Nigeria will not rush into passing a new law to govern virtual assets, marking a shift from expectations that Africa’s largest crypto market would move swiftly toward case-by-case legislation.
In a white paper released by the Virtual Asset Regulatory Authority (VARA), the country’s cryptocurrency regulatory council formed in August 2025, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu said the government intends to rely on existing regulatory powers rather than create a new statute.
“We will adopt a regulatory approach that is proportionate, evidence-based, and aligned with global standards,” President Tinubu wrote in the VARA white paper seen by . “We will deepen collaboration across Government, regulators, and markets. Initially, we do not intend to introduce new legislation; rushing to legislate prematurely risks placing undue burdens on participants. Instead, we are empowering regulators to act while setting clear expectations for industry.”
Nigeria is one of the world’s most active virtual assets markets. According to Chainalysis, a cryptocurrency analysis firm, Nigerians transacted $92.1 billion in cryptocurrencies between July 2024 and June 2025, nearly triple that of the next African country, South Africa. In 2025, the Investment and Securities Act (ISA) recognised the country’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), its capital markets authority, as the digital assets regulator.
That move first signalled that the country was taking a more accommodative stance toward cryptocurrencies, raising expectations of regulatory clarity and mainstream integration. However, further regulatory activities have stalled.
Yet despite the surge in cryptocurrency transactions, much of the trade has continued outside comprehensive statutory oversight, leaving gaps in consumer protection, tax transparency, and financial-crime controls.
Rather than draft a sweeping crypto law, the government is building a coordinated supervisory model anchored by the newly established Virtual Asset Regulatory Council (VARC) and the Virtual Asset Regulatory Office (VARO).
The approach leans on distributed oversight across regulatory agencies, including the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS), the country’s tax collection body, focusing first on registration, visibility, and proportionate supervision, before codifying new rules.
“The indication that Nigeria does not intend to introduce a brand-new standalone law for virtual asset services at this stage should be viewed as a strategy of regulatory integration rather than regulatory avoidance,” said Oluwasegun Kosemani, special consultant to Hon. Olufemi Bamisile, chairman of the ad-hoc committee on economic, regulatory, and security implications of cryptocurrency adoption and point-of-sale (PoS) operations in Nigeria.
The current direction appears focused on embedding virtual asset activities within existing financial, tax, anti-money laundering (AML), and payment system frameworks, ensuring coherence instead of fragmentation. Legislative engagement, including ongoing committee work, complements this by supporting structured implementation and policy clarity without duplicating supervisory authority, said Kosemani.
Kenya, another country moving towards cryptocurrency regulation, has specified the different markets that virtual asset operators can secure licences—including wallet provision, exchanges, investment advisory, payment processing, and escrow services—each with defined operating ceilings and obligations around fiduciary duties, investor protection standards, market conduct, and portfolio management operations, depending on the specific sector they play in.
Kenyan regulators, including the Capital Markets Authority (CMA) and the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK), will jointly oversee the industry. The Treasury Cabinet Secretary, alongside the newly-established Virtual Assets Association of Kenya (VAAK), which launched in December 2025, will collaboratively draft specific rules of market engagement tied to those categories.
Nigeria is opting for a principles-based perimeter before formal segmentation. This move signals two things: first, Nigeria is again acknowledging the scale and permanence of digital asset activity in the economy. Yet, it is choosing cautious regulatory calibration over legislative shock.
If executed well, the strategy could offer a more flexible path toward oversight in a fast-moving sector. Otherwise, the absence of detailed operating guidelines could leave too much discretion and too much uncertainty in the hands of regulators.
“The need for a more defined market structure framework could naturally arise in the future as the non-security virtual asset narrative evolves and practical implementation lessons emerge,” said Kosemani. “Should that moment come, it would benefit from deliberate, evidence-based legislative attention.”
