Good morning.

As complex as cryptocurrencies are—whether as cash or as assets that generate returns—countries seem to be finding ways to control them, however they see fit. Nigeria wants to tax crypto and virtual asset transactions the moment they become income, rewards, or payments. South Africa, in another case study, has identified a pattern that could weaken its monetary control system: cryptocurrencies used for cross-border payments. It now wants to set up a capital-control guardrail. Freelancers who earn in crypto from foreign clients, this one directly affects you. 

Let’s dive in.

Subscribe

Nigeria wants to tax crypto before creating a dedicated regulatory framework. In case you’ve lost track of how crypto regulation is faring in the country, here’s a quick recap:

• Virtual assets, including cryptocurrencies, are now legal in Nigeria.
• Under the Investment and Securities Act (2025), virtual assets were classified as securities, but since then, regulators seem to have stylishly moved away from that position.
• An executive order in July established the Virtual Asset Council, which is overseen by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS), the country’s tax authority. The move rounded off a process that first began in 2025.
• As part of that order, President Bola Tinubu said the country would release specific rules around taxation, with payment-like virtual assets now resting with the CBN, while digital assets that behave as securities fall under the SEC.
• The SEC has also opened its sandbox for digital asset investment platforms, the Accelerated Regulatory Incubation Programme (ARIP), to nine more firms. From the indications so far, the regulator appears to be targeting tokenisation players and operators or platforms that facilitate the exchange or distribution of tokenised products.

Now you’re all caught up. 

The latest move from the NRS is the next step: making crypto transactions taxable. Under new guidelines, eligible crypto transactions will attract a 1.5% stamp duty, with registered virtual asset service providers (VASPs) required to deduct the levy from the digital asset being transferred before remitting it to the government. 

The taxman has always found a way to locate you. This time, it is saying it does not mind collecting its share in Bitcoin, USDT, or whatever digital asset is passing through the system. Now the question is: what’s stopping banks from touching crypto, too?

The next time an unsolicited spam caller rings your mobile phone, heave a sigh of relief knowing that those (sometimes annoying) bugs could soon get what’s coming to them.

What’s happening? Under the Consumer Protection Act, direct marketers in South Africa could get fined R1 million ($60,560) or 10% of their annual turnover, or whichever is greater, for unsolicited calls and violating the provisions in the Act. The amendments were gazetted in April by Parks Tau, South Africa’s Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition.

What else? All direct marketers must register with the NCC and scrub their calling lists against the opt-out registry before contacting consumers. Registration opened in July 2026, and failure to comply could result in outright bans or hefty fines. Hardin Ratshisusu, the NCC’s acting commissioner, said the rules aim to protect consumers from “intrusive and unwanted direct marketing communication.”

The scale of the problem is staggering. Truecaller data cited shows South Africans received 5.38 billion spam calls in just the first two months of 2026—roughly 86 million moments of intrusion daily. Spam call volume jumped 22.9% between January and May 2026 compared to the same period in 2025. 

The rules don’t operate in a vacuum. South Africa’s Information Regulator clarified that even consumers who don’t register on the opt-out registry remain protected under the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), emphasising that telemarketers still need to receive consent before sending electronic marketing messages. While it sounds like a death knell for telemarketing, legitimate marketers can focus their energies on consumers who haven’t opted out.

Zoom out: Spam call crackdowns are picking up steam globally, but in South Africa, enforcement is the name of the game. By tying fines to a percentage of turnover, the government is moving away from inconsequential penalties to a model where non-compliance is a serious financial risk. For consumers, it’s a long-awaited shield, and for the industry, it’s a push towards a more professional, consent-based era of marketing.

In more crypto news, South Africa’s central bank has made it clear that sending crypto offshore is not just a crypto transaction; it’s the same as sending regular money across borders.

On Monday, South Africa’s National Treasury and the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) released a draft manual for cross-border crypto activity, and the message is surprisingly simple: buying Bitcoin locally is one thing; moving it offshore is another.

The key distinction: The draft framework says that buying crypto with rand through a licenced local Crypto Asset Service Provider (CASP), transferring crypto between local CASPs, or selling approved crypto holdings back into rand would generally be treated as domestic, non-reportable activity.

The interesting part begins when crypto leaves South Africa.

Explain like I’m new here: Under the draft manual, a South African resident who transfers crypto from a local CASP to an offshore exchange or a non-custodial wallet would trigger a cross-border capital outflow that must be reported to the Financial Surveillance Department (FinSurv), SARB’s exchange-control watchdog. The same principle applies in reverse for crypto coming back into South Africa from offshore platforms.

In other words, the Reserve Bank is not trying to ban crypto trading. It is trying to treat certain crypto transfers the way it already treats other forms of capital moving across the border.

The funny part: For years, folks gung-ho about crypto have loved using the phrase “be your own bank.” The Reserve Bank appears to have heard that and responded: “Wonderful. Please file the paperwork.”

Zoom out: This is still a draft framework and remains open for public comment until September 30. But it is one of the clearest signs yet that South Africa is moving toward regulated crypto flows rather than regulatory ambiguity.

South African exchanges will now have to know not just who their customers are, but also when a crypto transfer crosses a regulatory border. That pushes local CASPs closer to functioning like gatekeepers for South Africa’s cross-border crypto flows, with reporting responsibilities that resemble those of traditional foreign exchange intermediaries.

If you run a startup or digital business in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), breathe easy—for now. The government has suspended a controversial digital tax regime just ten days after introducing it, following a fierce backlash from tech stakeholders.

What’s happening? On the evening of August 1, authorities suspended Interministerial Order No. 015, signed on July 20 by the ministers of Digital Economy and Finance. The order was seeking to collect non-tax revenues from individuals or companies conducting digital activities in the country or supplying digital services to the Congolese market. The charges, payable in Congolese Francs at the official exchange rate, would have applied to both domestic operators and foreign companies.

The government said it paused the measure to provide clarifications and prevent any confusion, misinterpretation, or misleading exploitation. The fees could reach up to $100,000 for some operators.

What else? The order triggered immediate pushback from online media publishers, entrepreneurs, and tech associations that argued the new levies would weaken an already fragile digital ecosystem, particularly startups and digital media companies operating on thin margins. 

Critics also pointed out that the country’s 2022 startup law and Digital Code were created to encourage innovation, making the new fees difficult to reconcile with existing policy.

Augustin Kibassa Maliba, DRC’s digital economy minister, pushed back on the idea that the government was retreating, saying the regulation does not depart from the government’s commitment to promoting Congolese entrepreneurship. 

He noted that specific provisions for Congolese startups would be defined in the coming days. The backdrop is a heavy existing tax load. 

Between the lines: DR Congo is one of the tax-heavy countries in Central Africa, according to a June 2025 report by GSMA. Adding one more could add to the compliance burden of the affected operators. However, the reprieve is only temporary, with regulators saying they’ll reassess and come back with a plan.