GoTyme gives the crypto coalition added weight
CATASTROPHE already included several major players in the local ecosystem. GoTyme’s arrival nevertheless changes the picture. A regulated bank is now joining crypto platforms in challenging certain provisions proposed by the Treasury and the South African Reserve Bank.
BrefCrypto had already detailed the opposition to South Africa’s cross-border crypto restrictions. GoTyme is essentially making the same argument: comparable financial activity should receive comparable regulatory treatment, regardless of the technology used.
“This is not a position against crypto regulation,” GoTyme spokesperson Pontsho Ramontsha told TechCentral. The bank instead believes that the rules should be consistent and risk-based, rather than determined by the technological label attached to the payment.
The support is no longer marginal. Farzam Ehsani, VALR’s chief executive, recently said that the campaign had brought together 203 organizations and 5,677 people.
GoTyme also has a strategic interest in this development. Its sister bank in the Philippines already offers the purchase and sale of Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana and other assets through its banking app. The activity is locally regulated as a virtual asset service.
The boundary between banking and crypto is therefore no longer particularly clear for the group.
Self-custody becomes a one-way street
The proposed South African regulation is based on a fairly simple logic: the authorities want to be able to monitor capital movements when they pass through cryptocurrencies.
The official Crypto Asset Manual draft published by the SARB notably considers a transfer between a crypto service provider authorized in South Africa and a foreign platform to be cross-border, as well as a transfer from a local provider to certain non-custodial wallets.
For businesses, the proposal is particularly restrictive. At this stage, only individuals would be able to move certain crypto assets offshore through licensed providers within the limits set by their foreign-exchange allowances. Resident companies would not have the same option for transactions treated as capital imports or exports.
CATASTROPHE is also challenging another provision: an individual could transfer assets from a regulated South African exchange to their personal wallet, while the reverse route would be considered impermissible in certain circumstances.
In other words, crypto assets could leave the regulated environment far more easily than they could return.
That is precisely the paradox highlighted by the coalition. Regulation designed to improve traceability could push more funds toward offshore platforms and trading outside local channels.
The SARB is focused on a different concern. Because crypto assets are inherently cross-border, they can facilitate the circumvention of capital controls. The stated objective is therefore to limit regulatory arbitrage and enable Financial Surveillance to better identify illicit flows.
The texts are still not final.
Stablecoins make the debate far more urgent
This debate would have carried far less weight if South African crypto payments had not already increased by 176%. That is no longer the case.
BrefCrypto recently reported that nearly 27 billion rand in USDT had circulated across three major South African platforms in the year ending in April 2026. The country meanwhile had approximately 310 licensed crypto providers at the end of March.
Stablecoins make the regulatory equation particularly complex. A company can receive a conventional bank dollar from abroad through a bank, or receive the equivalent in USDT within minutes on a blockchain. Economically, the payment may serve the same purpose. Legally, the channel changes everything.
GoTyme’s position is precisely that this difference should not automatically lead to a ban on the second channel.
The bank also warns that overly restrictive regulation could produce the opposite of the intended effect. Users would not necessarily stop using crypto. They might simply move to foreign platforms that are less visible to South African authorities.
The issue becomes even more interesting when looking at the Philippines. GoTyme already holds a Virtual Asset Service Provider license there and directly offers eleven cryptocurrencies as well as PAX Gold through its app. External transfers are currently blocked for this product: everything remains within the GoTyme ecosystem.
This experience shows at least one thing: a bank within the group already knows how to integrate crypto into a regulated environment.
South Africa must now determine how far it wants to allow the same convergence.
The public consultation on the Crypto Asset Manual ends on September 30, 2026. The SARB itself has stated that its approach remains subject to change after reviewing the comments received.
