2025 was the year crypto regulation stopped being theoretical. The EU, the United States, and major Asia-Pacific markets all implemented comprehensive frameworks that transformed Travel Rule compliance from a regional concern into a global operational infrastructure. For VASPs, the question shifted from “if” to “how.”
But implementation surfaced a problem most regulators haven’t solved: how do you build systems that satisfy comprehensive compliance obligations while preserving the privacy expectations that define crypto markets? Traditional finance never faced this tension. Crypto can’t avoid it.
The EU’s Transfer of Funds Regulation went live on December 30, 2024. Zero threshold. Every crypto asset transfer across all 27 member states now requires complete originator and beneficiary information exchange. No exceptions.
By year-end 2025, ESMA counted 102 licensed Crypto Asset Service Providers operating under MiCA, including 12 credit institutions. The market split cleanly. Firms with robust compliance infrastructure expanded across the EU through passporting rights. Firms without it faced mounting operational costs and delayed market entry.
This wasn’t regulatory overreach — it was the EU establishing that compliance belongs at the foundation, not bolted on later. The firms that thrived built systems capable of handling zero-threshold requirements at scale. The firms that struggled treated Travel Rule compliance as a cost center to minimize. Wrong approach.
The United States followed a different path to similar conclusions. The GENIUS Act, signed July 18, 2025, created the first federal framework for payment stablecoins. The requirements: 1:1 reserve backing in high-quality liquid assets, strict disclosure, AML compliance under the Bank Secrecy Act’s $3,000 threshold. Treasury guidance made the subtext explicit: if you’re building stablecoin infrastructure, you’re building compliance infrastructure. Full stop.
The timing reflected market reality. The stablecoin market cap exceeded $250 billion. Transfer volumes surpassed Visa and Mastercard combined in 2024. Payment stablecoins have become a critical financial infrastructure. The GENIUS Act imposed banking-grade compliance requirements — but without the regulatory flexibility traditional banks enjoy around privacy frameworks. Stablecoin issuers face a challenge legacy finance never confronted: comprehensive compliance that assumes you’re a bank, privacy expectations that assume you’re not.
Asia-Pacific markets demonstrated that regulatory maturity doesn’t require identical approaches, but it does converge on similar principles. Hong Kong’s Stablecoin Ordinance took effect in August 2025. HKMA received over 70 expressions of interest. They’ll issue a handful of licenses. Singapore’s DTSP regime went live in June 2025. Japan selectively eased restrictions while maintaining rigorous custody requirements.
The pattern is clear: regulatory frameworks reward VASPs that invested in compliance infrastructure early. They penalize firms, treating it as a compliance tax. But these frameworks also surface the tension that will define 2026: comprehensive compliance requirements versus user privacy expectations.
Travel Rule implementation through 2025 exposed two problems that VASPs can’t solve individually.
First: interoperability. Chile activated Travel Rule obligations in July. Nicaragua earlier in the year. South Africa went live in 2025. Peru, Argentina, and multiple Middle Eastern jurisdictions target 2026. Brazil’s framework remains under consultation. Every jurisdiction implements on different timelines with different technical specifications. All expect seamless cross-border data exchange. The industry has built solutions such as TRUST, TRISA, and OpenVASP, but adoption remains uneven.
Second: privacy. And this one’s harder.
Travel Rule compliance requires collecting, storing, and transmitting PII about transaction originators and beneficiaries. This creates direct conflict with GDPR, with the privacy expectations that drove users to crypto, with blockchain’s pseudonymous architecture.
The EU’s zero-threshold requirement made this conflict explicit. Every transaction demands PII exchange. GDPR requires data minimization and purpose limitation. Travel Rule requirements push toward comprehensive data collection and extended retention. VASPs operating in Europe face regulatory obligations that pull in opposite directions.
Through 2025, VASPs made different bets. Some built centralized compliance databases aggregating transaction data across all users. Efficient for regulatory reporting. Also creates exactly the surveillance infrastructure that privacy frameworks discourage and users resist. Others implemented minimal compliance systems satisfying regulatory checkboxes while leaving themselves vulnerable to enforcement.
Neither approach solves the actual problem.
The VASPs navigating this successfully recognized something fundamental: privacy and compliance aren’t sequential concerns you address one after the other. They’re parallel design constraints. You either build systems that satisfy both simultaneously, or you build systems that fail at scale.
Peer-to-peer encrypted data exchange. Retention policies limited to regulatory compliance periods. Privacy-preserving compliance as technical architecture, not policy theater. These aren’t nice-to-have features. They’re the difference between sustainable operations and growing regulatory liability.
Jurisdictions that established frameworks in 2025 are moving to enforcement. The EU has issued over €540 million in fines since MiCA implementation. More than 50 firms lost licenses by February 2025. Licensing isn’t approval — it’s ongoing obligations with real consequences.
The jurisdictions implementing frameworks in 2026 — Peru, Argentina, the Middle Eastern, and Southeast Asian markets — are watching how early movers handled implementation. They’re studying which approaches create sustainable business environments rather than operational gridlock. More importantly, they’re watching how VASPs balance regulatory obligations with user privacy expectations.
2025 has settled whether Travel Rule compliance is necessary. 2026 will test whether it can be implemented without creating surveillance infrastructure that undermines crypto’s value proposition.
Technical solutions exist. Peer-to-peer encrypted data exchange eliminates intermediary storage vulnerabilities. Data minimization limits retention to regulatory requirements, not comprehensive user profiling. VASPs that invested in privacy-preserving approaches during 2025 positioned themselves well. VASPs that built centralized compliance databases are learning that efficiency gains don’t offset privacy liability.
Stablecoins make this tension acute. MiCA and the GENIUS Act both established strict obligations because stablecoins function as a payment infrastructure. VASPs facilitating stablecoin transfers face the same compliance expectations as traditional payment processors.
Here’s the difference: traditional payment rails were built without privacy expectations. Users accepted surveillance as the price of convenience. Crypto users didn’t make that trade. They expected pseudonymous transactions, minimal data collection, and protection from state and corporate surveillance. Travel Rule requirements force a reckoning with these expectations. They don’t eliminate them.
The VASPs entering 2026 with a strategic advantage recognize that privacy and compliance aren’t opposing forces. They’re design constraints you satisfy simultaneously or fail to satisfy at all. The regulatory landscape will continue maturing. More jurisdictions will implement requirements. Enforcement will intensify.
But the defining question isn’t technical compliance. It’s whether the industry can build a compliance infrastructure that preserves the privacy principles that make digital assets valuable in the first place.
_____
Shyft Network powers trust on the blockchain and economies of trust. It is a public protocol designed to drive data discoverability and compliance in blockchain while preserving privacy and sovereignty. SHFT is the network’s native token and fuel.
Shyft Network facilitates the transfer of verifiable data between centralized and decentralized ecosystems. It sets the highest crypto compliance standard and provides the only frictionless Crypto Travel Rule compliance solution while protecting user data.
Visit our website to read more, and follow us on X (Formerly Twitter), GitHub, LinkedIn, Telegram, Medium, and YouTube.Sign up for our newsletter to keep up-to-date on all things privacy and compliance.
Book your consultation: https://calendly.com/tomas-shyft or email: [email protected]
