16/2026-03
China's RWA Regulatory Framework Officially Launched! Eight Ministries Jointly Issue Document, Defining and Outlining Compliance Path for the First Time
On February 6, 2026, eight major departments including the People's Bank of China, National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Public Security, State Administration for Market Regulation, National Financial Regulatory Administration, China Securities Regulatory Commission, and State Administration of Foreign Exchange jointly issued the "Notice on Further Preventing and Disposing of Risks Related to Virtual Currency and Other Activities" (hereinafter referred to as the "Notice"), while the China Securities Regulatory Commission concurrently issued the 2026 No. 1 Announcement "Regulatory Guidelines for Overseas Issuance of Asset-Backed Tokenized Securities Based on Domestic Assets" (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines"). This series of actions officially announced that China's regulatory "ambiguous period" for real-world asset (RWA) tokenization business has ended, drawing clear legal boundaries for the "domestic assets, overseas token issuance" model that has long been in a gray area.
Unlike the window guidance implemented in late August 2025 for domestic enterprises' overseas issuance of RWA, this time the regulatory authorities not only provided an official definition of RWA for the first time but also systematically constructed regulatory pathways. Notably, the "Notice" takes effect immediately upon its issuance and simultaneously repeals the "September 24 Notice" issued in 2021, marking a shift in China's virtual asset regulatory approach from "simple prohibition" to "systematic reconstruction". Industry observers point out that this is not merely a policy tightening but rather the separation of RWA from the existing virtual currency regulatory framework, granting it independent business status and beginning to establish operational boundaries in accordance with laws and regulations.
Official First Definition of RWA, Only One Compliance Path
According to the "Notice", China has provided a clear definition of RWA for the first time: it refers to the use of cryptography and distributed ledger technology (or similar technologies) to convert rights such as asset ownership and beneficial rights into tokens or tokenized claim rights, and to conduct issuance and trading activities around them.
The "Notice" clearly states that conducting RWA-related business (including issuance, intermediary services, and technical support) within the country is generally considered illegal financial activity, with the only exception being "businesses approved by competent authorities and conducted on designated financial infrastructure". Industry analysis suggests that this dual requirement of "regulatory approval + designated platform" means that RWA has been formally included in the category of regulated financial activities, no longer automatically subject to comprehensive prohibitive provisions.
At the same time, the "Notice" implements layered management for virtual currencies, stablecoins, and RWA: virtual currencies maintain a comprehensive ban, stablecoins are subject to dynamic evaluation, and RWA operates under a licensing system. This layered regulatory framework follows the principle of "same business, same risk, same regulation", emphasizing that RWA will be directly incorporated into the existing cross-border financial regulatory system based on its economic essence, rather than establishing a separate set of parallel rules.
Clear Division of Departmental Responsibilities, Stablecoins May Involve Exchange Risks
The "Notice" details the allocation of regulatory responsibilities for different types of RWA:
- Foreign debt-type RWA is supervised by the National Development and Reform Commission;
- Equity-type and securitization-type RWA are primarily supervised by the China Securities Regulatory Commission;
- The return of overseas funds is supervised by the State Administration of Foreign Exchange;
- Other types of RWA are jointly supervised by the China Securities Regulatory Commission in coordination with relevant departments.
Regarding stablecoins, the "Notice" states that stablecoins pegged to fiat currency "essentially assume some of the circulation functions of legal tender". Legal experts remind that this statement may be extended in judicial practice to interpret exchanges between stablecoins and fiat currencies as "disguised foreign exchange transactions", thereby significantly increasing the legal risks in over-the-counter trading and cross-border exchange. How enforcement will be carried out in the future will become a key variable. Additionally, the repeated mention of "without approval" in the "Notice" also leaves policy flexibility for the development of subsequent compliant businesses.
Asset-Backed RWA to Pilot First, CSRC Refines Registration Process
As a key focus of this policy implementation, the "Guidelines" establish detailed rules for the overseas issuance of tokenized securities based on domestic assets, defining them as: tokenized equity certificates issued overseas, supported by future cash flows of domestic assets or related rights, relying on cryptography and distributed ledger technology.
The "Guidelines" also establish a negative list, explicitly prohibiting assets involving national security, having criminal records, or with unclear ownership rights from entering the RWA issuance scope. Through the standardization of the "registration + overseas registration + token design disclosure" process, RWA regulation moves from principled statements to operational implementation.
Senior legal experts in the cryptocurrency field point out that with the CSRC clarifying registration procedures and document submission standards, the compliance threshold for RWA businesses has significantly increased. In the future, entities leading such businesses are more likely to be large financial institutions or industry leaders with compliance capabilities, rather than traditional Web3 startup teams.
Financial Institutions Become Main Force in Overseas Issuance, Incorporated into Unified Risk Management System
Article 15 of the "Notice" specifically stipulates that if overseas subsidiaries or branches of Chinese financial institutions participate in RWA-related services, they must strictly implement compliance requirements such as Know Your Customer (KYC), investor appropriateness management, and Anti-Money Laundering (AML), and incorporate related businesses into the unified risk management framework of their domestic headquarters.
Legal experts interpret that the regulatory channel opened this time is mainly oriented towards financial institutions, and non-financial enterprises have not yet been included in the scope of compliant participation. In other words, the compliant issuance channel for overseas RWA is actually designed around the existing financial system.
Enhanced Risk Warnings, High Vigilance Needed for Domestic Fundraising and Over-the-Counter Trading
Some lawyers point out that this regulatory framework essentially characterizes RWA as "security tokenization", and from the perspective of preventing financial risks, the regulatory authorities focus on blocking various channels that leverage domestic assets and funds to raise capital from ordinary domestic investors under the names of RWA, NFTs, digital collectibles, etc.
The lawyer particularly reminds that extreme caution is needed when conducting RWA-related consulting, issuance, promotion, sales and other activities within the country. Especially for behaviors such as over-the-counter trading, cross-border fund transfers, and traffic diversion through KOLs, the current legal risks have significantly increased.
Technical Barriers Remain for On-Chain Implementation, Ecosystem Maturity Becomes Key Variable
Even as regulatory pathways gradually become clearer, RWA still faces practical challenges from compliance to true "on-chain" implementation. Industry insiders point out that RWA-related token standards are currently in a fragmented state globally, becoming the main obstacle to large-scale application.
For example, some bond-type token standards (such as ERC-3525, ERC-3475) have few actual implementation cases due to complex design and high wallet integration costs; although equity-type RWA achieves on-chain share mapping through base scaling mechanisms, inconsistent support levels among different wallets often lead to deviations in user-side asset display.
In contrast, products like Aave's aToken or Lido's stETH are widely accepted not because they rely on comprehensive standards, but because they deeply embed yield mechanisms into on-chain interactions, allowing operations such as transfers and staking to automatically complete yield accumulation. Analysts believe that the true implementation of RWA requires not only regulatory approval but also depends on whether on-chain infrastructure can support stable yield expression, asset combination capabilities, and a complete user experience loop.
Summary: Reconstructing Regulatory Framework, Not Relaxation but Standardization
Based on comprehensive interpretations from various sources, the "Notice" and supporting "Guidelines" jointly issued by the eight ministries this time are not a "relaxation" of the virtual asset field but a systematic reconstruction of China's virtual asset regulation: virtual currencies remain strictly excluded from the financial system, stablecoins enter a dynamic evaluation channel, and RWA is formally incorporated into the traditional securities and cross-border financing regulatory framework.
This is not China's embrace of cryptocurrency but rather China incorporating tokenization technology into the existing institutional framework according to its own financial regulatory logic, guiding it to serve the compliant development of the real economy and financial system.
Unlike the window guidance implemented in late August 2025 for domestic enterprises' overseas issuance of RWA, this time the regulatory authorities not only provided an official definition of RWA for the first time but also systematically constructed regulatory pathways. Notably, the "Notice" takes effect immediately upon its issuance and simultaneously repeals the "September 24 Notice" issued in 2021, marking a shift in China's virtual asset regulatory approach from "simple prohibition" to "systematic reconstruction". Industry observers point out that this is not merely a policy tightening but rather the separation of RWA from the existing virtual currency regulatory framework, granting it independent business status and beginning to establish operational boundaries in accordance with laws and regulations.
Official First Definition of RWA, Only One Compliance Path
According to the "Notice", China has provided a clear definition of RWA for the first time: it refers to the use of cryptography and distributed ledger technology (or similar technologies) to convert rights such as asset ownership and beneficial rights into tokens or tokenized claim rights, and to conduct issuance and trading activities around them.
The "Notice" clearly states that conducting RWA-related business (including issuance, intermediary services, and technical support) within the country is generally considered illegal financial activity, with the only exception being "businesses approved by competent authorities and conducted on designated financial infrastructure". Industry analysis suggests that this dual requirement of "regulatory approval + designated platform" means that RWA has been formally included in the category of regulated financial activities, no longer automatically subject to comprehensive prohibitive provisions.
At the same time, the "Notice" implements layered management for virtual currencies, stablecoins, and RWA: virtual currencies maintain a comprehensive ban, stablecoins are subject to dynamic evaluation, and RWA operates under a licensing system. This layered regulatory framework follows the principle of "same business, same risk, same regulation", emphasizing that RWA will be directly incorporated into the existing cross-border financial regulatory system based on its economic essence, rather than establishing a separate set of parallel rules.
Clear Division of Departmental Responsibilities, Stablecoins May Involve Exchange Risks
The "Notice" details the allocation of regulatory responsibilities for different types of RWA:
- Foreign debt-type RWA is supervised by the National Development and Reform Commission;
- Equity-type and securitization-type RWA are primarily supervised by the China Securities Regulatory Commission;
- The return of overseas funds is supervised by the State Administration of Foreign Exchange;
- Other types of RWA are jointly supervised by the China Securities Regulatory Commission in coordination with relevant departments.
Regarding stablecoins, the "Notice" states that stablecoins pegged to fiat currency "essentially assume some of the circulation functions of legal tender". Legal experts remind that this statement may be extended in judicial practice to interpret exchanges between stablecoins and fiat currencies as "disguised foreign exchange transactions", thereby significantly increasing the legal risks in over-the-counter trading and cross-border exchange. How enforcement will be carried out in the future will become a key variable. Additionally, the repeated mention of "without approval" in the "Notice" also leaves policy flexibility for the development of subsequent compliant businesses.
Asset-Backed RWA to Pilot First, CSRC Refines Registration Process
As a key focus of this policy implementation, the "Guidelines" establish detailed rules for the overseas issuance of tokenized securities based on domestic assets, defining them as: tokenized equity certificates issued overseas, supported by future cash flows of domestic assets or related rights, relying on cryptography and distributed ledger technology.
The "Guidelines" also establish a negative list, explicitly prohibiting assets involving national security, having criminal records, or with unclear ownership rights from entering the RWA issuance scope. Through the standardization of the "registration + overseas registration + token design disclosure" process, RWA regulation moves from principled statements to operational implementation.
Senior legal experts in the cryptocurrency field point out that with the CSRC clarifying registration procedures and document submission standards, the compliance threshold for RWA businesses has significantly increased. In the future, entities leading such businesses are more likely to be large financial institutions or industry leaders with compliance capabilities, rather than traditional Web3 startup teams.
Financial Institutions Become Main Force in Overseas Issuance, Incorporated into Unified Risk Management System
Article 15 of the "Notice" specifically stipulates that if overseas subsidiaries or branches of Chinese financial institutions participate in RWA-related services, they must strictly implement compliance requirements such as Know Your Customer (KYC), investor appropriateness management, and Anti-Money Laundering (AML), and incorporate related businesses into the unified risk management framework of their domestic headquarters.
Legal experts interpret that the regulatory channel opened this time is mainly oriented towards financial institutions, and non-financial enterprises have not yet been included in the scope of compliant participation. In other words, the compliant issuance channel for overseas RWA is actually designed around the existing financial system.
Enhanced Risk Warnings, High Vigilance Needed for Domestic Fundraising and Over-the-Counter Trading
Some lawyers point out that this regulatory framework essentially characterizes RWA as "security tokenization", and from the perspective of preventing financial risks, the regulatory authorities focus on blocking various channels that leverage domestic assets and funds to raise capital from ordinary domestic investors under the names of RWA, NFTs, digital collectibles, etc.
The lawyer particularly reminds that extreme caution is needed when conducting RWA-related consulting, issuance, promotion, sales and other activities within the country. Especially for behaviors such as over-the-counter trading, cross-border fund transfers, and traffic diversion through KOLs, the current legal risks have significantly increased.
Technical Barriers Remain for On-Chain Implementation, Ecosystem Maturity Becomes Key Variable
Even as regulatory pathways gradually become clearer, RWA still faces practical challenges from compliance to true "on-chain" implementation. Industry insiders point out that RWA-related token standards are currently in a fragmented state globally, becoming the main obstacle to large-scale application.
For example, some bond-type token standards (such as ERC-3525, ERC-3475) have few actual implementation cases due to complex design and high wallet integration costs; although equity-type RWA achieves on-chain share mapping through base scaling mechanisms, inconsistent support levels among different wallets often lead to deviations in user-side asset display.
In contrast, products like Aave's aToken or Lido's stETH are widely accepted not because they rely on comprehensive standards, but because they deeply embed yield mechanisms into on-chain interactions, allowing operations such as transfers and staking to automatically complete yield accumulation. Analysts believe that the true implementation of RWA requires not only regulatory approval but also depends on whether on-chain infrastructure can support stable yield expression, asset combination capabilities, and a complete user experience loop.
Summary: Reconstructing Regulatory Framework, Not Relaxation but Standardization
Based on comprehensive interpretations from various sources, the "Notice" and supporting "Guidelines" jointly issued by the eight ministries this time are not a "relaxation" of the virtual asset field but a systematic reconstruction of China's virtual asset regulation: virtual currencies remain strictly excluded from the financial system, stablecoins enter a dynamic evaluation channel, and RWA is formally incorporated into the traditional securities and cross-border financing regulatory framework.
This is not China's embrace of cryptocurrency but rather China incorporating tokenization technology into the existing institutional framework according to its own financial regulatory logic, guiding it to serve the compliant development of the real economy and financial system.