Cuba vs Netherlands
Crypto regulation comparison
Cuba
Netherlands
Cuba's Central Bank issued Resolution 215/2021 recognizing virtual assets and establishing a licensing framework for virtual asset service providers (VASPs). The BCC evaluates and grants one-year licenses to VASPs. US sanctions limit access to international platforms but domestic crypto use is formally regulated.
The Netherlands has one of Europe's strictest crypto regulatory regimes. DNB has overseen VASP registration since 2020 under the Dutch AML/CFT Act (Wwft), and many applications have been rejected. The Netherlands does not tax realized capital gains directly; instead, crypto holdings are taxed under the Box 3 wealth tax based on a deemed return on net assets. The AFM oversees market conduct. MiCA is now the governing framework.
Key Points
- Resolution 215 (2021) allows central bank to license virtual asset service providers
- Central Bank licenses virtual asset service providers under Resolution 215
- VASPs must comply with AML/KYC requirements and report to the central bank
- US sanctions significantly limit access to international crypto platforms
- Government agencies may not use virtual assets without BCC authorization
Key Points
- DNB requires VASP registration under the Wwft (AML Act); rigorous approval process
- Only a limited number of VASPs have obtained DNB registration (many rejected or withdrawn)
- Crypto taxed under Box 3 wealth tax: deemed return on net assets taxed at ~31-36% (effective ~1.2-1.6%)
- AFM regulates crypto advertising and market conduct; banned crypto ads targeting retail in 2022
- MiCA framework applicable from December 2024, transitioning from national DNB regime