The state of crypto regulation in French Polynesia

French Polynesia is at a turning point in its financial history 🌊. The rise of cryptocurrency and decentralized finance is pushing the territory to define its own path — balancing public protection and innovation. But one question remains: does the Fenua really want to apply the European MiCA regulation ? The answer is no — at least not without local adaptation. 🤔

1. A legal framework still under French influence 🇫🇷

French Polynesia is a self-governing overseas collectivity, but currency, finance, and market regulation still fall under the authority of the French State. In theory, whenever a new law or ordinance affects these areas, it can be extended to French Polynesia — provided the territory gives its consent.

In recent years, crypto-assets have entered both European and French legislation: anti-money laundering (AML/CFT), PSAN registration rules, and finally the MiCA regulation adopted in Brussels in 2023. The goal ? To better supervise crypto players and protect investors.

But in October 2024, the Assembly of French Polynesia clearly stated that it did not wish to apply these texts without prior local reflection. Two draft ordinances were submitted by the French State for review:

• one on reinforcing AML/CFT obligations for crypto-asset transfers;
• and one on crypto-asset markets, meant to extend the MiCA framework.

Result: the Assembly issued a negative opinion on these automatic extensions.

2. Why French Polynesia said “no” to MiCA for now ⚖️

This refusal is not a rejection of regulation itself. It reflects a demand for clarity, accessibility, and adaptation.

The Assembly highlighted several key problems:

• The texts sent from Paris were too complex, with no consolidated version of the Monetary and Financial Code specific to the territory;
• There was no clear explanatory documentation provided;
• It is impossible to assess the real impact of these rules on the Polynesian economy and its local actors;
• The method used — simply copying hundreds of articles from the metropolitan Code — makes the law unreadable for local companies.

In short 🧾: the Fenua is not rejecting regulation, it is refusing to apply it blindly. The goal is to obtain a framework that is understood, adapted, and coherent with the realities of island life.

This position marks a strong difference: French Polynesia doesn’t want to be just an administrative extension of mainland France — it wants to be a territory capable of adapting crypto to its own economic and cultural model.

3. Toward a tailor-made local framework 🌴

The message is clear: French Polynesia wants to participate in regulation, not just endure it.

In the short term, the local government could work toward:

• a partial transposition of European rules, adapted to the specific features of the territory;
• updating local obligations related to AML/CFT;
• creating an educational framework to inform citizens and entrepreneurs;
• strengthening cooperation with the State’s financial authorities to ensure compliance while maintaining autonomy.

For actors like Coinstancy 💎, this situation represents a genuine opportunity — to build a responsible model, aligned with international best practices but respectful of Polynesia’s unique identity.

The goal ? To build finance that is clear, accessible, and sustainable — where crypto innovation serves economic development rather than speculation. 🚀

Conclusion

French Polynesia doesn’t yet have its own crypto framework, but it is making its voice heard. By refusing to automatically apply the French ordinances related to MiCA, it sends a strong message: the law must be understood before it is imposed.

This choice opens the door to smarter, more relevant regulation — adapted to local realities and to the ambitions of Polynesian entrepreneurs. And Coinstancy intends to support this movement, putting transparency and education at the heart of its mission 🌺.
 

Frequently asked 🤔

Is cryptocurrency legal in French Polynesia ?

Yes ✅ Crypto-assets are legal. Residents can buy, hold, or trade them. What doesn’t yet exist is a complete local framework. French Polynesia applies some French standards but not the European MiCA regulation, which has not been approved for the territory.

Why did the Assembly oppose the application of MiCA ?

Because the text was too complex and ignored local specificities. The Assembly isn’t against regulation itself — it’s against applying a European framework without adaptation. It wants to help define clear, readable rules for local businesses and investors.

What risks does a crypto company face in Polynesia ?

For now, the main risks are legal and administrative: lack of a clear framework, uncertainty about obligations, and dependence on French law. This doesn’t make activity illegal, but it requires strong compliance and careful AML/CFT procedures.

Could the MiCA regulation apply later on ?

Yes, but only if French Polynesia gives a favorable opinion for a new extension. The territory could also decide to create its own regulatory framework, inspired by MiCA but simplified to fit local conditions.

What role can Coinstancy play in this transition ?

Coinstancy acts as a trusted player: informing, educating, and promoting transparency in crypto finance. In Polynesia, its role is to guide users and institutions toward a balanced model where innovation remains responsible 🌊.