Key points for market participants include:

• A “substance over form” model.The BMA proposes to regulate tokenised assets according to their economic and functional characteristics, rather than the fact that distributed ledger technology is used. This is important for structures that may sit across the Investment Business Act, Investment Funds Act, Digital Asset Business Act and Digital Asset Issuance Act.
• A harmonised definition of “tokenised investment”.The BMA proposes a single definition, introduced through the Investment Business Act and cross-referenced across other regimes. The proposed definition covers an investment represented in digital form using DLT, whether as a “digital twin” of an existing off-chain asset or as a “native token” existing solely on a distributed ledger.
• Digital twins and native tokens are treated differently, but within one framework.The BMA uses this distinction for operational and supervisory purposes, not to create separate regimes. Digital twins require attention to the link between the off-chain asset and the on-chain token, including title, asset verification, reconciliation and enforceability. Native tokens, by contrast, do not require the same off-chain asset verification or reconciliation because the token ledger is intended to be the definitive ownership record.
• Three functional roles drive the proposed obligations.The framework distinguishes between Primary Tokenisers, Secondary Offerors and Custodians. Primary Tokenisers are responsible for issuance, legal structuring, technical implementation and maintaining the integrity of the tokenised asset. Secondary Offerors facilitate access to, or trading in, already-created tokenised assets, including through broker-dealer, asset management or trading venue models. Custodians safeguard tokens and, for digital twins, may also safeguard the underlying assets.
• Cross-regime relief is paired with cross-regime controls.The BMA proposes tailored exemptions to reduce duplicative licensing where risks are already addressed under one framework. At the same time, it proposes extending the Digital Asset Business (DAB) Operational Cyber Risk Management Code of Practice to all entities involved in tokenisation and applying the DAB Custody Code of Practice to all entities providing custody for tokenised assets.
• Tokenised funds receive bespoke treatment.The BMA recognises that tokenised fund units may look like native tokens where the register is on-chain, but the fund’s NAV is still derived from off-chain portfolio assets. The consultation therefore proposes a tailored approach that preserves the existing investor protection framework for funds while addressing tokenisation-specific operational risks. The BMA is also considering amendments to allow fund registers to exist purely on-chain and to require disclosures on smart contract functionality, upgrade mechanisms, technology risks and service provider responsibilities.
• Fractionalisation is not intended to dilute eligibility rules.The BMA states that tokenisation should not be used to make restricted fund products available to investors who would not otherwise meet the applicable eligibility criteria.

Stakeholders are invited to submit comments to the BMA by the close of business on 30 June 2026. Responses received will inform any subsequent legislative amendments, guidance notes, or further regulatory action.

The Consultation paper can be found here.

For additional context on the proposed regulatory framework for asset tokenisation, refer to the Stakeholder Letter, available here