Stablecoin issuer / redeemer in Benin

Evidence fact bj.stablecoin.lack-of-specific-classification not found (may have been renamed).

To date, there is no specific legislation or regulatory framework in Benin or by the BCEAO that explicitly classifies stablecoins as e-money, payment tokens, or securities.

A stablecoin will normally meet the art. 2(2) definition of actif virtuel — 'la représentation numérique d'une valeur qui peut être échangée ou transférée par un procédé numérique' — and therefore falls inside the AML/CFT perimeter of Loi n° 2024-01. But the definition expressly excludes 'les représentations numériques des monnaies fiduciaires, titres et autres actifs financiers qui font l'objet d'une réglementation ou de dispositions réglementaires spécifiques', so the classification of a fiat-denominated or securities-backed stablecoin is not automatic. Outside AML, stablecoins are unclassified: the BCEAO has issued warnings, not a categorisation.

The BCEAO has consistently stated that these assets are not legal tender in the UEMOA zone and are not regulated by the central bank.

The most significant regulatory pronouncement is the BCEAO Communiqué N° 004/2020/RB du 29 janvier 2020 sur les monnaies virtuelles et crypto-actifs.

This communiqué warns financial institutions and the public about the risks associated with virtual currencies, including their speculative nature, lack of regulation, and potential use for illicit activities.

It explicitly states that these assets are not guaranteed by any central bank, are not legal tender, and carry significant risks for users.

None for stablecoins specifically. Since stablecoins are not recognized or regulated as a distinct financial product, there are no stipulated reserve requirements.

The relevant e-money regime is BCEAO Instruction n° 008-05-2015 du 21 mai 2015, whose requirements include prior agrément (art. 8), fully paid capital of 300,000,000 FCFA before agrément (art. 11), 100% backing of outstanding e-money (arts. 32-33) and redemption at nominal value on demand (art. 35). But there is no recognised pathway by which a crypto-asset is classified as monnaie électronique in the UEMOA: the instruction contains no reference to crypto-actifs, no issuer has been so authorised, and art. 2(2) of the uniform law defines actifs virtuels as a separate category excluding digital representations of fiat already subject to specific regulation.

No BCEAO instrument numbered « 002/2018/RB du 12 décembre 2018 » exists; the cited bceao.int URL returns HTTP 404 and the instrument does not appear in BCEAO's own index of payment-system texts. The instrument actually governing e-money issuance across the UMOA (including Benin) is Instruction n° 008-05-2015 du 21 mai 2015 régissant les conditions et modalités d'exercice des activités des émetteurs de monnaie électronique: art. 8 prior agrément by the Central Bank, art. 11 minimum capital 300,000,000 FCFA, art. 33 outstanding funds must permanently cover e-money in circulation, art. 35 redemption at nominal FCFA value.

No specific licensing regime for stablecoin issuers. As with reserve requirements, there is no framework for licensing an entity whose primary business is the issuance of stablecoins.

Correct that an e-money issuer must be licensed (agréé) by the BCEAO before operating, and that a decentralised privately issued stablecoin would not qualify without restructuring to fit the monnaie électronique definition — but the legal basis is art. 8 of Instruction n° 008-05-2015 du 21 mai 2015, not the non-existent « Instruction N° 002/2018/RB ». Art. 8: « aucune structure ou établissement ne peut exercer des activités d'émission de monnaie électronique, sans avoir été dûment agréé ou autorisé préalablement par la Banque Centrale. »

Not explicitly addressed for stablecoins. Given the unregulated status, there are no legally guaranteed redemption rights from the perspective of Benin's or the BCEAO's regulatory framework for privately issued stablecoins. Users engage with such assets at their own risk.

E-money redemption is indeed guaranteed, but by art. 35 of Instruction n° 008-05-2015 du 21 mai 2015, not by « Instruction N° 002/2018/RB ». Art. 35 requires « le remboursement des unités de monnaie électronique non utilisées ... à la valeur nominale en FCFA », exercised under the conditions of the holder contract required by art. 29 — i.e. redemption at par of unused units, rather than an unconditional 'at any time' right stated without reference to the contract.

The BCEAO is actively developing a retail central bank digital currency (CBDC) for the West African Economic and Monetary Union, currently referred to in official and media reports as the e‑CFA, but it remains in the development/launch phase rather than being a fully live, widely deployed currency.

The exploration of an e-CFA suggests the BCEAO recognizes the benefits of digital currencies for financial inclusion, efficiency, and potentially cross-border payments, but strictly within a central bank-controlled framework.

The introduction of an e-CFA could, over time, diminish the perceived utility or demand for private stablecoins within the formal financial ecosystem of the UEMOA, as the central bank would offer a trusted, regulated digital alternative to physical cash.

Not Legal Tender: Cryptocurrencies are not recognized as legal tender within the UEMOA zone.

No BCEAO or Beninese instrument prohibits banks, microfinance institutions or payment service providers from crypto-related activity. GIABA's May 2025 report states that 'no legal instrument has been adopted by Benin designed to regulate VA and VASP activities' and rates R.15 Non-Compliant. What exists is (a) BCEAO public warnings about unregulated crypto-actifs, and (b) Loi n° 2024-01 art. 58, a generally applicable prior-authorisation requirement for professional PSAV activity that is inoperative because no competent authority has been designated.

Legal Uncertainty: Activities are conducted in a regulatory grey area.

No Consumer Protection: There are no specific regulatory safeguards for clients using such services.

Correct that no crypto-custody-specific law exists, but it understates the AML position: Beninese AML/CFT law does not merely 'apply generally' to crypto — Loi n° 2024-01 art. 3(c) expressly lists prestataires de services d'actifs virtuels as assujettis, art. 2(44) covers exchange, transfer, custody/administration and issuance-related services, art. 23 imposes 10-year record retention, and art. 58 requires prior agrément. Suspicious transaction reports go to CENTIF-Bénin (the FIU; note that 'CENAREF' is the DRC's FIU, not Benin's). In practice supervision is absent: GIABA rates Benin Non-Compliant on R.15.

Article 17 of Loi n° 2024-01 du 20 fevrier 2024 requires reporting entities to identify the customer and to verify identity by means of documents, data or information from reliable and INDEPENDENT sources. Customer self-certification does not satisfy verification. The risk-based approach modulates the extent of measures, not the requirement of an independent source. The only material carve-out identified by GIABA is article 86 (certain online payment transactions where the account is held in Benin, another WAEMU state, or an equivalent third country).

Beneficial Ownership: Identify and take reasonable measures to verify the identity of the beneficial owner(s) of the customer.

Ongoing Monitoring: Conduct ongoing due diligence on the business relationship and scrutinize transactions to ensure they are consistent with the VASP's knowledge of the customer, their business, and risk profile.

Risk-Based Approach: Apply a risk-based approach, meaning enhanced due diligence (EDD) for higher-risk situations (e.g., customers from high-risk jurisdictions, politically exposed persons - PEPs, complex transactions) and simplified due diligence (SDD) for lower-risk situations.

No travel rule applies to virtual asset transfers in Benin. The originator/beneficiary information rules of the UMOA uniform law (arts. 39-47), carried into Loi n° 2024-01, are drafted for 'institutions financieres', which the law defines separately from prestataires de services d'actifs virtuels. GIABA's May 2025 follow-up report rates Benin Non-Compliant on Recommendation 15 ('no legal instrument has been adopted by Benin designed to regulate VA and VASP activities') and Partially Compliant on Recommendation 16 with no virtual-asset coverage at all.

Article 60 al. 1 of Loi n° 2024-01 du 20 fevrier 2024 requires reporting entities (assujettis) to report immediately to CENTIF sums, transactions or attempted transactions suspected of being proceeds of money laundering, terrorist financing, proliferation financing or a predicate offence. GIABA rates Benin Compliant on R.20. However it is not established that PSAV/VASPs are operative reporting entities in Benin: GIABA rates R.15 Non-Compliant and records that no legal instrument regulating VA/VASP activity has been adopted.

Evidence fact bj.aml.no-tipping-off-vasps-and-they not found (may have been renamed).

The retention period in Benin is TEN (10) years, not five. Article 23 of Loi n° 2024-01 du 20 fevrier 2024 requires reporting entities to keep, for ten years from the closure of accounts or the termination of the relationship, documents on customer identity, customer knowledge and risk profile, due diligence analyses and transactions. This mirrors art. 23 of the UMOA uniform law of 31 March 2023 ('dix ans, a compter de la cloture de leurs comptes').

Benin’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) is the Cellule Nationale de Traitement des Informations Financières (CENTIF). CENTIF is an administrative financial intelligence unit under the Minister of Finance, with financial and decision-making autonomy, responsible for receiving, analyzing, enriching and transmitting suspicious transaction reports and other relevant financial information to competent authorities for the purposes of combating money laundering and terrorist financing, and for coordinating and supporting national AML/CFT policy and strategy.

No Crypto-Specific Rate: There are no specific capital gains tax rates for cryptocurrencies in Benin.

Potential Interpretation: If the DGI were to view cryptocurrencies as a "movable asset" or a "financial instrument," any profits derived from their sale or exchange could theoretically be subject to general capital gains provisions.

Individual gains on movable property are not entirely untaxed in Benin: plus-values de cessions de valeurs mobilières fall within the impôt sur le revenu des capitaux mobiliers (IRCM, CGI art. 68). Beyond that, occasional disposals of ordinary movable property are not caught by a standalone capital gains tax, and habitual/professional trading is taxed as business income within the IRPP. Real-estate gains are taxed separately under the TPVI.

IS (Companies): The standard corporate income tax rate in Benin is generally 30%.