Tunisia Compliance Report

Generated 2026-09-22

No Guidance

Regulatory Overview

Regulatory Status: Regulators have not addressed crypto; legal status ambiguous
Key Regulator(s): Central Bank of Tunisia, Tunisian Financial Analysis Committee
Primary Legislation: Law No. 94-117 of November 14, 1994, on the Reorganization of the Financial Mark
Travel Rule: Not adopted
Tax Reporting: There are no specific capital gains tax rates for cryptocurrencies in Tunisia.. Since virtual assets are not recognized as legitimate financial assets, the framework for taxing capital gains on traditional assets (e.g., shares, real estate) does not officially extend to crypto. Any profits derived from crypto are not explicitly covered by the existing tax code for capital gains.. There is no specific income tax regime for income derived from cryptocurrency activities (e.g., mining, staking, trading income, salaries paid in crypto).. Given the BCT's stance, any "income" generated from such activities would be in an unregulated and potentially illegal domain, making its declaration for tax purposes problematic and undefined under current law. If crypto were ever to be legalized and income derived, it might fall under general income tax principles, but this is entirely speculative and not the current legal reality.. Cryptocurrency transactions are not subject to VAT/GST in Tunisia.

Key Facts

aml Law No. 2022-77 of December 26, 2022, on Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Loi n° 2022-77 du 26 décembre 2022, relative à la lutte contre le blanchiment d'argent et le financement du terrorisme). This law repeals and replaces the previous AML/CFT law (Law No. 2015-26). It introduces crucial definitions and obligations for entities dealing with virtual assets. Definition of Virtual Assets: The law generally adopts a broad definition consistent with FATF standards, recognizing them as a digital representation of value that can be digitally traded or transferred and used for payment or investment purposes. Definition of Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs): It explicitly includes VASPs as "reporting entities" (or "obliged entities" / "personnes assujetties"). While the law itself may not define all types of VASPs exhaustively, it typically covers entities that conduct one or more of the following activities for or on behalf of another natural or legal person: Exchange between virtual assets and fiat currencies. Exchange between one or more forms of virtual assets. Safekeeping and/or administration of virtual assets or instruments enabling control over virtual assets. Participation in and provision of financial services related to an issuer's offer and/or sale of a virtual asset.
custody Absence of a Legal Framework: There is no specific law or regulation defining cryptocurrencies, digital assets, or the services related to them (including custody). Official Warnings: The BCT has issued several warnings against the use of cryptocurrencies, citing their speculative nature, lack of legal tender status, volatility, and risks associated with money laundering and terrorist financing. These warnings generally discourage engagement with these assets rather than regulate their operation. No Licensing Regime for VASPs: Without a defined legal framework, there are no specific licensing requirements for Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs), including those offering custody services. None. As there is no specific regulatory framework for crypto custodians, there are no specific rules mandating the segregation of client digital assets from the custodian's own assets. None. There are no specific insurance or bonding requirements for cryptocurrency custodians in Tunisia. None. Tunisian regulations do not include specific mandates for cold storage or any other particular security measures for digital assets, as there is no framework regulating digital asset custody. None. There is no legal or regulatory definition of a "qualified custodian" in the context of digital assets in Tunisia. The existing financial regulations apply to traditional financial institutions and services, not to unregulated crypto entities. No specific custody legislation is publicly pending. While there have been discussions and initiatives regarding blockchain technology and digital transformation within the BCT (e.g., the concept of an e-dinar or exploring central bank digital currencies), these are distinct from regulating private cryptocurrencies or their custody. There are no known specific bills or regulatory drafts focused on establishing a licensing regime or specific rules for cryptocurrency custody services.
enforcement Regulator Name: While the Central Bank of Tunisia (BCT) defines the regulatory environment, the enforcement was carried out by the Tunisian judicial system (police and courts) based on existing financial laws. Entity Targeted: Iskander Najar (also sometimes reported as Islem Najar), a young Tunisian individual. Violation Type: Illegally using cryptocurrency to transfer money abroad, violating Tunisian foreign exchange laws (specifically, the prohibition on non-authorized transfers of foreign currency) and potentially money laundering charges. Penalty Amount: Initial sentence of two years in prison and a fine of 5,000 Tunisian Dinars (TND) (approximately $1,700 at the time). This sentence was later reduced on appeal. Specific details of the reduced fine are less widely reported than the prison sentence reduction. Date: Arrest occurred in early 2021. An initial sentence was delivered in March 2021. Appeals and subsequent rulings continued into 2022. Outcome: Najar was convicted and served time in prison. The case garnered significant international attention, with many advocating for his release and highlighting the severity of Tunisia's stance on crypto. His sentence was ultimately reduced on appeal, and he was released after serving part of his term. The outcome reinforced Tunisia's strict interpretation of its foreign exchange laws concerning digital assets. Al Jazeera (March 2021): Tunisia jails man for using Bitcoin to transfer money Middle East Eye (March 2021): Tunisia jails student for using Bitcoin to transfer money abroad Bloomberg (April 2021, discusses the wider context): Tunisia Says Jailed Bitcoin User Violated Exchange Rules Access Now (July 2021, update on appeal): Tunisia: Imprisoned Bitcoin user’s appeal postponed as calls for release grow
general Natural Persons: Obtain and verify the customer's identity using reliable, independent source documents (e.g., national ID card, passport). This includes name, address, date of birth, nationality, and unique identification numbers. Legal Entities/Arrangements: Obtain and verify the legal entity's name, legal form, address, proof of incorporation/registration, and the identity of natural persons holding senior management positions. Beneficial Ownership Identification: Identify and verify the identity of the beneficial owner(s) – the natural person(s) who ultimately own or control the customer, and/or the natural person on whose behalf a transaction is being conducted. For legal entities, this typically involves identifying individuals with 25% or more ownership/control. Purpose and Intended Nature of Business Relationship: Understand the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship or the specific transaction. Ongoing Monitoring: Continuously monitor the business relationship and transactions undertaken by the customer to ensure consistency with the VASP's knowledge of the customer, their business, risk profile, and, where necessary, the source of funds. Source of Funds/Wealth: For high-risk customers or transactions, VASPs must take reasonable measures to establish the source of funds and the source of wealth. Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD): Apply EDD in situations presenting a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. This includes, but is not limited to: Customers from high-risk geographic locations (as identified by FATF or national authorities).
licensing Cryptocurrencies are not recognized as legal tender in Tunisia. Transactions involving cryptocurrencies are not authorized by the BCT. The BCT highlights the risks associated with virtual assets, including volatility, lack of consumer protection, money laundering, and financing of terrorism. Exchanges: There is no legal framework allowing the operation of crypto exchanges. Any attempt to operate one would be in violation of the BCT's stance and existing financial laws. Custody Providers: Similarly, no specific license exists. Providing custody for virtual assets would fall into the same regulatory void/prohibition. Payment Processors: Companies processing payments in or with cryptocurrencies would face the same regulatory hurdles as exchanges. Traditional payment service provider licenses (issued by the BCT for fiat currencies) would not extend to virtual assets given their non-recognition. Capital Requirements: Substantial minimum capital requirements to ensure financial stability and cover operational risks. AML/KYC Compliance: Strict Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) policies and procedures, in line with international standards (FATF recommendations). This would include customer identification, transaction monitoring, suspicious activity reporting to the Commission Tunisienne des Analyses Financières (CTAF) (Tunisia's Financial Intelligence Unit).
stablecoin No explicit classification: Tunisian law does not explicitly classify stablecoins as e-money, payment tokens, or securities. Likely Default Treatment: Due to the absence of specific legislation, stablecoins are generally treated as unregulated and unauthorized financial instruments. Potential "e-money" conflict: If a stablecoin were pegged to the Tunisian Dinar or aimed to function as a payment instrument, it would likely fall under the scope of laws governing electronic money and payment services. However, without explicit BCT authorization (which is highly unlikely given their current stance), such an operation would be considered illegal. The primary legislation in this area is: Loi n° 2016-71 du 30 septembre 2016, relative aux établissements de paiement (Law No. 2016-71 of September 30, 2016, on Payment Institutions). This law defines electronic money and regulates the issuance of electronic money by authorized payment institutions. Stablecoins, particularly fiat-backed ones, could conceptually fit some aspects of this definition if they were recognized and licensed, but currently, they are not. Securities: While less likely for typical stablecoins (especially those aiming for fiat parity), certain stablecoins with complex underlying mechanisms or profit-sharing characteristics could theoretically be deemed securities under existing securities laws, though this is speculative without specific guidance. None Specified: As stablecoins are not explicitly regulated or authorized, there are no specific reserve requirements for stablecoin issuers under Tunisian law. Hypothetical for e-money: If a stablecoin issuer were ever licensed as an electronic money institution under Law 2016-71, they would be subject to strict safeguarding requirements for client funds, typically requiring funds to be held in segregated accounts with a credit institution or invested in secure, low-risk assets. However, this is purely hypothetical in the current environment. No Specific License: There is no specific licensing regime for stablecoin issuers in Tunisia.
tax There are no specific capital gains tax rates for cryptocurrencies in Tunisia. Since virtual assets are not recognized as legitimate financial assets, the framework for taxing capital gains on traditional assets (e.g., shares, real estate) does not officially extend to crypto. Any profits derived from crypto are not explicitly covered by the existing tax code for capital gains. There is no specific income tax regime for income derived from cryptocurrency activities (e.g., mining, staking, trading income, salaries paid in crypto). Given the BCT's stance, any "income" generated from such activities would be in an unregulated and potentially illegal domain, making its declaration for tax purposes problematic and undefined under current law. If crypto were ever to be legalized and income derived, it might fall under general income tax principles, but this is entirely speculative and not the current legal reality. Cryptocurrency transactions are not subject to VAT/GST in Tunisia. This is because they are not recognized as legitimate goods, services, or financial instruments within the Tunisian tax system. The framework for VAT applies to taxable supplies of goods and services, which does not currently encompass virtual assets. Since there is no specific tax framework for cryptocurrencies, there are no specific tax reporting requirements for individuals or businesses related to crypto holdings, transactions, or profits for tax purposes. However, it's crucial to understand that general financial regulations, foreign exchange controls, and anti-money laundering (AML) laws apply to all financial activities in Tunisia. Engaging in unrecognized crypto activities could therefore trigger scrutiny under these broader regulations, even if there isn't a specific crypto tax reporting requirement.

Sources

This report is AI-generated from publicly available regulatory sources. Last updated: 2026-09-06. View full profile