From the journal

Indonesia's MoF Regulation 108/2025 Activates Crypto-Asset Tax Reporting from 2026

Indonesia's Ministry of Finance issued Regulation No. 108 of 2025 (MoF 108) implementing the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework. The rule sets statutory reporting duties for Crypto Asset Service Providers and brings payment service providers and licensed e-wallet operators under the financial information reporting scheme. First reporting covers the 2026 calendar year, due to the Directorate General of Taxes by 30 April 2027.

2 min read

Indonesia's Minister of Finance issued MoF Regulation No. 108 of 2025. The rule operationalises the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework in Indonesia. It is final and in force. Reporting obligations begin for the 2026 tax year. The Directorate General of Taxes (DGT) administers collection.

MoF 108 captures Crypto Asset Service Providers that meet domestic nexus criteria, including exchanges. It brings payment service providers and licensed e-wallet operators inside the financial information reporting scheme. It covers transfers of relevant crypto assets. First reports for the 2026 calendar year are due no later than 30 April 2027. Cross-border information exchange is contemplated. Detailed reporting formats and administrative penalties will follow in subsequent implementing regulations.

Indonesian crypto exchanges, foreign exchanges with Indonesian users meeting nexus criteria, custodial wallet operators, payment institutions, and licensed e-money issuers will report account-holder and transaction data to the DGT. Customers of these providers should expect provider requests for tax identification numbers and residency documentation.

MoF 108 aligns with the OECD Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework adopted in 2023. The exact scope of relevant crypto assets will track implementing guidance. Indonesia's prior shift of crypto supervision from Bappebti to OJK affects parallel licensing duties for the same operators.

Licentium advises crypto and digital asset clients on cross-border tax reporting and works with Indonesian counsel on local filings. Contact us if your platform serves Indonesian customers or accepts Indonesian payment rails. Work we undertake includes CARF readiness, nexus analysis, customer onboarding redesign, due-diligence procedures, and exchange-of-information opinions.

Source: Indonesian Ministry of Finance Regulation No. 108 of 2025 on Crypto-Asset Reporting, in force for the 2026 reporting year, https://www.kemenkeu.go.id/, confirmed 14 May 2026.

The information provided is not legal, tax, investment, or accounting advice and should not be used as such. It is for discussion purposes only. Seek guidance from your own legal counsel and advisors on any matters. The views presented are those of the author and not any other individual or organization. Some parts of the text may be automatically generated. The author of this material makes no guarantees or warranties about the accuracy or completeness of the information.

Crypto Regulatory

More from the journal

See all
Illia Prokopiev

MLR Registration and the FCA Cryptoasset Gateway to 25 October 2027

This matter concerns the transition of a United Kingdom cryptoasset business from FCA registration under the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 to Part 4A permission under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The question is whether MLR registration gives conversion, grandfathering, priority, or a right to continue after 25 October 2027, and what an affected firm should do before the gateway closes. This analysis assumes an existing UK-facing cryptoasset business, no relevant Part 4A permission, and an intention to continue after commencement.

Illia Prokopiev

ESMA's 2026 Custody Resilience CSA and the Rules That Actually Bind

ESMA’s 2026 Common Supervisory Action is a coordinated national review of digital operational resilience in crypto-asset custody. It will test whether selected crypto-asset service providers can demonstrate effective controls across six announced workstreams. The legal questions are which requirements are binding, how national competent authorities may assess control effectiveness, and what consequences may follow from a deficiency. This analysis assumes that the firm is permitted under MiCA Article 59 to provide custody and administration within Article 3(1)(17).

Illia Prokopiev

Stablecoin regulation in the US, Hong Kong and Singapore

Stablecoin and digital-token regulation now combines market-entry authorization with continuous financial-crime controls in daily operations. The question is whether the United States’ proposed payment-stablecoin customer identification program, Hong Kong’s narrow first licensing round, and Singapore’s digital payment token (DPT) directory support a bank-like compliance characterization. They do, with material limits. The more accurate proposition is that compliance is moving beyond approval into continuous financial-institution-grade operations.