control.
  • The draft would require quarterly reporting of the wallets that hold customer assets.
  • ASIC proposes to allow offshore custody and is asking whether Australian operators should get emergency access to private keys if an overseas parent or custodian fails.
  • Operators will have until Oct. 7, 2027, to apply for a license and can keep operating while ASIC assesses their applications.

Why it matters

  • exposure A local platform that relies on an overseas parent or custodian carries that entity's failure risk, and ASIC's open question is whether the Australian operator gets emergency key access when it fails.
  • constraint Limits on principal trading and affiliated liquidity arrangements bear on how Australian exchanges source liquidity, so exchanges that depend on an affiliate have something to argue before Nov. 27.
  • contradiction OKX Australia's chief executive calls the standards appropriately onerous and expects consolidation, while the industry council is testing proportionality across business sizes.

The A$14 million figure is half a formula. ASIC's draft asks operators without qualifying third-party custody arrangements to hold the greater of A$14 million in net tangible assets or 10% of average revenue [3], and the two prongs cross at A$140 million of average revenue [14]. Below that, the flat floor binds: a platform averaging A$50 million in revenue would hold A$14 million, or 28% of that revenue [15]. Above it, revenue sets the number, and a platform averaging A$300 million would hold A$30 million [16].

That is one model of the three ASIC is weighing [2], and Cointelegraph's report describes only that one. Operators can size one path. We think the first decision is custody, because the only published figure is attached to the absence of a qualifying third-party arrangement [3]. Amy-Rose Goodey, chief executive of the Digital Economy Council of Australia, names the same lever. She said the council will be "working closely with our members to examine the three proposed capital models in considerable detail, particularly their proportionality across businesses of different sizes and the concessions available for third-party custody." [9] Buying a qualifying custodian would then also change which line of the capital schedule an operator sits on. That could be wrong in three ways: ASIC could collapse the three models into one by March [7], the concession could prove smaller than the custodian's fees, or comments on proportionality could move the A$14 million itself.

Shange Chandra, chief executive of OKX Australia, expects the draft to sort operators. "These standards are appropriately onerous," he told Cointelegraph. "They will reward operators who have already invested in compliance, capital and custody. They will challenge operators who have waited to make that investment." [10] He said the proposals could drive industry consolidation [11], and he asked for a streamlined license process for established firms with a track record of compliance [12].

Goodey's point about business size has a number behind it. Under the A$14 million model, any platform averaging less than A$140 million in revenue holds more than 10% of that revenue as capital, and the share rises as revenue falls [17]. On trading, she said the restrictions on "principal trading, affiliated liquidity arrangements and best execution requirements will also warrant careful consideration, given their implications for how Australian exchanges operate and access liquidity." [13]

The calendar is short at one end and long at the other. Final standards are due in March 2027 and the law takes effect on April 8 [7][8], which leaves at most 38 days between them [18]. Applications then run to Oct. 7, 2027, about six months after the start date [19], and the report says operators can operate while ASIC assesses their applications [8]. Nov. 27 is the deadline for feedback on this draft [7]. We would count the custody-first view wrong if the March text drops the revenue prong or lands all three models on one figure.

What to watch

  • Nov. 27 feedback deadline: whether submissions move the A$14 million floor or the 10% revenue prong.
  • March 2027 final standards: whether the three capital models collapse into one, and how large the third-party custody concession turns out to be.
  • ASIC's answer on emergency private-key access for Australian operators when an overseas parent or custodian fails.

Clarity's read

What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.

Reality

Evidence60
Adoption
Insufficient
Hype gap−5
Incentives40
Confidence65
Why these scores

Claim ledger

Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.

  1. [1]

    ASIC opened consultation on proposed capital, custody and trading requirements for crypto platforms as it prepares to implement legislation passed in April.

    Reported Supported Source: CointelegraphView cited source
  2. [2]

    ASIC's proposals include three alternative capital models.

    Reported Supported Source: CointelegraphView cited source
  3. [3]

    One of the three capital models requires operators without qualifying third-party custody arrangements to hold at least A$14 million in net tangible assets or 10% of average revenue, whichever is greater.

    Reported Supported Source: CointelegraphView cited source

Get this ledger inside ChatGPT. Ask about any of our stories and the answer brings its figure, each claim’s verdict and the sources. Free, no account.

Add to ChatGPTAdd to Claude

Sources

1 independent publisher whose own reporting we read for this story.

  1. cointelegraph.com

    1 article · October 14, 2026

    Australia seeks feedback on crypto platform rules ahead of 2027 rollout

Share your take

Let Clarity write the post for you.

Signed-in readers get a short post drafted on this story in the register they choose — narrative, analytical, or a direct position — editable to the last word before it goes anywhere. The share buttons at the top of this story work without an account.

Topics and entities

Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.

Loading related stories