The Virtual Assets Act 2026 has legalised the sector, created the Pakistan Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority, and opened a formal path for banks to serve licensed virtual asset service providers under State Bank conditions. Far above a small administrative shift, it has marked the end of a long official pretence that crypto activity could be kept outside the room by refusing to name it.
Now, the pressure is to move quickly. The prime minister wants the regulatory system operational at speed. PVARA’s leadership has suggested that tens of millions of Pakistanis are already using digital assets, most of them outside formal oversight. Even if the number is treated with caution, the point can no longer be swept under the rug. For years, Pakistan has treated large parts of the digital economy as a moral suspicion. Virtual assets may reduce friction in remittances, give freelancers more reliable payment rails, widen access to certain forms of investment, and connect Pakistan’s young labour force to global financial networks. Remittances remain a national lifeline, with FY25 flows expected around $38 billion.
The first test, therefore, is not whether Pakistan can attract glossy memorandums, foreign exchanges, conference panels or photographs with global founders. The first test is whether the regulator can protect an ordinary depositor before the first scandal arrives. The law must begin with a prejudice; not against technology, but against power.
Gender must also be treated as a regulatory issue, not a development-sector footnote. Many women use digital wallets quietly because families control bank accounts, mobility, phones, documents or income. Virtual assets may give some women financial room. At the same time, they may also expose them to coercion, blackmail, theft, and informal family surveillance.
The tax angle needs equal care. If the state sees crypto only as a revenue opportunity, it will drive users back underground. Similarly, if it ignores taxation altogether, it will invite evasion and political backlash. The banking system, too, should not be allowed to treat this as a fee opportunity without responsibility. SBP has rightly placed conditions around licensed providers, segregated accounts and due diligence. Yet, conditions on paper do not amount to enforcement. At the end of the day, there is also a macroeconomic risk that also deserved to be seriously considered. Virtual assets cannot be allowed to become a parallel foreign-exchange market under a more fashionable name.
