Nigeria’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has proposed a minimum capital requirement of ₦2 billion each for Digital Asset Exchanges (DAXs) and Digital Asset Custodians (DACs) as part of a broader regulatory framework for the country’s digital and virtual asset market.
The proposed requirement is contained in the SEC’s Rules on Digital and Virtual Assets Operations, Custody and Markets, which establish capital, registration, conduct, custody and supervisory requirements for businesses operating in Nigeria’s digital-asset ecosystem.
Under the proposed framework, the ₦2 billion minimum capital threshold would apply to two of the most significant categories of digital-asset businesses: exchanges that facilitate secondary trading and custodians responsible for safeguarding digital assets and private keys on behalf of clients.
The SEC has proposed lower capital thresholds for other categories of digital-asset businesses. Digital Asset Platform Operators (DAPOs), Digital Asset Offering Platforms (DAOPs) and Real-World Asset Tokenisation Platforms (RATOPs) would each require a minimum capital of ₦500 million, while Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) would face a ₦200 million minimum capital requirement.
The proposed capital structure signals a differentiated regulatory approach based on the nature and potential risk of each digital-asset activity.
Emomotimi Agama, Director General of the Securities and Exchange Commission, is seen in the photo. Nigeria’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has proposed a minimum capital requirement of ₦2 billion each for Digital Asset Exchanges (DAXs) and Digital Asset Custodians (DACs) as part of a broader regulatory framework for the country’s digital and virtual asset market.
Under the proposed rules, a Digital Asset Exchange is defined as a platform facilitating the secondary trading of digital or virtual assets through order books, matching engines, automated mechanisms or similar systems. A Digital Asset Custodian, meanwhile, is responsible for holding, safeguarding, administering or controlling digital assets or private keys on behalf of another person.
₦2bn threshold for exchanges and custodians
Under the proposed rules, a Digital Asset Exchange is defined as a platform facilitating the secondary trading of digital or virtual assets through order books, matching engines, automated mechanisms or similar systems. A Digital Asset Custodian, meanwhile, is responsible for holding, safeguarding, administering or controlling digital assets or private keys on behalf of another person.
The higher capital requirement for these two categories comes alongside extensive operational and risk-management obligations.
For exchanges, the rules require client assets to be segregated from the exchange’s own assets and those of parent companies, affiliates and service providers. Exchanges are also prohibited from using client assets for their own benefit or for purposes outside authorised client deposit, trading, settlement or withdrawal instructions.
The proposed framework also restricts the custody activities that a DAX can perform directly. Where custody extends beyond incidental hot-wallet operations, the exchange may be required to use a separately registered Digital Asset Custodian or obtain full custodian registration.
For custodians, the rules require the legal segregation of client assets from proprietary assets and assets belonging to affiliated entities. Custodians must also maintain separate wallets or equivalent internal ledgering systems to ensure accurate attribution of client holdings.
80% of client assets to be held in cold storage
The SEC’s proposed rules also introduce a significant custody safeguard, requiring Digital Asset Custodians to maintain at least 80% of client digital or virtual assets in cold storage, unless the Commission prescribes another percentage.
Assets held in hot or warm wallets would be limited to amounts reasonably required for withdrawals, settlement, transaction processing or other operational purposes, with additional controls around wallet limits, monitoring, reconciliation and access.
Custodians would also be subject to strict cryptographic key-management requirements, including multi-party controls, segregation of duties, restricted access and recovery arrangements.
The framework further requires multi-signature or equivalent controls for material transactions and seeks to prevent a single person or single point of failure from being able to initiate or authorise significant transactions.
Registration fees also rise
Beyond the capital requirement, the proposed rules establish significant registration and supervisory fees.
DAXs, DACs, DAPOs, DAOPs and RATOPs would each pay a ₦30 million registration fee, alongside a ₦100,000 processing fee and ₦300,000 application fee.
VASPs would pay a ₦15 million registration fee, in addition to the same ₦100,000 processing and ₦300,000 application fees.
The rules would also impose recurring supervisory charges linked to adjusted turnover.
A DAX operating under the SEC’s Accelerated Regulatory Incubation Programme (ARIP) would pay 0.015% of adjusted turnover, while other entities under ARIP would pay 0.0075%.
Following full registration, DAXs would pay a supervisory fee of 0.025% of adjusted turnover, while other regulated entities would pay 0.015%.
The SEC says it may review these supervisory fees after 12 months of implementation and periodically thereafter, taking into account market development, transaction volumes, supervisory costs, investor protection, market integrity, financial stability and the competitiveness of Nigeria’s digital-asset ecosystem.
SEC proposes phased route to full registration
The proposed framework would not require every prospective operator to immediately obtain full registration.
The rules establish an Accelerated Regulatory Incubation Programme (ARIP) as a transitional framework through which eligible digital-asset businesses can operate under approval-in-principle, restricted-scope or enhanced-supervision arrangements pending full registration.
Except where otherwise approved, entities seeking registration would initially apply through ARIP. Successful applicants could receive approval-in-principle valid for two years, although such approval would not constitute full registration as a capital-market operator.
The SEC would subsequently assess whether an applicant has demonstrated the operational, financial, governance, technological and compliance capacity required for its proposed business before granting formal registration.
The rules also provide circumstances under which certain businesses may bypass ARIP, including existing capital-market operators adding digital-asset functions, fully registered digital-asset providers from IOSCO-member jurisdictions and qualifying subsidiaries of duly licensed financial institutions.
Rules extend beyond crypto exchanges
The proposed SEC framework covers a much broader range of digital-asset activities than cryptocurrency trading alone.
It applies to the issuance and offering of digital and virtual assets, tokenisation, trading, custody, transfer and settlement, as well as investment, advisory and financial services related to digital and virtual assets. Its scope covers entities operating in Nigeria, providing services to Nigerian residents or targeting Nigerian investors or the Nigerian market through digital channels.
The rules recognise several categories of regulated businesses, including DAXs, DACs, DAPOs, DAOPs, RATOPs and VASPs.
VASPs would be permitted to provide specific authorised services such as order execution and routing, transfer and settlement, on-ramp and off-ramp services, non-custodial wallet interfaces, staking and validator-related services, digital-asset lending and borrowing, yield-generating arrangements, portfolio management, investment advisory, placement and distribution services.
However, a VASP would only be permitted to provide services covered by its specific registration, approval or authorisation. It would also have to safeguard client assets and information, use registered custodians where applicable, maintain appropriate risk and cybersecurity controls and comply with AML/CFT/CPF, sanctions-screening and other financial-crime prevention requirements.
Stronger oversight of digital-asset transactions
The proposed rules would give the SEC expanded visibility into digital-asset operations.
Regulated entities could be required to provide the Commission with API-based or other electronic access to operational, transactional, financial, risk, wallet, custody, settlement and compliance data on a risk-based basis.
Businesses would also have to maintain systems capable of identifying and monitoring transactions involving Nigerian residents and cross-border digital-asset flows.
The proposed framework requires designated transaction wallets, accounts or equivalent mechanisms to distinguish domestic and cross-border flows and ensure that transactions into and out of Nigeria are traceable, auditable and attributable to identifiable users or counterparties.
Additional risk-based controls would apply to transfers involving self-hosted or unhosted wallets, high-risk jurisdictions, privacy-enhancing technologies, anonymity-enhanced assets and mixing or tumbling services.
24-hour incident reporting
The proposed framework would also tighten reporting obligations for digital-asset operators.
A regulated entity would be required to notify the SEC within 24 hours of a material change, material cyber incident, system failure, operational disruption, loss of client assets, data breach or other material event.
For material cyber incidents and certain other operational incidents, the rules require an initial notification within 24 hours and a detailed incident report within 48 hours, unless otherwise directed by the Commission.
The rules further require regulated entities to maintain complete and retrievable records, including client, transaction, wallet, custody, settlement, order, complaint, financial and compliance records, for at least seven years.
What proposal means for Nigeria’s digital-asset market
The proposed ₦2 billion minimum capital requirement for DAXs and DACs represents one of the most significant financial thresholds in the SEC’s proposed digital-asset regulatory architecture.
The differentiated capital structure places the highest financial requirement on businesses operating exchanges and custody infrastructure, while imposing progressively lower thresholds on platform operators, offering platforms, tokenisation platforms and VASPs.
The framework also combines capital requirements with custody safeguards, technology and cybersecurity controls, financial-crime compliance, transaction monitoring, regulatory access and ongoing supervisory fees.
Taken together, the proposed rules would move Nigeria’s digital-asset market towards a more formalised capital-market framework in which operators must demonstrate not only sufficient capital, but also the governance, technology, risk-management and client-asset protection capacity required to operate under SEC supervision.
Stay ahead with real-time reports, breaking news, and exclusive insights delivered directly to your phone. Don’t settle for outdated information. Join TECHNOLOGYTIMES NEWS on WhatsApp for 24/7 updates.
Super Falcons stars Rasheedat Ajibade and Jennifer Echegini have returned to Paris Saint-Germain training following their involvement with Nigeria at the 2026 Women’s Africa Cup of Nations (WAFCON).
Sport247 reports that the Nigerian duo rejoined their PSG teammates on Wednesday as the French club intensified preparations for their upcoming UEFA Women’s Champions League qualifying clash against Eintracht Frankfurt.
Both Ajibade and Echegini looked sharp during the training session, marking an important step in their transition back to club football after representing Nigeria on the continental stage.
Their return provides a significant boost to PSG as the club prepares for a demanding Champions League qualification fixture.
Ajibade has established herself as an important figure for both club and country, while Echegini has continued to develop her reputation as one of Nigeria’s exciting attacking midfielders.
The pair will now turn their attention back to PSG as they look to regain full match fitness and compete for places in the squad ahead of the new season.
PSG are scheduled to face Eintracht Frankfurt in the UEFA Women’s Champions League qualifiers on Thursday at 6:00pm.
The encounter will provide Ajibade and Echegini with an opportunity to make an immediate impact following their return from international duty, although the final decision on their involvement will rest with the PSG technical team.
Their presence could prove valuable for the French side as they begin their European campaign, with PSG targeting progression to the next stage of the competition.
For the Nigerian internationals, the fixture also represents the beginning of another demanding club season after a busy period with the Super Falcons.
Both players will be hoping to carry their international form into the PSG setup and play important roles as the French giants pursue success domestically and in Europe.
With Ajibade and Echegini back in the fold, PSG have welcomed two key Nigerian internationals back at a crucial stage of their preparations.
The focus now shifts to Frankfurt, where the Super Falcons duo could make their presence felt on the European stage once again.
The Presidency on Wednesday criticized former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar over what it described as a series of conflicting and unclear proposals regarding the management of petrol subsidies.
A statement signed byBayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President (Information & Strategy, noted that in a swift reaction to recent statements from Atiku and his media aides, the administration accused him of engaging in policy somersaults and political opportunism rather than offering a coherent economic strategy for the nation.
The criticism follows three contradictory stances issued by Atiku’s camp within a single week, ranging from a complete restoration and gradual phasing out of the subsidy to tying its removal strictly to local refining capacity. Demanding full transparency, the Federal Government challenged the former Vice-President to provide a realistic, costed framework explaining how his proposed “targeted subsidy” would be funded, who would benefit, and how it would avoid plunging the country back into severe fiscal distress.
The statement added that the latest comments by former Vice-President Atiku on petrol subsidy raise a fundamental question: is he seriously proposing an economic policy, or is he simply playing politics with the temporary discomfort Nigerians face?
The statement added that “Within a week, Nigerians have heard three different explanations of what an Atiku administration would do about petrol subsidy. The confusion has now become impossible to ignore.
First, Atiku’s spokesperson, Paul Ibe, said Atiku would restore petrol subsidy if elected president and later phase it out. Ibe described it as a temporary intervention intended to give Nigerians and businesses room to recover.
“Then came a clarification from another senior aide, Phrank Shaibu, who said Ibe’s statement was an “unauthorised and misleading characterisation” of Atiku’s position. According to Shaibu, Atiku would not set a predetermined date for ending the subsidy. Instead, it would remain until domestic refining expands, supply stabilises, competition deepens, and the market can deliver affordable prices without government support.
But just hours later, Atiku himself intervened and effectively overruled that clarification. He insisted that his position “has not changed” and that he would restore what he called a “targeted subsidy” if elected president. He also said, “I will restore targeted subsidy and put purchasing power back in the hands of Nigerians.”
This is not merely a matter of semantics. It is a serious policy contradiction.
If Atiku’s position has not changed, why did one of his principal aides say the subsidy would be temporary and phased out? Why did another senior aide have to publicly disown that explanation and introduce a completely different framework based on market conditions? And why did Atiku then step in to reaffirm the original position?
Nigerians deserve clarity, not policy by trial and error.
More fundamentally, Atiku’s argument appears to misunderstand the dynamics of the petroleum market. Petrol does not become cheap simply because government orders a subsidy or because competition is expected to emerge. Several factors, including international crude oil prices, exchange rates, refining costs, transportation, distribution, and other market costs, influence pump prices.
Competition can improve efficiency and margins, but it cannot magically insulate Nigeria from global crude oil prices or other input costs.
There is also a troubling oversimplification in Atiku’s argument that “when fuel rises, transport rises. When transport rises, food rises. When food rises, families suffer.” Of course, energy and transportation costs affect food prices. But petrol prices alone have never caused food inflation. Nigerians experienced rising food prices even during the years when petrol subsidy was in place.
Agricultural productivity, insecurity, exchange rates, logistics, storage, flooding, input costs, money supply and supply constraints also matter. A serious economic programme must address these factors, as President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been doing for the past three years, rather than reduce the entire cost-of-living crisis to petrol prices.
We therefore urge Atiku to stop shifting positions and explain precisely what he means by “targeted subsidy”: how much will it cost, who will benefit, how will beneficiaries be identified, how will it be funded, and what objective economic conditions will determine its eventual termination?
Nigerians cannot afford another opaque and potentially costly subsidy regime dressed up in new language.
The former vice-president should be honest with Nigerians: either he has a coherent, costed, and workable petroleum policy, or he is simply playing politics with a policy that has significantly restored fiscal health to the three tiers of government and stabilised the macroeconomic environment.
The economy is too serious for policy somersaults, incoherence, destructive populism and election gimmicks.
Atiku says his subsidy will follow the barrel of crude. Is he aware that refined petrol only constitutes 45 per cent of the by-products of a refined barrel of crude? A barrel yields other products, such as aviation fuel, kerosene, and diesel, which were deregulated many years ago.
Diesel, which the Obasanjo-Atiku administration deregulated in 2004, accounts for roughly 25% of the barrel. Jet Fuel and Kerosene make up about 9% of the barrel. Kerosene and jet fuel were deregulated in 2009, and subsidies removed in 2016.
About 10% to 15% of the barrel creates base ingredients for synthetic rubber, nylon, polyester, and plastics used in everyday goods like toothbrushes, cups, and packaging.
Asphalt makes up about 2% to 4% of the barrel. Hydrocarbon Gas Liquids (HGL), like propane and butane, make up about 4%. Lubricants and Waxes constitute about 1% to 2%. Petroleum coke and sulfur form the solid residue left from refining.
Will Atiku subsidise all these by-products of the barrel as well, since kerosene is used by the underprivileged to cook, and many homes and factories use diesel to power generators and delivery trucks? And will he allow the refineries he will supply discounted crude oil to profit from 55 per cent of the by-products, while focusing subsidy only on petrol, his obsession?
The former Vice President is definitely suffering from a lack of basic understanding of his newfound policy prescription.