You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

November 24, 2025

Myanmar Affirms Cryptocurrency Controls

A recent warning from the Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) against cryptocurrency use upholds the country’s ongoing strategy of enforcing strict prohibitions on unauthorized cryptocurrency activities while also promoting the controlled development of a central bank digital currency (CBDC).

The CBM’s warning, issued November 16, 2025, reminded the public of announcements in May 2019 and a notification in May 2020 confirming that all online and offline cryptocurrency transactions are strictly prohibited. The CBM also clarified that no financial institution in Myanmar is authorized to deal with digital currencies. The warning highlighted global risks, such as money laundering, scams, tax evasion, hacking, and severe financial losses caused by price volatility and insufficient regulation. The CBM urged the public to use only legitimate banking channels and avoid illegal cryptocurrency activities.

The warning comes five months after the CBM issued a notification announcing the formation of the Central Committee for the Issuance of a Central Bank Digital Currency. This committee includes senior CBM officials, representatives from relevant ministries and the banking sector, and technology experts. Its main role is to research CBDC models, test secure digital payment systems, and ensure that any future implementation aligns with Myanmar’s monetary policy and financial stability objectives.

Taken together, these two actions illustrate the CBM’s continued pursuit of its dual strategy to promote innovation through CBDC development while prohibiting cryptocurrency use. Businesses should note that while CBDC pilot programs may appear in the future, cryptocurrencies remain off-limits.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 22, 2021
Since Cambodia does not have any dedicated laws on data protection, there are no regulatory or enforcement authorities that are specifically tasked with handling, overseeing, or implementing personal data protection matters. Consequently, the following governmental bodies may have substantial powers in this realm: the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications, and the Ministry of Interior. After reviewing the DMF [Data Management Framework adopted by ASEAN] and MCCs [Model Contractual Clauses for Cross-Border Data Flows], we are of the view that these standards broadly align with concepts of data protection that exist under Cambodian laws that implicate data protection issues. Therefore, Cambodian authorities may react positively to the guidelines provided under the DMF and MCCs. However, implementing these guidelines can be challenging for a developing country such as Cambodia due to the following reasons: inadequate data protection and cybercrime regulations; lack of technological advancement in information and communication technology; lack of technology experts who can effectively deal with advanced computer crimes; the high cost of digital data governance; and the fact that it may be time-consuming to put these guidelines into place. Positive and negative implications Furthermore, we anticipate that the guidelines would provide both positive and negative impacts on businesses. In terms of positive impact, the DMF and MCCs will likely: increase the cybersecurity of all companies doing business in Cambodia; enable businesses to have better data processes and protection and more secure internal data collection infrastructure; help businesses gain more credibility and improve their reputations; and increase companies’ customer base as clients will have stronger trust in companies and be willing to share data, knowing they are doing so in a secure environment. In terms of negative impact, both data exporters and data importers will be strictly required to abide by the data protection guidelines
March 4, 2021
E-commerce platforms have become some of the most significant marketplaces in Thailand, with millions of daily business transactions and huge numbers of online users. The increasing number of online shops operating on e-commerce platforms requires new techniques to be employed in online IP rights infringement cases. Both the private sector and the government have developed tools to enhance online IP enforcement, including ones using the latest legal technologies and artificial intelligence (AI). Many legal technologies and AI operations are still nascent and typically do not yet offer the best approach for online IP rights enforcement. For example, AI and other technologies available today are still unable to consistently differentiate between original and counterfeit products from the images and information displayed on the e-commerce platforms and the internet. Therefore, some of the most effective measures for online IP enforcement still involve manual online searches by experienced local investigators with deep understanding of the behaviors of local users (both sellers and buyers) and the ability to link relevant information across online platforms. Thailand’s Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), as the governmental office responsible for IP-related matters in Thailand, has initiated its new Memorandum of Understanding on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights on the Internet. This memorandum of understanding (MOU) does not create additional rights for IP owners, but acts as a mechanism to gather all the relevant stakeholders to address issues related to online IP infringement in a unified, mutually agreeable manner. The signatories of the MOU fall into four categories: Governmental authorities: DIP, Department of Business Development, and Department of International Trade Promotion; E-commerce platform operators: Lazada, Shopee, and JD Central (the most popular e-commerce platforms in Thailand); IP rights holders: Particularly including trademark owners facing ongoing counterfeiting problems in Thailand; and Law firms. Although the MOU is not