From the journal

Ontario Securities Commission Reports 25% Crypto Ownership Among Canadians, July 2026

The Ontario Securities Commission released its 2026 crypto asset survey on July 28, 2026, finding that 25% of Canadians own crypto assets and 59% are aware of them. Half of crypto owners reported checking platform registration status before use, up from 38% in 2023, a metric the OSC cited as evidence of improving investor protection awareness.

2 min read

On July 28, 2026, the Ontario Securities Commission published its 2026 crypto asset survey covering 2,360 Canadians. The document is a survey report issued under the OSC's investor protection mandate under the Securities Act (Ontario), R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5. It is not an enforcement action or regulatory instrument but reflects the OSC's ongoing monitoring of retail investor exposure to crypto assets.

The survey found that 59% of respondents are aware of crypto assets and 25% own them, both metrics up from prior survey waves. Among crypto owners, 50% reported checking whether their trading platform is registered with the OSC or another Canadian securities regulator before use, up from 38% in 2023. Registration requirements for crypto asset trading platforms derive from Canadian Securities Administrators Staff Notice 21-329 and subsequent CSA guidance, which classifies many platforms as dealers or marketplaces subject to provincial securities law and requires them to pre-register or obtain exemptive relief.

Registered crypto asset trading platforms in Canada must comply with OSC and CSA requirements covering account segregation, know-your-client procedures, product suitability, and concentration limits. The survey data on registration awareness is relevant to platform compliance teams: as consumer awareness of registration requirements grows, regulators are better positioned to argue that unregistered platforms knowingly serve an investor population familiar with the registration obligation, supporting more aggressive enforcement action.

The survey follows CSA's ongoing review of crypto asset trading platform terms and conditions, including custody and insolvency disclosures. Canada's 2024 federal budget committed to implementing the OECD's Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework, which requires crypto asset service providers to report transaction data to tax authorities. The Department of Finance and CSA have yet to set final Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework implementation timelines across Canadian jurisdictions.

Licentium advises crypto asset businesses on Canadian and international regulatory compliance and maintains a partner network with Canadian-qualified securities and fintech counsel. To discuss OSC registration requirements or Canadian crypto compliance planning, contact us. Work we undertake includes: crypto asset regulatory analysis, trading platform registration strategy, CSA compliance, Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework readiness, and multi-jurisdictional digital asset licensing.

Source: Ontario Securities Commission, Crypto Asset Survey 2026 (28 July 2026)

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.