About Loeb Smith
People
Sectors
Expertise
- Legal Service
- Banking and Finance
- Blockchain, Fintech and Cryptocurrency
- Capital Markets and Privatization
- Corporate
- Cybersecurity and Data Privacy
- Insolvency, Restructuring and Corporate Recovery
- Insurance and Reinsurance
- Intellectual Property
- Investment Funds
- Litigation and Dispute Resolution
- Mergers and Acquisitions
- Private Client and Family Office
- Private Equity and Venture Capital
- Governance, Regulatory and Compliance
- Entity Formation and Managed Services
- Consulting
- Legal Service
News and Announcements
Locations
Subscribe Newsletters
Contact

Exciting news! We’ve made it on the shortlist for the HFM US Services Awards 2025 in two categories:
Best law firm: private markets
Best offshore governance firm.
We thank our clients who took the time to provide feedback/testimonials about our legal services delivered to the evolving needs of hedge funds managers.
Winners will be announced on September 16, 2025 in NYC. Stay tuned😁!
2025 shortlist | HFM US Services Awards
The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (“CIMA”) recently re-emphasized that all persons carrying out relevant financial business (“Licensees and Registrants”) are expected and required to ensure that their Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officers (“AMLCOs”), Money Laundering Reporting Officers (“MLROs”) and their Deputies (together, the “AML Officers”) are fully aware of their respective duties and responsibilities as set out in the Anti-Money Laundering Regulations (2020 Revision) (as amended) (“AMLRs”) and will act in accordance with them.
Licensees and Registrants are further required to ensure that appropriate appointments and the discharge of the day-to-day functions of these AML Officers are made or occur in compliance with Regulations 3, 4, 33 and 34 of the AMLRs.
Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officers (AMLCOs)
Part II Section 2 (C) of the Guidance Notes on the Prevention and Detection of Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Proliferation Financing in the Cayman Islands (the “CIMA Guidance Notes”) states, among other things, that AMLCOs must have the authority and ability to oversee the effectiveness of the Licensee’s and/or Registrant’s AML/CFT systems, compliance with applicable AML/CFT legislation and guidance and the day-to-day operation of the AML/CFT policies and procedures. An AMLCO must be a person who is fit and proper to assume the role and who:
- has sufficient skills and experience;
- reports directly to the Board of Directors (“Board”) or equivalent;
- has sufficient seniority and authority so that the Board reacts to and acts upon any recommendations made;
- has regular contact with the Board so that the Board is able to satisfy itself that statutory obligations are being met and that sufficiently robust measures are being taken to protect the Licensee and/or Registrant against ML/TF risks;
- has sufficient resources, including sufficient time and, where appropriate, support staff; and
- has unfettered access to all business lines, support departments and information necessary to appropriately perform the AML/CFT compliance function.
Money Laundering Reporting Officers (MLROs)
Part II Section 9 (B) of the Guidance Notes states, among other things, that each CIMA Licensee or Registrant should designate a suitably qualified and experienced person as MLRO at management level, to whom suspicious activity reports (SARs) must be made by staff.
The CIMA Licensee or Registrant should ensure that the person acting as MLRO/Deputy MLRO:
- is a natural person;
- is autonomous (meaning the MLRO is the final decision maker as to whether to file a SAR);
- is independent (meaning having no vested interest in the underlying activity of the Licensee or Registrant);
- has and shall have access to all relevant material in order to make an assessment as to whether the activity is or is not suspicious; and
- can dedicate sufficient time for the efficient discharge of the MLRO function, particularly where the MLRO/DMLRO has other professional responsibilities.
CIMA also reiterated that:
- AML Officers must be versed in the different types of transactions that the business conducts which may give rise to opportunities for money-laundering, terrorist financing, proliferation financing and any direct or indirect activity with designated person or entities.
- Where the AML Officer function is outsourced, the Licensee or Registrant retains ultimate responsibility for compliance with the AMLRs and must maintain adequate policies and procedures.
Further Assistance
This publication is not intended to be a substitute for specific legal advice or a legal opinion. If you require further advice relating to the matters discussed in this Legal Insight, please contact us. We would be delighted to assist.
E: gary.smith@loebsmith.com
E: robert.farrell@loebsmith.com
E: elizabeth.kenny@loebsmith.com
E: vanisha.harjani@loebsmith.com
E: vivian.huang@loebsmith.com
E: faye.huang@loebsmith.com
E: yun.sheng@loebsmith.com
Fiat currency transactions
What rules and restrictions govern the exchange of fiat currency and cryptoassets?
Assuming the subject cryptoassets fall within the definition of virtual assets under the Virtual Asset (Service Providers) Act (As Revised) (VASP Act), the exchange of fiat currency and cryptoassets will likely constitute a virtual asset service under the VASP Act and hence any person providing the service of exchange of fiat currency and cryptoassets in the course of their business will be a virtual asset service provider regulated by the VASP Act.
Furthermore, if the exchange of fiat currency and cryptoassets falls within one of the relevant financial businesses under the Proceeds of Crime Act, the relevant service provider will be required to comply with the AML and KYC requirements under the AML Regulations, which include, among other things, implementing client identification and verification, record-keeping, and internal reporting and control procedures.
Exchanges and secondary markets
Where are investors allowed to trade cryptoassets? How are exchanges, alternative trading systems and secondary markets for cryptoassets regulated?
There are generally no legal requirements or restrictions on where investors are allowed to trade cryptoassets in the Cayman Islands, so investors are usually free to trade cryptoassets wherever they desire.
Assuming the subject cryptoassets that are traded on the exchanges, alternative trading systems and secondary markets qualify as virtual assets under the VASP Act, such exchanges, alternative trading systems and secondary markets will have to apply for a licence with the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) if either of them qualifies as a virtual asset trading platform under the VASP Act, which is defined as: a centralised or decentralised digital platform — (a) which facilitates the exchange of virtual assets for fiat currency or other virtual assets on behalf of third parties for a fee, commission, spread or other benefit; and (b) which — (i) holds custody of or controls virtual assets on behalf of its clients to facilitate an exchange; or (ii) purchases virtual assets from a seller when transactions or bids and offers are matched in order to sell them to a buyer, and includes its owner or operator, but does not include a platform that only provides a forum where sellers and buyers may post bids and offers and a forum where the parties trade in a separate platform or in a peer-to-peer manner.
If the exchanges, alternative trading systems or secondary markets are licensed with CIMA as virtual asset trading platforms, each of them would be subject to various restrictions and obligations stipulated, among other things, under section 11 of the VASP Act, such as being restricted from providing financing to its clients for the purchase of virtual assets unless disclosures are made to clients regarding the terms of, and the risk of, the financing, and being obligated to carry out reasonable due diligence procedures on virtual assets and their issuers that are listed on the platform.
Alternatively, the exchanges, alternative trading systems and secondary markets for cryptoassets may otherwise have to be registered or licensed with CIMA if its business activity constitutes any virtual asset service under the VASP Act.
At the same time, the exchanges, alternative trading systems and secondary markets for cryptoassets may be regulated by the Securities Investment Business Act (SIBA) if the subject cryptoassets fall within the definition of securities under the SIBA, and if they are engaged in certain securities investment business, which would mandate the registration or licensing with CIMA.
Furthermore, if the business of exchanges, alternative trading systems and secondary markets for cryptoassets falls within one of the relevant financial businesses under the Proceeds of Crime Act, they will be required to comply with the AML and KYC requirements under the AML Regulations, which include, among other things, implementing client identification and verification, record-keeping, and internal reporting and control procedures.
Custody
How are cryptoasset custodians regulated?
Assuming the cryptoassets that are the subject of the custody service of the relevant cryptoasset custodians qualify as virtual assets under the VASP Act, such custodians will have to apply for a licence with CIMA if either of them provides virtual asset custody service under the VASP Act, which is defined as ‘the business of safekeeping or administration of virtual assets or the instruments that enable the holder to exercise control over virtual assets’. If the custodians are licensed with CIMA to provide virtual asset custody service, each of them would be subject to various restrictions and obligations stipulated, inter alia, under section 10 of the VASP Act, such as being obligated to:
- maintain best technology practices relating to virtual assets held in custody;
- not encumber or cause any virtual asset to be encumbered, unless specifically agreed to by the beneficial owners of the virtual assets;
- ensure that all proceeds relating to virtual assets held in custody shall accrue for the benefit of the owner, unless otherwise agreed in writing;
- take such steps as may be necessary to safeguard the virtual assets held;
- have adequate safeguards against theft and loss; and
- enter into a custodial arrangement with the owner of a virtual asset, which includes the prescribed details set out in the VASP Act.
Furthermore, if the business of such cryptoasset custodians falls within one of the ‘relevant financial businesses’ under the Proceeds of Crime Act, they will be required to comply with the AML and KYC requirements under the AML Regulations, which include, among other things, implementing client identification and verification, record-keeping and internal reporting and control procedures.
Broker-dealers
How are cryptoasset broker-dealers regulated?
Assuming the broker-dealer business of the relevant cryptoasset broker-dealers involves cryptoassets that qualify as virtual assets under the VASP Act, it is likely that such broker-dealers will have to be registered with CIMA and be regulated accordingly because such broker-dealer business typically involves either one or a combination of the following virtual asset services: transfer of virtual assets, virtual asset custody service, or participation in and provision of financial services related to a virtual asset issuance or the sale of a virtual asset.
At the same time, the cryptoasset broker-dealers may be regulated by the SIBA if the subject cryptoassets fall within the definition of securities under the SIBA, and if they are engaged in certain securities investment business (which would be likely in terms of dealing in securities and/or arranging deals in securities), which would mandate the registration or licensing with CIMA.
Furthermore, if the business of such cryptoasset broker-dealers falls within one of the relevant financial businesses under the Proceeds of Crime Act, they will be required to comply with the AML and KYC requirements under the AML Regulations, which include, among other things, implementing client identification and verification, record-keeping and internal reporting and control procedures.
Decentralised exchanges
What is the legal status of decentralised cryptoasset exchanges?
Since the definition of ‘virtual asset trading platform’ under the VASP Act also covers those trading platforms with a decentralised nature, certain pieces of legislation and regulations, such as the VASP Act, the SIBA and the AML Regulations, may similarly apply to decentralised cryptoasset exchanges so long as the subject cryptoasset and business activities fall within the corresponding scopes.
Peer-to-peer exchanges
What is the legal status of peer-to-peer (person-to-person) transfers of cryptoassets?
Assuming the cryptoassets that are the subject of the peer-to-peer transfers qualify as virtual assets under the VASP Act, if such peer-to-peer transfers are conducted in the course of the relevant party’s business, such peer-to-peer transfers may constitute a virtual asset service with respect to transfer of virtual assets under the VASP Act, which renders the need to be registered with CIMA.
Similarly, a party of peer-to-peer transfers of cryptoassets may be regulated by the SIBA if the subject cryptoassets fall within the definition of securities under the SIBA, and if that party is engaged in certain ‘securities investment business’ (which would be likely in terms of dealing in securities), which would mandate the registration or licensing with CIMA.
Furthermore, if such peer-to-peer transfers fall within one of the relevant financial businesses under the Proceeds of Crime Act, the relevant party will be required to comply with the AML and KYC requirements under the AML Regulations, which include, among other things, implementing client identification and verification, record-keeping, and internal reporting and control procedures.
Trading with anonymous parties
Does the law permit trading cryptoassets with anonymous parties?
In general, there are no legal restrictions on trading cryptoassets with anonymous parties, unless such trades are considered to be conducted in the course of business of the relevant party and the relevant party is considered to be providing the services of transfer of virtual asset under the VASP Act, and/or carrying out the relevant financial business under the AML Regulations, in which the relevant party will then be subject to certain due diligence requirements of the transaction parties and/or customers, hence making it difficult for a party to keep itself anonymous.
Foreign exchanges
Are foreign cryptocurrency exchanges subject to your jurisdiction’s laws and regulations governing cryptoasset exchanges?
In general, the location of domicile of a foreign cryptocurrency exchange does not affect whether Cayman Islands’ laws and regulations may govern such exchange.
For the VASP Act, what matters is whether any virtual asset service is provided in or from within the Cayman Islands in the course of business, the affirmation of which will render the foreign cryptocurrency exchange to register or be licensed with CIMA.
In addition, the SIBA also does not differentiate between the treatment for varying locations of domicile of a foreign cryptocurrency, and what matters is the actual business activity conducted by the relevant exchanges and whether it is being conducted in or from within the Cayman Islands.
Under what circumstances may a citizen of your jurisdiction lawfully exchange cryptoassets on a foreign exchange?
From the perspective of Cayman Islands laws, there is generally no legal restriction or requirement on how a citizen of the Cayman Islands is required to exchange cryptoassets on a foreign exchange.
Do any tax liabilities arise in the exchange of cryptoassets (for both other cryptoassets and fiat currencies)?
There is generally no Cayman Islands tax liability for the exchange of cryptoassets.
This publication is not intended to be a substitute for specific legal advice or a legal opinion. For specific legal advice on the subject matter of this Briefing, please contact your usual Loeb Smith attorney or any of the following:
E: gary.smith@loebsmith.com
E: robert.farrell@loebsmith.com
E: elizabeth.kenny@loebsmith.com
E: vanisha.harjani@loebsmith.com
E: kate.sun@loebsmith.com
E: vivian.huang@loebsmith.com
E: faye.huang@loebsmith.com
Megatrends

Share
Loeb Smith ranked by Lexology as Legal Influencers Q1 2025 for Private client – Central and South America for Cayman Islands law and BVI law related topics! 🥳🎉
Follow us to stay updated or catch up with the latest articles and legal insights on this link: https://www.loebsmith.com/news/

We are very pleased to share that our law firm has been ranked again as one of the HONG KONG FIRMS TO WATCH (2025) by Asian Legal Business.
Visit ALB to read the announcement:
https://www.legalbusinessonline.com/features/rankings-alb-hong-kong-firms-watch-2025

We are excited to be shortlisted once again in the “Best offshore law firm” and “Best offshore law firm – client service” categories for the With Intelligence HFM Asia Services Awards 2025!

Last year we won the “Best offshore law firm – client service” award and had a fantastic time celebrating with friends and other professionals at the With Intelligence HFM Asia Services Awards evening.
It is a pleasure working with clients and professional parties in #HongKong, mainland #China #SouthKorea #Japan and other parts of Asia to advise on investment funds employing varying strategies to invest in all asset classes.
Being shortlisted in 2025 is industry recognition of our expertise in the investment funds sector and our long-term commitment to delivering outstanding client service.
With offices in Hong Kong, British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands, our integrated business model combined with our far-reaching approach to innovation and client service, enables us to meet the ever-evolving needs of clients and grow alongside them through sustainable partnerships.
Overview
Juliette was admitted as a solicitor in 2016 to the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia and has since gained experience as an in-house and private practice financial services lawyer. She joined Loeb Smith’s Grand Cayman office in 2025 as a Senior Associate Corporate and Investment Funds team. Juliette’s practice areas include corporate and commercial, investment funds, financial services regulation with a particular focus on alternative investments (e.g. hedge funds, private equity and digital assets). Juliette regularly advises clients throughout fund lifecycle including formation and launch of both Cayman funds and Australian funds of all asset types and regulatory compliance matters.
Latest Updates and News
INSIGHTS | 08 June 2026
Tokenised investment funds in the Cayman Islands: new benefits and old rules
Some time ago, the tokenisation of assets moved beyond the experimental stage in the context of investment funds in the Cayman Islands. What perhaps began as a niche exercise in representing interests on a blockchain is increasingly being proposed by mainstream sponsors as a way to broaden distribution,…
INSIGHTS | 05 June 2026
Wahaha ruling underscores benefits of lifetime offshore trusts
Families and businesses in Hong Kong, mainland China and across Asia have long used BVI or Cayman corporate vehicles as holding entities for their businesses and assets.
INSIGHTS | 05 June 2026
Cayman Islands – Cryptoassets and Blockchain (part 2)
Fiat currency transactions – What rules and restrictions govern the exchange of fiat currency and cryptoassets?
INSIGHTS | 04 June 2026
Cayman Islands – Cryptoassets and Blockchain (part 1)
What legal framework governs cryptoassets? Is there specific legislation governing cryptoassets and businesses transacting with cryptoassets?
INSIGHTS | 21 May 2026
Voidable Transactions in the British Virgin Islands
In certain circumstances, the liquidator of a British Virgin Islands (“BVI”) company may be able to set aside certain transactions which took place in the lead up to the company’s liquidation. It is important for those concerned with the affairs of a BVI company that they are aware…



