No borders, no rules? Cryptocurrency and South African law

South Africa’s exchange control system, managed by the South African Reserve Bank (“SARB”), aims to regulate the movement of capital across borders by South African residents. Historically, this system has overseen the transfer of legal tender, securities, and foreign investments. The emergence of cryptocurrency - decentralised, borderless, and intangible - has challenged the relevance of these longstanding rules.

Exchange control in South Africa is primarily governed by the Exchange Control Regulations (the “Excon Regulations”), issued under the Currency and Exchanges Act 9 of 1933. These regulations prohibit the export of capital, such as financial assets and investments, or funds, including cash and cash equivalents, without SARB’s prior approval. Notably, these rules were drafted well before the advent of digital assets and blockchain technology, as cryptocurrency is a form of digital currency that first entered the global market in 2009. This means applying the Excon Regulations to cryptocurrency requires interpretation that the law does not currently support.

Cryptocurrencies, by their very nature, are not issued by a central authority and are not regarded as legal tender. However, they can be traded, stored, or transferred electronically for various purposes, such as payment and investment, using cryptographic technology. In recognition of this, South African tax authorities began referring to “crypto assets” rather than “cryptocurrency” in the Explanatory Memorandum on the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill, 2020, published in 2021, aligning terminology with evolving regulatory standards.

The key legal issue remains whether crypto assets fall within the scope of the Excon Regulations. This question was addressed in the recent High Court case Standard Bank of South Africa v South African Reserve Bank & Others (Case No. 047643/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 481 (15 May 2025). In the matter, the court examined whether SARB could impose exchange control restrictions on cryptocurrency transactions. The court held that SARB could not, finding that cryptocurrency currently falls outside the definitions of “capital” and “money” under the existing regulatory framework. Crucially, the court ruled that SARB cannot unilaterally extend these definitions to include cryptocurrency – only a legislative amendment could achieve that. This judgment confirms that, under current law, the movement of cryptocurrency across borders does not constitute an “export” of capital as contemplated by the Excon Regulations. For now, crypto assets exist outside the reach of South Africa’s exchange control system.

That said, this regulatory loophole is unlikely to remain open indefinitely, and the SARB has also noted an appeal against the abovementioned judgment. SARB has participated in the Intergovernmental Fintech Working Group (IFWG), which has called for enhanced regulatory oversight of crypto assets. SARB is also in the process of developing its regulatory framework. However, until formal legislative changes are introduced, SARB’s powers remain limited, and cryptocurrency continues to function in a legally uncertain and unregulated territory. For now, crypto still slips through the cracks — but the window is closing. The law may be behind the curve, but it’s catching up fast.

August 5, 2025
Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

A landmark judgment delivered on 3 October 2025 by the Constitutional Court of South Africa has reshaped the legal landscape governing employment and family rights. In Van Wyk and Others v Minister of Employment and Labour; Commission for Gender Equality and Another v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (CCT 308/23) [2025] ZACC 20, the Court declared several provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 (“BCEA”) and the Unemployment Insurance Act 63 of 2001 (“UIF Act”) invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution in that they unfairly discriminate between different classes of parents.

AI regulation on the horizon

AI regulation on the horizon

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries, and everyday life. We now live in an era where information cannot be trusted at face value, and content creation blurs the lines between reality and fiction. With such a dangerous capability literally at anyone’s fingertips, it is normal to wonder whether AI is being regulated in South Africa. In this article, we look at the current position regarding AI in South Africa.

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

Dividends from South African resident companies fall under the dividends tax regime and are subject to a 20% withholding tax in terms of section 64E of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (“Act”), known as dividends tax, rather than normal income tax. In contrast, foreign dividends are included in a taxpayer’s gross income unless relief is available under section 10B of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, which provides a full or partial participation exemption depending on certain circumstances. In this article, we unpack the important distinction in the tax treatment of local vs foreign dividends in South Africa.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest