TK Global OS — Regulatory notesCryptoasset licensing: United Kingdom, Kenya, Brazil

Working back from the deadline: a VASP licensing timeline for Kenya, Brazil and the UK

Cross Published 2026-08-27

Three dates, three different legal characters

Kenya, Brazil and the United Kingdom each have a 2026 date attached to virtual asset licensing. They are not the same kind of date. Treating them as interchangeable — three cut-offs to diarise — is the most common scheduling error we see, because only one of the three behaves the way firms assume.

The UK date does not close the gateway

This is worth stating plainly because the shorthand is everywhere. Regulation 52(5) of SI 2026/102 says, in terms, that a direction under paragraph (1) “does not prevent applications for a relevant cryptoasset permission being made outside the relevant application period”. Nothing closes on 28 February 2027. What ends on that date is eligibility for the regulation 53 saving — the provision that lets a firm keep operating on its existing basis while its application is determined.

The FCA says the same thing on its own page describing how the gateway will operate, and adds that it “will not expedite our assessment of a firm’s application to compensate for its late submission”. So a late applicant is not shut out; it is unprotected and un-prioritised, which in practice is bad enough. The accurate phrasing is that the window for the saving closes, not that the gateway closes.

One related caution. Summaries of the fallback regime in regulation 56 usually render it as “no new customers”. The regulation is drafted differently: regulation 56(3)(b) limits the exemption to what is necessary for the performance of a pre-existing contract, and regulation 56(4) defines a pre-existing contract by reference to a “relevant day”. The operative test is contract vintage, not customer novelty. If regulation 56 matters to your plan, read regulation 56 rather than a summary of it.

What actually sits on the critical path

In each regime the binding constraint is a document that cannot be produced quickly, and it is rarely the application form.

The dates that belong on the plan after the deadline

A licensing schedule that stops at the filing date is only half a schedule.

Building the schedule backwards

Take the filing date, subtract the lead time on the slowest document — audit, capital injection, or a policy set that needs board approval — and the resulting date is when the project actually had to start. Then add the post-filing dates above, because supervisory relationships begin at authorisation rather than ending there. Where a date is set by regulator direction rather than by the instrument, note that in the plan: directions can be revisited in a way that primary dates cannot. As at the date of this article we have found no extension or amendment to any of the three dates above.

The checklist behind this article

We publish a readiness checklist for each of the three regimes. Each item is cited to a rule, regulation or article number, every figure is marked as coming from the instrument or from reporting of it, and questions the instruments leave open are marked as open rather than guessed: Kenya, USD 79, Brazil, USD 79, United Kingdom, USD 149. Updated editions are free as each position develops.

If your critical path is clear and you simply need the document list, the checklist for your market is enough on its own. If you are in more than one of these regimes at once, or you cannot tell which filing date binds first, the 48-hour gap check looks at your specific situation and comes back with the sequence.

Get the note when something actually changes

The UK gateway, Kenya's VASP Act and Brazil's BCB regime. Only when a rule, date or figure moves — and primary sources are always marked separately from press reporting.

More on Cross