Open
Consultation Paper No. AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0005 from 15 July 2026 on Targeted Amendments to the AIFC Rules
Please, press "PDF" button above to download a Consultation Paper.
INTRODUCTION
Why are we issuing this Consultation Paper (CP)?
The Astana Financial Services Authority (AFSA) has issued this Consultation Paper (CP) to seek views on proposed targeted amendments to the AIFC Rules relating to Captive Insurance, protection of Client Assets, and Islamic finance.
Who should read this CP?
The proposals in this paper will be of interest to Captive Insurers, Authorised Firms who hold or control Client Investments, Provide Custody, Authorised Firms conducting Islamic Financial Business, and any other interested stakeholders.
Terminology
Defined terms have the initial letter of the word capitalised, or of each word in a phrase. Definitions are set out in the AIFC Glossary (GLO). Unless the context otherwise requires, where capitalisation of the initial letter is not used, the expression has its natural meaning.
What are the next steps?
We invite comments from interested stakeholders on the proposed amendments. All comments should be in writing and sent to the email specified below. When sending your comments by email, please use “Consultation Paper AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0005” in the subject line. You may, if relevant, identify the organisation you represent when providing your comments. The AFSA reserves the right to publish, including on its website, any comments you provide, unless you expressly request otherwise. Comments supported by reasoning and evidence will be given more weight by the AFSA.
The deadline for providing comments on the proposed amendments is 15 September 2026. Once we receive your comments, we shall consider if any refinements are required to this proposal.
Following the public consultation, we may proceed with making relevant changes to the AIFC Acts as appropriate to reflect the points raised in the consultation. You should not act on the proposals until the amendments are enacted.
The AFSA prefers to receive comments by email at consultation@afsa.kz.
Structure of this CP
Part I – Background
Part II – Proposals relating to Captive Insurance
Part III – Proposals relating to protection of Client Assets
Part IV – Proposals relating to Islamic finance
Part V – Public Consultation Questions
Annex 1 – Proposed Targeted Amendments to the AIFC Rules
PART I – BACKGROUND
1. Through supervisory engagement and its ongoing iterative review of the AIFC regulatory framework, the AFSA has identified a number of gaps, inconsistencies, and areas where clarification is required. While these issues do not warrant a comprehensive review of the relevant frameworks, they require targeted amendments to enhance regulatory clarity and support effective supervision. Rather than deferring such changes until a broader review is undertaken, the AFSA considers it appropriate to address them through timely and focused amendments to the relevant AIFC Acts.
2. Accordingly, the AFSA has brought these proposals together in a single consolidated policy project introducing targeted amendments across a number of AIFC Acts. This approach allows separately identified issues to be considered through a coordinated policy process, promotes consistency in the development of the regulatory framework, and facilitates the implementation of targeted improvements.
3. The proposals in this Consultation Paper cover three key areas of the AIFC regulatory framework: captive insurance, protection of Clients’ Assets, and Islamic finance.
PART II – PROPOSALS RELATING TO CAPTIVE INSURANCE
Clarification of “Group” Definition for Captive Insurers
Policy issue
4. While the presence of captive insurers demonstrates the growing diversity of the AIFC's insurance market, a discrepancy exists regarding the classification of Captive Insurers. Under PINS 14.1.1-1, the classification of such entities relies on a general understanding of the "group" concept. This creates legal ambiguity and interpretational conflicts when determining whether an insurer’s business qualifies as "captive" or if the company must operate under the more stringent general insurance requirements. This ambiguity presents a specific regulatory risk: because captive insurers benefit from lower capital and operational requirements, the absence of a link to a strictly codified definition of a "Group" leads to potential regulatory arbitrage.
5. To resolve these issues, the AFSA looked to the benchmarks of the DIFC and ADGM. In the DIFC GLO, the term "Parent" is clearly defined as a "Holding Company". This definition is then backed by the DIFC Companies Law, which provides the specific qualifiers, such as owning the majority of shares or controlling the board, needed to prove a parent-subsidiary relationship. The AIFC legal framework is structured in a similar manner, yet it lacks the necessary connectivity between the AIFC Acts. Currently, GLO defines a "Holding Company" (by reference to the AIFC Companies Regulations) as a "holding Body Corporate that is a Company." However, there is no explicit link to the definition of “Group”, “Parent”, or “Subsidiary” in the classification of Captives in PINS and between the term "Parent" and "Holding Company" in GLO.
Policy proposal
6. It is proposed to introduce a new provision in PINS 10, which governs all insurers that are members of Groups, establishing an authoritative and codified definition of “Group” for the purposes of the entire PINS rulebook. Under proposed PINS 10.1.1-1, “Group” is defined as a group of entities which includes a first entity and: (a) any Parent of the first entity; and (b) any Subsidiaries, direct or indirect, of the Parent or Parents of the first entity. “Parent” is defined as a Holding Company, with the definition of Holding Company drawn from GLO by reference to the AIFC Companies Regulations as a holding Body Corporate that is a Company. This connects the Group concept to objective, codified criteria: majority voting rights, board appointment or removal rights, and contractual control of voting rights, as established in the AIFC Companies Regulations.
Captive Insurance Definitional Inconsistencies
Policy issue
7. There is an inconsistency between the GLO and PINS definitions of Captive Insurers. While PINS defines a Captive Insurer by reference to the class system, the GLO retains the original broad, unclassified formulation, under which a Captive Insurer is treated in effect as strictly an entity that insures only the business or operations of the Group to which it belongs. As a result, the two definitions operate independently and are capable of diverging in scope.
Policy proposal
8. It is proposed to resolve the inconsistency between the GLO and PINS definitions of Captive Insurers by converting the GLO definitions of Captive Insurance Business and Captive Insurer into cross-references to PINS. While PINS defines a Captive Insurer by reference to the class system, the GLO retains the original broad, unclassified formulation, under which a Captive Insurer is treated in effect as strictly an entity that insures only the business or operations of the Group to which it belongs.
9. Specifically, the GLO definition of Captive Insurance Business is amended to read “has the meaning given in PINS 14.1.2” and the GLO definition of Captive Insurer is amended to read “has the meaning given in PINS 14.1.1”. This ensures that the GLO cannot diverge from the PINS classification regime in the future, as both definitions now derive their content directly from PINS rather than operating independently.
PART III – PROPOSALS RELATING TO PROTECTION OF CLIENT ASSETS
Policy issue
10. The AIFC Conduct of Business Rules (COB) establish custody requirements designed to protect Client Assets (Money and Investments) held by Authorised Firms in the event of insolvency or an inability to fulfil obligations. The framework applies to firms that receive, hold, or control Money and Investments in connection with Investment Business, Providing Money Services, or Providing Custody, with certain provisions extending to firms on Arranging Custody. It already imposes due diligence obligations on Third Party Account Providers (COB 8.2.11 for Client Money and 8.3.8 for Client Investments) alongside record-keeping requirements (COB 8.2.20 and 8.3.15 respectively). Together, these provisions afford a considerable degree of asset identifiability.
11. The existing framework therefore provides a solid foundation for client asset protection. The review nonetheless identified three areas where it could be further strengthened: asset identifiability controls, external audit requirements, and crisis preparedness.
12. ESMA's 2016 consultation on omnibus accounts and asset segregation under AIFMD identified four pillars of effective client asset protection: independent legal advice on applicable insolvency laws and their recognition of segregated assets; accurate records of clients' rights and entitlements; frequent reconciliations; and due diligence on sub-custodians. Three of these four pillars are already embedded in the current COB framework. The fourth, independent legal advice, is not proposed for introduction at this stage: it is absent from peer jurisdictions' frameworks, and the re-introduction of the external audit requirement offers a proportionate alternative means of securing the underlying operational safeguards.
13. Peer jurisdictions informed each of three proposals. The DFSA’s COB requirement on assets being identified and controlled at all times. The DFSA's GEN 8.6 provides the model for the external audit requirement proposal. Finally, the crisis management planning requirements in the FCA's Client Assets Sourcebook (CASS) and the DFSA's equivalent provisions informed the Crisis Preparedness Pack proposal.
Policy proposals
Asset Identifiability Controls
14. To strengthen the asset identifiability dimension of the custody framework, the AFSA proposes to introduce a new obligation under COB 8.1.4. While the existing framework already affords a considerable degree of asset identifiability through its Third Party Account Provider and record-keeping requirements, the AFSA concluded that an explicit asset location requirement of the kind imposed on prime brokers by the FCA and FSRA would not be appropriate for the AIFC at this stage of market development. It is therefore proposed to introduce a new provision under COB 8.1.4 requiring Authorised Firms to maintain systems and controls for ensuring that Client Assets are always identifiable and secure.
External Audit Requirement for Client Assets
15. The AFSA further proposes to address the absence of a mandatory external audit requirement for Client Assets. To rectify this, it is proposed to introduce a requirement in GEN 6.3.9 (“Audit Reports”), obliging Authorised Firms to produce: a Client Money Auditor’s Report, in accordance with AUD Annex A; a Client Investments Auditor’s Report, in accordance with AUD Annex B; and an Insurance Intermediary Auditor’s Report, in accordance with AUD Annex C. This leads to consequential technical amendments to AUD and GLO, specifically updating AUD 9.2.1 and relevant GLO definitions to connect them to GEN 6.3.9, thereby closing the reference loop.
Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack
16. To strengthen firms’ preparedness for insolvency and resolution scenarios, the AFSA proposes to introduce a dedicated Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack requirement. Proposed new provisions under COB 8.1.6, 8.2.4 and 8.3.4 would require Authorised Firms to prepare and maintain a dedicated Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack (“the Pack”). The Pack would consolidate key information necessary to identify, recover, and return Client Assets in crisis scenarios such as insolvency. Its contents would include, among other things, a master document containing information sufficient to retrieve each component of the Pack, a comprehensive master list of all Client Accounts, records of the most recent reconciliations, details of Third Party Account Providers, and copies of the firm’s Client Asset policies and procedures. The Pack is designed to enable relevant stakeholders, including insolvency practitioners, accountants, legal advisers, and the AFSA, to act swiftly and efficiently in crisis situations.
17. In terms of scope, it is acknowledged that where an Authorised Firm merely controls Client Assets held in the client’s own name, those assets do not require return in a crisis and accordingly the Pack requirement would not apply in such cases. Recognising the operational effort required to compile the Pack, a transitional period is proposed to allow Authorised Firms sufficient time to meet the new obligation.
18. In connection with the proposed amendments in relation to “the Pack”, it is also proposed to introduce an associated requirement for Authorised Firms to maintain a comprehensive master list of all Client Accounts, covering both Client Money and Client Investments, including key details such as account name, number, location, status, and relevant opening or closure dates. This list must be properly documented and retained for a minimum of six years following the closure of each account.
PART IV – PROPOSALS RELATING TO ISLAMIC FINANCE
Amendments to IBB Chapter 13 for Restricted Profit-Sharing Investment Accounts (RPSIAs)
Policy issue
19. While the AIFC has established a foundational Islamic finance framework with a growing number of market participants, the AFSA has identified a regulatory gap in the treatment of Restricted Profit-Sharing Investment Accounts (RPSIAs) under IBB. In particular, while IBB contains detailed provisions governing Unrestricted Profit-Sharing Investment Accounts (UPSIAs), equivalent provisions applicable to RPSIAs are absent from the existing framework, creating regulatory and supervisory uncertainty. The proposed amendments to IBB Chapter 13 address this gap.
Policy proposal
20. Since the AFSA does not have a separate rulebook equivalent to QFC’s Investment Advisory Rules (INMA), it is proposed to incorporate provisions relevant to RPSIAs under the existing Profit-Sharing Investment Account provisions in IBB, while also clarifying the scope of existing regulations. In developing this approach, the AFSA drew on the frameworks adopted by the QFC.
21. Four specific amendments are proposed: (1) clarification of the chapter’s applicability scope to RPSIAs; (2) a requirement to comply with AAOIFI FAS 30 and 35, which superseded FAS 11; (3) a fund segregation requirement; and (4) a provision on periodic statements interval.
22. It is first proposed to clarify that Chapter 13 of the IBB also applies to an Islamic bank (including broker-dealers as per the application of IBB) in its capacity as manager of a Restricted PSIA. An Islamic bank that manages a Restricted PSIA must comply with all applicable provisions of the Chapter, with the specific requirements set out in IBB 13.6(2), 13.7(n), and 13.10(2), except for specific banking requirements starting from IBB 13.11 to 13.20.
23. In line with the approach taken in QFC, it is proposed to introduce a requirement for firms Managing an RPSIA to comply with AAOIFI FAS 30 and 35, which superseded FAS 11. FAS 30 addresses the recognition and measurement of impairment and credit losses on Islamic financial assets; FAS 35 addresses the accounting treatment of risk reserves established to protect Investment Account Holders (IAHs).
24. Furthermore, the fund segregation requirement is essential because the restricted mandate creates a specific and identifiable pool of assets that the IAH has defined and entrusted to the manager for a particular purpose. That purpose-specificity gives the assets a character distinct from the manager’s own funds, from other PSIA pools, and from the general estate of the firm. Without segregation, that distinction collapses in practice: assets can be commingled, exposing the IAH’s pool to the firm’s general creditors in an insolvency, to losses arising from other mandates, or to conflicts between the firm’s proprietary interests and its fiduciary obligations to the IAH.
25. Regarding the periodic statements’ interval, the determination of reporting frequency currently rests with the firm, with a period no longer than six months. That is appropriate for unrestricted PSIAs, where the IAH has handed funds over without defining how they are to be managed. A restricted PSIA is a fundamentally different relationship: for the IAH, reporting frequency is not an administrative detail but part of the substance of the oversight right that the restricted mandate implies. It is proposed that the reporting interval be agreed between the parties rather than imposed unilaterally by the firm, ensuring that the IAH’s reporting needs, which will vary with the complexity and risk profile of the mandate, are reflected in the contract.
Definition of an Islamic Financial Contract and Expansion of the Islamic Financial Contracts List
Policy issue
26. In addition to the RPSIA gap, the AFSA has also identified deficiencies in IFR 1.12, which sets out the Shari’ah-compliant contractual structures permissible within the AIFC framework. However, in its current form, the provision falls short in two material respects: it does not reflect the full range of instruments used in modern Islamic finance markets, and the term “Islamic Financial Contract” is capitalised in IFR 1.12 as a defined term yet is not defined, either in IFR or in the GLO, creating a structural gap in the framework.
Policy proposal
27. The proposed amendments to IFR 1.12 address two deficiencies: the absence of a definition of “Islamic Financial Contract”, and some established contracts missing in the list of recognised contracts. On the definition, the AFSA looked at the approach taken in peer jurisdictions. The DFSA defines an Islamic Financial Contract as “any contract designed to comply with Shari’ah,” while the FSRA defines it as “any contract that an appropriate SSB has designated to be in compliance with Shari’ah”. It is proposed to adopt the DFSA’s formulation. This approach is objective and principle-based, focusing on the nature of the contract rather than firm-specific approvals, and ensures consistency across the AIFC market.
28. On the contracts list, it is proposed to add musawamah, wakala, variations of qard, and wa’d to the recognised contracts enumerated in IFR 1.12. Although the existing clause provides a residual category for “any other Islamic Financial Contract approved by the relevant Authorised Firm’s SSB,” explicit mentions of these contracts add clarity of the allowed financial contracts.
Miscellaneous Amendments
29. The AFSA also proposes a number of miscellaneous amendments to GLO to improve definitional consistency and ensure that key Islamic finance concepts are applied consistently across the AIFC regulatory framework.
30. Sukuk is already defined in the AFSA’s IBB 12.1(2) as “certificates that represent a holder’s proportionate ownership in an undivided part of an asset or pool of assets where the holder assumes all rights and obligations to the asset or pool”. It is proposed to introduce this definition into the GLO to ensure a uniform interpretation of the term across all AIFC Acts.
31. Additionally, it is proposed to introduce a definition of “Islamic Securities.” Both the DFSA and FSRA define Islamic Securities as “any Security Offered, or held out expressly or implicitly, as Islamic or Shari’ah compliant”. The AFSA proposes to adopt this definition to provide clarity on the scope of Securities that are presented or marketed as Islamic or Shari’ah compliant within the AIFC framework.
PART V – PUBLIC CONSULTATION QUESTIONS
Question 1: Do you agree with the proposed approach to the classification of Captive Insurers, including the introduction of a specific definition of "Group" in PINS and the resolution of the definitional inconsistency between GLO and PINS by converting the GLO definitions of "Captive Insurance Business" and "Captive Insurer" into cross-references to PINS?
Question 2: Do you agree with the proposed package of Client Asset protection measures, comprising: (i) the obligation on Authorised Firms to maintain systems and controls ensuring Client Assets are identifiable and secure at all times; (ii) the re-introduction of a mandatory external audit requirement for Client Assets; and (iii) the introduction of the Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack, including the requirement to maintain a comprehensive master list of all Client Accounts? Please provide any comments on the practical implementation of these proposals, including expected costs, and operational challenges.
Question 3: What transitional period do you consider reasonable for compliance with (i) the mandatory external audit requirement for Client Assets and (ii) the Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack and master list obligations? Please explain the basis for your suggested timeframes.
Question 4: Do you agree with the proposed amendments to the Islamic finance framework, including the treatment of Restricted Profit Sharing Investment Accounts (RPSIAs), the adoption of definitions of an Islamic Financial Contract, Sukuk, and Islamic Securities, and the expansion of the list of recognised Islamic Financial Contracts to include musawamah, wakala, variations of qard, and wa'd?
Question 5: Do you have any other comments on the proposed targeted amendments to the AIFC Rules?
Annex 1 – Proposed Targeted Amendments to the AIFC Rules
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO AIFC RULES
In these amendments, underlining indicates a new text and strikethrough indicates a removed text.
AIFC INSURANCE AND REINSURANCE PRUDENTIAL RULES
1 General provisions
(…)
1.5.9 Obligations in respect of gGroups
An Insurer that is a member of a gGroup must comply with the requirements of PINS 10 (Insurers that are members of Groups).
(…)
6 Investment
(…)
6.1.2 Assets appropriate to liabilities
(…)
(2) In particular, an Insurer must:
(…)
(f) if it is part of an insurance gGroup, hold investments tailored to the characteristics of its liabilities and its needs and not be subject to undue influence from the wider objectives of the gGroup.
(…)
10 Insurers that are members of Groups
10.1.1 Application
PINS 10 applies to every Insurer that is a member of a Group.
10.1.1-1 Meaning of Group
(1) For the Purposes of PINS, Group is a group of entities which includes an entity (the 'first entity') and:
(a) any Parent of the first entity; and
(b) any Subsidiaries (direct or indirect) of the Parent or Parents in (a) or the first entity.
(2) Parent is a Holding Company. The definition of a Holding Company is provided in the Glossary as (as defined in the Companies Regulations) a holding Body Corporate that is a Company.
(…)
14 Captive Insurers
14.1 Introduction
(…)
14.1.1-1. Classification of Captive Insurer
(1) A Class 1 Captive Insurer is an AIFC Captive Insurer that is permitted under the conditions of its authorisation to effect or carry out Contracts of Insurance only for risks related to or arising out of the business or operations of the gGroup to which the Insurer belongs.
(2) A Class 2 Captive Insurer is an AIFC Captive Insurer that is permitted under the conditions of its authorisation to obtain no more than 20% of its gross written premium from third-party risks arising from business or operations that are closely linked to the business or operations of the gGroup to which the Insurer belongs.
(3) A Class 3 Captive Insurer is an AIFC Captive Insurer that:
(a) is permitted under the conditions of its authorisation to effect or carry out Contracts of Insurance only for risks related to or arising out of the business or operations of persons who engage in similar, related or common:
i. businesses; or
ii. activities; or
iii. trade; or
iv. services; or
v. operations; and
(b) is owned by the persons mentioned in paragraph (i) (a) or by a body corporate of which all such persons are members such as gGroup captives.
AIFC GENERAL RULES
(…)
6 SUPERVISION
(…)
6.3 Accounting / Auditing
(…)
6.3.9 Audit reports
An Authorised Person must:
(a) require, in writing, its Auditor to:
(i) conduct an audit of and produce a report on the Authorised Person’s financial statements in accordance with the International Standards on Auditing;
(ii) produce, if the Authorised Firm is permitted to control or hold Client Money, a Client Money Auditor’s Report in accordance with the Rules in AUD Annex A;
(iii) produce, if the Authorised Firm is permitted to hold or control Client Investments or Provide Custody of Client Investments, a Client Investments Auditor’s Report in respect of that business as applicable, in accordance with the Rules in AUD Annex B;
(iv) produce, if the Authorised Firm is permitted to control or hold Client Money, an Insurance Intermediary Auditor’s Report in accordance with the Rules in AUD Annex C; and
(ii) (v) such other reports as the AFSA may require; and
(b) submit any reports so produced to the AFSA within four months of the Authorised Person’s year end.
(…)
AIFC CONDUCT OF BUSINESS RULES
8. CLIENT ASSETS
8.1 Application
(…)
8.1.4 General requirements
(1-1) An Authorised Firm must have systems and controls to ensure that Client Assets are identifiable and secure at all times.
(1) An Authorised Firm which receives Money from, or holds Money for or on behalf of, a Client in the course of, or in connection with, the carrying on of Investment Business or Provides Money Services in or from the AIFC must comply with COB 8.2.
(2) An Authorised Firm which holds Investments belonging to a Client in the course of, or in connection with, the carrying on of Investment Business in or from the AIFC, Provides Custody or Provides Money Services in or from the AIFC must comply with COB 8.3.
(3) A Client whose Investments or Money is required to be held in compliance with either COB 8.2 or COB 8.3 is a "Segregated Client".
(4) An Authorised Firm which controls Money or Investments belonging to a Client under a Mandate but does not receive or hold that Money or those Investments itself must comply with COB 8.4.
(5) An Authorised Firm that holds Client Assets in any of the circumstances specified in COB 8.1.3 (a) to (c) must comply with COB 8.1.6.
(…)
8.1.6 Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack
(1) An Authorised Firm must prepare and maintain in accordance with this section a Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack (“Client Assets Pack”).
(2) An Authorised Firm must include, as applicable, in its Client Assets Pack:
(a) a master document containing information sufficient to retrieve each document in its Client Assets Pack;
(b) a copy of the master lists of all Clients Accounts maintained under COB 8.2.4 and 8.3.4;
(c) records of the most recent reconciliations performed under sections COB 8.2.21, 8.2.22, 8.2.23, 8.2.24 and COB 8.3.16, 8.3.17;
(d) records and written permissions on the use of the Client Investment, obtained by the Authorised Firm under COB 8.3.11;
(e) a document which identifies the Third Party Account Providers the Authorised Firm has appointed under this chapter and any Client Accounts held by those Third Party Account Providers;
(f) for each Third Party Account Provider identified in (e), a copy of each executed agreement, including any side letters or other agreements used to clarify or modify the terms of the executed agreement, between that Third Party Account Provider and the Authorised Firm that relates to the holding of Client Assets, including any written acknowledgment received pursuant to COB 8.2.12 or COB 8.3.9;
(g) a document which:
(i) identifies each third party, and each branch of the Authorised Firm outside the AIFC, which the Authorised Firm uses to perform operational functions related to any obligations imposed on the Authorised Firm under this chapter;
(ii) details, for each third party or branch identified in (i), of:
(A) the related operational functions;
(B) how to access relevant information held by that third party or branch; and
(C) how to effect a transfer of Client Assets held by the Authorised Firm but controlled by that third party or branch;
(h) a copy of each executed agreement, including any side letters or other agreements used to clarify or modify the terms of the executed agreement, between the Authorised Firm and the third party identified in paragraph (g)(i);
(i) a document which identifies each individual, and the nature of their responsibility, within the Authorised Firm who is critical or important to the performance of operational functions related to any obligations imposed on the firm by this chapter; and
(j) a copy of the Authorised Firm’s policies and procedures maintained to comply with COB 8.1.4(1-1).
(3) An Authorised Firm must review the content of its Client Assets Pack on an ongoing basis to ensure that it remains accurate and up to date.
(4) If any change of circumstances has the effect of making the content of the Client Assets Pack inaccurate or out of date, an Authorised Firm must update the Client Assets Pack promptly and, in any event, no later than five business days after the change of circumstances occurred.
(5) In relation to every document, an Authorised Firm must, subject to (6):
(a) put in place adequate arrangements to ensure that a liquidator, receiver or administrator, trustee in bankruptcy or analogous officer appointed in respect of it or any material part of its property is able to retrieve each document as soon as practicable and in any event within 48 hours of that officer’s appointment; and
(b) ensure that it is able to retrieve each document as soon as practicable and in any event within 48 hours if requested by the AFSA.
(6) In relation to every document, an Authorised Firm must ensure that the following records and documents can be retrieved immediately under (5):
(a) the records of the most recent reconciliations referred to in COB 8.1.6(2)(c);
(b) the document identifying the Third Party Account Providers and any Client Accounts held by those Third Party Account Providers referred to in COB 8.1.6(2)(e); and
(c) the document identifying the individuals referred to in COB 8.1.6(2)(i).
(7) Where an Authorised Firm relies on the continued operation of certain systems to provide a component document in its Client Assets Pack, it must have arrangements in place to ensure that the systems will remain operational and accessible to it after its insolvency, winding up or other Distribution Event.
Guidance
(i) COB 8.1.6 requires an Authorised Firm that Provides Custody or holds Client Assets in any of the circumstances specified in COB 8.1.3 (a) to (c) to prepare and maintain a Client Assets Crisis Preparedness Pack (Client Assets Pack). The purpose of this pack is to ensure that an Authorised Firm maintains, and is able to retrieve, information that would, in the event of its insolvency, winding up or other Distribution Event, assist an insolvency practitioner in achieving a timely return of Client Money and Client Investments as applicable, to the firm’s Clients.
(ii) The Rules in this section specify the types of documents and records that must be maintained in a Client Assets Pack and the retrieval period for the documents included in the pack. An Authorised Firm should maintain the component documents of the Client Assets Pack in a way that they can be promptly retrieved in accordance with COB 8.1.6(7) and should not use the retrieval period to start producing these documents.
(iii) An Authorised Firm may hold in electronic form any document in its Client Assets Pack, provided that the document can be readily retrieved as required by COB 8.1.6(7).
(iv) To comply with COB 8.1.6(2)(e), an Authorised Firm should ensure that the document records the full name of the Third Party Account Provider, its postal and email address, its phone number and the numbers of all Client Accounts opened by the firm with that Third Party Account Provider.
(v) The reference to a third party which performs operational functions for the Authorised Firm in COB 8.1.6(2)(g) does not include a Third Party Account Agent.
(vi) For the purpose of COB 8.1.6(2)(i), examples of individuals within the Authorised Firm or elsewhere who are critical or important to the performance of operational functions include those necessary to carry out both internal and external Client Asset reconciliations and those in charge of Client documentation involving Client Assets.
8.2 Client Money: Investment Business
The rules in this COB 8.2 are the Client Money Rules.
(…)
8.2.4 Client Money Accounts
(1) A Client Money Account in relation to Client Money is an account which:
(a) is held with a Third Party Account Provider;
(b) is established for the purpose of holding Client Money;
(c) is maintained in the name of the Authorised Firm or a Nominee Company controlled by the Authorised Firm; and
(d) includes the words 'Client Account' in its title.
(2) An Authorised Firm must maintain a master list of all Client Accounts.
(3) The master list must detail:
(a) the name of the account;
(b) the account number;
(c) the location of the account;
(d) whether the account is currently open or closed; and
(e) the date of opening or closure.
(4) The details of the master list must be documented and maintained for at least six years following the closure of an account.
(…)
8.3 Client Investments Rules
The rules in COB 8.3 are the Client Investments Rules.
(…)
8.3.4 Client Investment Accounts
(1) A Client Investment Account is an account which:
(a) is held with a Third Party Account Provider or by an Authorised Firm which is authorised under its Licence to Provide Custody;
(b) is established for the purpose of holding Client Investments;
(c) when held by a Third Party Account Provider, is maintained in the name of the Authorised Firm or a Nominee Company controlled by the Authorised Firm; and
(d) includes the words 'Client Account' in its title.
(2) An Authorised Firm must maintain a master list of all Client Accounts.
(3) The master list must detail:
(a) the name of the account;
(b) the account number;
(c) the location of the account;
(d) whether the account is currently open or closed; and
(e) the date of opening or closure.
(4) The details of the master list must be documented and maintained for a minimum period of six years following the closure of an account.
(…)
AIFC AUDITOR RULES
9. FUNCTIONS OF AUDITORS, CONDUCT OF AUDITS AND PREPARATION OF AUDIT REPORTS
(…)
9.2 Conduct of Audits and Content of Reports
9.2.1 Standards of Reports
An Auditor must conduct an audit, and prepare the contents of any relevant audit report, referred to in AIFC legislation in accordance with the following table:
|
Audit Report |
Requirement |
Applicable Standards |
Contents |
|
Financial Statements – Authorised Person |
GEN 6.3.9 |
International Standards on Auditing |
ISA 700 |
|
Financial Statements – Company - |
Section 137 of the Companies Regulations |
International Standards on Auditing
|
ISA 700 |
|
Financial Statements – Reporting Entity |
MAR 3.2.2 |
ISA 700 |
|
|
Financial Statements - Non-Exempt Fund |
CIR 11.4(a) |
ISA 700 |
|
|
AML Policies, Procedures, Systems and Controls – Authorised Person |
AML 14.6.1 |
ISA 700 AML 14.6.1(b) |
|
|
Client Money Auditor's Report |
|
International Standards on Assurance Engagement (ISAE) or International Standards on Related Services (ISRS) |
Annex A |
|
Client Investments Auditor's Report |
|
Annex B |
|
|
Insurance Intermediary Audit Report |
|
Annex C |
AIFC ISLAMIC BANKING BUSINESS PRUDENTIAL RULES
(…)
13. TREATMENT OF PSIAS AND ASSOCIATED RISKS
13.1 General
(1) Islamic banks typically raise funds through PSIAs, because interest-bearing deposits are not permitted by Shari’ah.
(2) This Chapter sets out the treatment of unrestricted PSIAs and the risks (rate of return risk, withdrawal risk and displaced commercial risk) that are associated with PSIAs.
(3) This Chapter also sets out:
(a) the responsibilities of an Islamic bank, as an unrestricted PSIA manager;
(b) the requirements for policies, warnings, terms of business, contracts and financial and other periodic statements in relation to PSIAs; and
(c) the techniques available to an Islamic Bank to mitigate the risks associated with PSIAs.
(4) This Chapter also applies to an Islamic bank in its capacity as manager of a restricted PSIA. An Islamic bank that manages a restricted PSIA must comply with all provisions of this Chapter, except for IBB 13.11 to 13.20, and with the specific requirements set out in IBB 13.6(2), 13.7(n), and 13.10(2),
(…)
13.6 Warnings to investment account holders PSIA managers’ responsibilities
(1) An Islamic Bank must warn a prospective IAH in writing that:
(a) the IAH bears the risk of loss to the extent of the IAH’s investment; and
(b) the IAH would not be able to recover that loss from an Islamic Bank, except in the case of negligence, misconduct, fraud or breach of contract on the part of an Islamic Bank.
(2) An Islamic Bank that manages a restricted PSIA must maintain adequate provisions and reserves against equity and assets in accordance with AAOIFI FAS 30 and FAS 35.
13.7 Terms of business
An Islamic Bank must ensure that the following information is included in the terms of business given to an IAH:
(a) how and by whom the funds of the IAH will be managed and invested;
(b) the PSIA’s investment objectives and details of its policy on diversification;
(c) the basis for allocating profits and losses;
(d) a summary of the policies for valuing the PSIA’s assets;
(e) if an Islamic Bank uses PER or IRR as a smoothing technique, a summary of the policies for transferring funds to and from the reserve;
(f) particulars of the management of the PSIA;
(g) particulars of the management of any other person to whom the owner has outsourced, or will outsource, the management of the PSIA, including:
(i) the person’s name;
(ii) the person’s regulatory status; and
(iii) details of the arrangement;
(h) details of any arrangement for early withdrawal, redemption or other exit and any costs to an IAH as a result;
(i) confirmation of the IAH’s investment objectives;
(j) whether funds from the PSIA will be mixed with the funds of any other PSIA;
(k) any applicable charges and the basis on which such charges will be calculated;
(l) any fees that an Islamic Bank can deduct from the profits of the PSIA;
(m) how the IAH can monitor the performance of investments and associated risks.;
(n) where PSIA is a restricted PSIA, how the IAH's investment will be segregated from the Islamic bank's own funds and from any claims by the Islamic bank's creditors.
(…)
13.10 Periodic statements
(1) An Islamic Bank must give each IAH of a PSIA a periodic statement about the PSIA at intervals stated in the contract or terms of business. The interval must not be longer than 6 months.
(2) Where the PSIA is a restricted PSIA, the interval referred to in sub-rule (1) must be agreed with the IAH. An Islamic bank must not determine the interval unilaterally in the contract or terms of business for a restricted PSIA without the IAH's express agreement. The maximum interval of 6 months applies regardless of the agreed interval.
(3) (2) An Islamic Bank must ensure that the periodic statement contains the following information as at the end of the period covered by the statement:
(a) the number, description and value of investments held by the PSIA;
(b) the amount of cash held by the PSIA;
(c) details of applicable charges (including any deductions of fees that an Islamic Bank is allowed to deduct from the profits of the PSIA) and the basis on which the charges are calculated;
(d) the total of any dividends and other benefits received by an Islamic Bank for the PSIA;
(e) the total amount, and particulars, of all investments transferred into or out of the PSIA;
(f) details of the performance of the IAH’s investment;
(g) the allocation of profit between the owner and the IAH;
(h) any changes to the investment strategies that could affect the IAH’s investment.
AIFC ISLAMIC FINANCE RULES
1. GENERAL
(…)
1.12 Definition of Islamic Financial Contract
An Islamic Financial Contract is any contract designed to comply with Shari’ah. An Islamic Financial Contract It may include any of the following:
(i) murabahah and its variations;
(ii) salam and its variations;
(iii) tawarruq and its variations;
(iv) istisna and its variations;
(v) ijarah and its variations;
(vi) musharakah and its variations;
(vii) mudarabah and its variations;
(viii) qard and its variations;
(ix) musawamah and its variations;
(x) wa’d and its variations;
(xi) wakalah and its variations; and
(xii) (ix) any other Islamic Financial Contract that is approved to be so by the relevant Authorised Firm’s SSB.
AIFC GLOSSARY
(…)
2. INTERPRETATION
|
(…) |
(…) |
|
Captive Insurance Business |
Has the meaning given in PINS 14.1.2. |
|
Captive Insurer |
Has the meaning given in PINS 14.1.1. |
|
(…) |
(…) |
|
Client Investments Auditor’s Report |
The report specified in |
|
(…) |
(…) |
|
Client Money Auditor’s Report |
The report specified in |
|
(…) |
(…) |
|
Insurance Intermediary Audit Report |
The report specified in |
|
(…) |
(…) |
|
Islamic Financial Contract |
Any contract designed to comply with Shari’ah. |
|
Islamic Securities |
Any Security Offered, or held out expressly or implicitly, as Islamic or Shari’ah compliant. |
|
(…) |
(…) |
|
Sukuk |
Certificates that represent a holder’s proportionate ownership in an undivided part of an asset or pool of assets where the holder assumes all rights and obligations to the asset or pool. |
|
(…) |
(…) |
Consultation Paper No. AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0004 from 15 July 2026 on Amendments to the AIFC Fees Rules
Please, press "PDF" button above to download a Consultation Paper.
INTRODUCTION
Why are we issuing this Consultation Paper (CP)?
The Astana Financial Services Authority (AFSA) has issued this Consultation Paper to seek suggestions from the market on proposed amendments to the AIFC Fees Rules.
Who should read this CP?
The proposals in this Consultation Paper will be relevant for entities operating, or seeking to operate, within the jurisdiction of the AIFC.
Terminology
Defined terms have the initial letter of the word capitalised, or of each word in a phrase. Definitions are set out in AIFC Glossary. Unless the context otherwise requires, where capitalisation of the initial letter is not used, the expression has its natural meaning.
What are the next steps?
We invite comments from interested stakeholders on the proposed amendments. All comments should be in writing and sent to the email specified below. When sending your comments by email, please use “Consultation Paper AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0004” in the subject line. You may, if relevant, identify the organisation you represent when providing your comments. AFSA reserves the right to publish, including on its website, any comments you provide, unless you expressly request otherwise. Comments supported by reasoning and evidence will be given more weight by AFSA.
The deadline for providing comments on the proposed amendments is 20 August 2026. Once we receive your comments, we shall consider if any refinements are required to this proposal.
Following the public consultation, we may proceed with making relevant changes to reflect the points raised in the consultation. You should not act on the proposals until the amendments are enacted.
AFSA prefers to receive comments by email at consultation@afsa.kz.
Structure of this Consultation Paper
Part I – Background
Part II – Proposals
Part III – Public Consultation Questions
Annex 1 – Proposed Amendments to the AIFC Fees Rules
PART I – BACKGROUND
1. The AIFC Fees Rules (Fees Rules) set out the framework governing fees payable by entities operating, or seeking to operate, within the jurisdiction of the AIFC. Fees Rules also provide for the imposition of late fees and fines where entities fail to comply with applicable legal or regulatory requirements.
2. AFSA undertook a comprehensive review of the Fees Rules in 2025 to ensure that AFSA can continue to uphold high regulatory standards while supporting the sustainable development of the AIFC ecosystem. During the 2025 public consultation, Centre Participants generally supported periodic reviews of the fees framework while noting that future fee adjustments would be more manageable if implemented through a gradual and predictable approach rather than through infrequent, larger revisions.
3. In addition, AFSA has reviewed certain aspects of the fee framework introduced in December 2025 in light of stakeholder feedback and practical implementation experience. As a result, AFSA is proposing a number of targeted amendments to specific fee provisions to improve proportionality, clarity and operational effectiveness.
4. The proposed amendments are intended to enter into force on 1 January 2027.
PART II – PROPOSALS
Annual increase of 5% across all applicable fees for 2027-2029
5. AFSA developed a medium-term fee model to establish a transparent and structured approach to future fee adjustments, under which all fixed fees would be increased annually by 5% during the 2027–2029 period.
6. The model was informed by financial projections, expected developments in the AIFC, operational requirements associated with AFSA's supervisory functions, and broader macroeconomic conditions. In determining the adjustment rate, AFSA considered relevant factors, including projected operating costs, inflationary trends and exchange rate movements, and considers that the proposed cap of 5% provides an appropriate balance between maintaining an up-to-date fees framework and ensuring a predictable regulatory environment for Centre Participants.
7. The revised Schedules of Fees Rules set out the applicable fees for each respective year, thereby providing AIFC Participants with greater transparency, clarity, and predictability in relation to the fee framework. The proposed approach would establish a predefined adjustment mechanism within the Fees Rules, enabling Centre Participants to anticipate future fee changes and incorporate them into their business planning.
Removal of the variable fee component applicable to the annual supervision fee for Providing Money Services licence
8. During the 2025 public consultation, regulated firms raised concerns regarding the methodology for calculating the variable component of the annual supervision fee applicable to the Providing Money Services licence, particularly the scope of transaction values to be included in the calculation. In response, AFSA deferred the implementation of the variable fee for this licence category for one year to allow further engagement with market participants and consideration of the appropriate supervisory reporting framework.
9. Following further assessment and stakeholder engagement, AFSA has concluded that the variable fee component for the Providing Money Services licence should be removed from the AIFC Fees Rules. AFSA considers that this amendment will simplify the fee framework, improve regulatory clarity, and reduce the administrative burden on regulated firms while maintaining an appropriate and proportionate supervisory fee structure.
Amendment of the cap applicable to the variable fee component of the annual supervision fee for Operating a Loan Crowdfunding Platform and Operating an Investment Crowdfunding Platform licences
10. Separately, crowdfunding operators requested a review of the cap applicable to the variable component of the annual supervision fee. Stakeholders indicated that the existing cap may not appropriately reflect the scale and operational characteristics of crowdfunding business models.
11. Having considered the feedback received, AFSA proposes increasing the cap applicable to the variable fee component for Operating a Loan Crowdfunding Platform and Operating an Investment Crowdfunding Platform licences from USD 1 million to USD 5.3 million. AFSA considers that the proposed amendment would provide a more proportionate and practical fee structure for firms with higher fundraising volumes while continuing to support an appropriate supervisory cost-recovery framework.
Amendment of the late fees for failures to submit required notifications, reports, returns, or to comply with directions issued by AFSA
12. Under the current framework, a late fee is imposed only where non-compliance continues for more than three business days after the relevant deadline. In practice, this grace period has enabled a significant number of firms to submit required notifications, reports and returns after the prescribed deadline without incurring a late fee. AFSA therefore proposes to remove the grace period to strengthen timely compliance with regulatory obligations and reinforce reporting discipline.
13. AFSA considers that the proposed amendment would align the late fee regime with a more effective supervisory approach by ensuring that breaches are recognised immediately upon non-compliance. The amendment would also support the timely availability of supervisory information, including where required to respond to requests from other competent authorities. As reporting deadlines are predefined and well established, AFSA does not expect the proposal to impose an additional burden on regulated firms.
Introduction of fees for sub-funds of Umbrella Funds
14. Since early 2025, AFSA has observed an increase in the registration of Umbrella Funds, reflecting, in part, the cost efficiencies associated with umbrella structures compared with establishing multiple standalone funds. Under the current framework, however, the fees applicable to Umbrella Funds do not distinguish between a fund with a single Sub-Fund and one comprising multiple Sub-Funds, notwithstanding that each additional Sub-Fund may require a separate supervisory assessment of its investment strategy, operational arrangements, valuation methodology and risk management framework.
15. AFSA has benchmarked its approach against other international financial centres, where fee frameworks generally recognise the incremental supervisory effort associated with additional Sub-Funds through separate application or annual fees. Consistent with this approach, AFSA proposes to introduce a structured fee framework under which the standard application fee for a Domestic Fund would cover the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund, with an additional fee applying to each subsequent Sub-Fund. AFSA considers that this approach would better align the fee framework with the supervisory resources required while preserving the cost advantages of umbrella fund structures. AFSA welcomes views on whether a differentiated approach may be appropriate for certain umbrella fund structures, such as single-stock ETFs or other arrangements where Sub-Funds operate under substantially identical investment mandates.
Miscellaneous
16. AFSA has also proposed a number of miscellaneous, editorial and consequential amendments to the Fees Rules. These amendments are intended to improve the clarity, consistency and overall effectiveness of the fee framework and to ensure that the Rules remain accurate and aligned with the evolving regulatory environment.
17. The proposed amendments include various technical updates across the Fees Rules and related Schedules to reflect existing regulatory practices, improve drafting consistency and facilitate the effective application of the fee framework.
PART III – PUBLIC CONSULTATION QUESTIONS
Question 1: Do you prefer a pre-defined gradual annual fee increase of 5% from 2027 to 2029 or periodic ad hoc fee revisions when considered necessary by AFSA. What are the reasons for your preferred approach?
Question 2: Do you agree with the proposed amendments relating to: (i) the removal of the variable fee component applicable to the annual supervision fee for the Providing Money Services licence; (ii) the amendment of the cap applicable to the variable fee component of the annual supervision fee for Operating a Loan Crowdfunding Platform and Operating an Investment Crowdfunding Platform licences; and (iii) the amendment of the late fee regime? If not, please explain.
Question 3: Do you have any comments on the proposed introduction of fees for Sub-Funds of Umbrella Funds, including whether a differentiated fee approach may be appropriate for certain umbrella fund structures? Please explain.
Annex 1 – Proposed Amendments to the AIFC Fees Rules
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE AIFC FEES RULES
In these amendments, underlining indicates a new text and strikethrough indicates a removed text.
1. APPLICATION FEES PAYABLE TO THE AFSA
(…)
1.3. Approved Individuals
Fees are payable in respect of any application for an Approved Individual as specified in Schedules 1, 2, 3 or 6 8 depending on the nature of the entity on whose behalf the Approved Individual is acting.
(…)
9. OTHER FEES FEES PAYABLE TO AFSA IN RELATION TO FUNDS
9.1. Application to register a Non-Exempt Fund or provide notification for an Exempt Fund
9.1.1. A Domestic Fund Manager or the Person proposing to be the Domestic Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund which is a Non-Exempt Fund, who is applying to register the Non-Exempt Fund in accordance with CIS 4.2, must pay to the AFSA:
(a) the application fee specified in Schedule 9; and
(b) any supplementary fee required by the AFSA in accordance with FEES 6.
9.1.2. A Domestic Fund Manager or the Person proposing to be the Domestic Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund which is an Exempt Fund, who notifies the AFSA of their intention to offer the Units of such Fund, in accordance with CIS 4.7 must pay to the AFSA:
(a) the notification fee specified in Schedule 9; and
(b) any supplementary fee required by the AFSA in accordance with FEES 6.
9.2. Management of a Domestic Fund by a Foreign Fund Manager
9.2.1. A Foreign Fund Manager providing a declaration to the AFSA of its intention to manage a Domestic Fund which is an Exempt Fund or the Person proposing to be the Foreign Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund which is an Exempt Fund, who is applying to register the Exempt Fund in accordance with CIS 4.2 must pay to the AFSA:
(a) the application fee specified in Schedule 9; and
(b) any supplementary fee require by the AFSA in accordance with FEES 6.
(…)
SCHEDULE 1: APPLICATION FEES PAYABLE TO THE AFSA FOR REGULATED ACTIVITIES
1.1 Application fees for applying for Licence to carry on Regulated Activities
Application fees are determined by the activities the Authorised Firm conducts or intends to conduct, as set out below:
|
Application fee by activities |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Operating a Representative Office |
|
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Managing a Collective Investment Scheme |
|
7 720 – in relation to Exempt Fund 11 030 – in relation to Non-Exempt Fund |
8 110 – in relation to Exempt Fund 11 580 – in relation to Non-Exempt Fund |
|
Arranging Custody |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Providing Fund Administration |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Advising on Investments |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Arranging Deals in Investments |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Insurance Intermediation |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Managing Investments |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Providing Custody |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Providing Trust Services |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Acting as the Trustee of a Fund |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Dealing in Investments as Agent |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Dealing in Investments as Principal |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Managing a Restricted Profit Sharing Investment Account |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Islamic Banking Business |
|
23 150 |
24 310 |
|
Providing Islamic Financing |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Accepting Deposits |
|
23 150 |
24 310 |
|
Providing Credit |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Advising on a Credit Facility |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Arranging a Credit Facility |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Providing Money Services |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Insurance Business |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Takaful Business |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Captive Insurance Business through a Protected Cell Company |
|
7 720 plus 1 000 for each cell |
8 110 plus 1 000 for each cell |
|
Captive Insurance Business other than through a Protected Cell Company |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Captive Takaful Business through a Protected Cell Company |
|
7 720 plus 1 000 for each cell |
8 110 plus 1 000 for each cell |
|
Captive Takaful Business other than through a Protected Cell Company |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Insurance Management |
|
11 030 |
11 580 |
|
Opening and Operating Bank Accounts |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
|
Operation of a Payment System |
|
11 030 |
11 580 |
|
Operating a Multilateral Trading Facility |
|
11 030 |
11 580 |
|
Operating an Organised Trading Facility |
|
11 030 |
11 580 |
|
Operating a Digital Asset Trading Facility |
|
108 050 |
113 450 |
|
Providing Credit Rating Services |
|
5 510 |
5 790 |
1.1-1 Application fee in relation to Digital Assets
An applicant seeking to conduct Regulated Activities in relation to Digital Assets, except for the Regulated Activity of Operating a Digital Asset Trading Facility, must pay to the AFSA an additional application fee, in the amount of 2 800 USD. as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
2 940 |
3 090 |
3 240 |
1.2 Application fees for modification and withdrawal of a Licence or Approved Individual's registration
|
Application to Modify |
Fee (USD)* |
|
Modification of an Authorised Firm's Licence |
(a) An Authorised Firm applying to the AFSA to change the scope of its Licence and seeking to carry on one new Regulated or Market Activity, must pay to the AFSA an application fee equal to 100% of the application fee for that new Regulated or Market Activity specified in table 1.1 of Schedule 1 or table 2.1 of Schedule 2 of FEES. (b) An Authorised Firm applying to the AFSA to change the scope of its Licence and seeking to carry on more than one new Regulated and/or Market Activity, must pay to the AFSA an application fee equal to 100% of the highest of the application fees for new activities and 50% of the application fee in respect of each additional new activity specified in table 1.1 of Schedule 1 or table 2.1 of Schedule 2 of FEES. (c) An Authorised Firm applying to the AFSA to change the scope of its Licence and seeking to carry on the Regulated Activities in respect of Digital Assets must pay to the AFSA an additional application fee specified in 1.1-1 of Schedule 1 of FEES above in full. (d) An Authorised Firm applying to the AFSA to change the scope of its Licence, where the change is within an existing Regulated or Market Activity, or to vary or withdraw a condition or restriction on its Licence, must pay to the AFSA an application fee equal to 50% of the application fee for that Regulated or Market Activity specified in table 1.1 of Schedule 1 or table 2.1 of Schedule 2 of FEES. |
|
|
|
Modification of an Approved Individual's registration
An Authorised Firm submitting application on modification of an Approved Individual’s registration must pay a fee, as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
530 |
560 |
590 |
(…)
Application fee for Approval of Individuals
An Authorised Firm submitting applications on behalf of individuals seeking Approved Individual status must pay an application fee in the amount of 500 USD in respect of each Approved Individual application., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
530 |
560 |
590 |
Application fee for change of control
An Authorised Firm applying for change of control must pay to the AFSA an application fee in the amount of 1 400 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
1 470 |
1 540 |
1 620 |
(…)
SCHEDULE 2: APPLICATION FEES PAYABLE TO THE AFSA FOR MARKET ACTIVITIES
2.1 Application fees for applying for Licence to carry on Market Activities
Application fees are determined by the Market Activities the Authorised Person conducts or intends to conduct, as set out below:
|
Application fee by activities |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Operating a Clearing House |
additional 5 000 if there is an intention to clear Investment Tokens and have Direct Access Members |
165 380; and additional 5 000 if there is an intention to clear Investment Tokens and have Direct Access Members |
173 650; and additional 5 000 if there is an intention to clear Investment Tokens and have Direct Access Members |
|
Operating an Exchange |
additional 5 000 if there is an intention to trade Investment Tokens and have Direct Access Members |
165 380; and additional 5 000 if there is an intention to trade Investment Tokens and have Direct Access Members |
173 650; and additional 5 000 if there is an intention to trade Investment Tokens and have Direct Access Members |
|
Operating a Loan Crowdfunding Platform |
|
16 540 |
17 370 |
|
Operating an Investment Crowdfunding Platform |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
2.2 Application fees for modification and withdrawal of a Licence or Approved Individual's registration
|
Application to Modify |
Fee (USD) |
|
Modification of an Authorised Market Institution's Licence |
(a) An Authorised Market Institution applying to the AFSA to change the scope of its Licence and seeking to carry on one new Market or Regulated Activity must pay to the AFSA an application fee equal to 100% of the application fee for that new Market or Regulated Activity specified in table 2.1 of Schedule 2 or table 1.1 of Schedule 1 of FEES. (b) An Authorised Market Institution applying to the AFSA to change the scope of its Licence and seeking to carry on more than one new Market and/or Regulated Activity, must pay to the AFSA an application fee equal to 100% of the highest of the application fees for new activities and 50% of an application fee in respect of each additional new activity specified in table 2.1 of Schedule 2 or table 1.1 of Schedule 1 of FEES. (c) An Authorised Market Institution applying to the AFSA to change the scope of its Licence, where the change is within the scope of an existing Market or Regulated Activity, or to vary or withdraw a condition or restriction on its Licence, must pay to the AFSA an application fee equal to 50% of the application fee for that Market or Regulated Activity specified in table 2.1 of Schedule 2 or table 1.1 of Schedule 1 of FEES. |
|
|
|
Modification of an Approved Individual's registration
An Authorised Market Institution submitting application on modification of an Approved Individual’s registration must pay a fee, as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
530 |
560 |
590 |
(…)
Application fee for Approval of Individuals
An Authorised Market Institution submitting applications on behalf of individuals seeking Approved Individual status must pay an application fee in the amount of 500 USD in respect of each Approved Individual application., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
530 |
560 |
590 |
Application fee for change of control
An Authorised Market Institution applying for change of control must pay to the AFSA an application fee in the amount of 1 400 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
1 470 |
1 540 |
1 620 |
(…)
SCHEDULE 3: APPLICATION FEES PAYABLE TO THE AFSA FOR ANCILLARY SERVICES
3.1 Application fees for Ancillary Services
|
Application fee by activities |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Providing Legal Services |
|
3 090 |
3 240 |
|
Providing Audit Services |
|
3 090 |
3 240 |
|
Providing Accountancy Services |
|
3 090 |
3 240 |
|
Providing Consulting Services |
|
3 090 |
3 240 |
|
|
|
|
|
(…)
Application fee for change of Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO)
An Ancillary Service Provider applying to the AFSA to change Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO) must pay an application fee in the amount of 500 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
530 |
560 |
590 |
Application fee for change or new additional appointment of Audit Principal
An Ancillary Service Provider applying to the AFSA to change or make a new additional appointment of an Audit Principal must pay an application fee in the amount of 500 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
530 |
560 |
590 |
SCHEDULE 4: APPLICATION FEES PAYABLE TO AFSA FOR RECOGNISED NON-AIFC MARKET INSTITUTION, RECOGNISED NON-AIFC MEMBERS AND FOREIGN FUND MANAGERS
4.1 Application fees for recognition as a Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institution, Recognised Non-AIFC Member and Foreign Fund Manager
|
Application fee |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institution |
|
16 540 |
17 370 |
|
Recognised Non-AIFC Member |
|
2 210 |
2 320 |
|
Foreign Fund Manager |
|
7 720 |
8 110 |
(…)
SCHEDULE 5: FEES PAYABLE TO THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
An applicant seeking registration or recognition must pay the following fees to the Registrar of Companies:
|
Application for registration or recognition |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|||
|
Online* |
Paper |
Online* |
Paper |
Online* |
Paper |
|
|
Private Company |
|
|
560 |
1 660 |
590 |
1 740 |
|
Public Company |
|
|
560 |
1 660 |
590 |
1 740 |
|
Investment Company |
|
|
120 |
1 660 |
130 |
1 740 |
|
Recognised Company |
|
|
560 |
1 660 |
590 |
1 740 |
|
Partnerships |
|
|
560 |
1 660 |
590 |
1 740 |
|
Recognised Partnership |
|
|
560 |
1 660 |
590 |
1 740 |
|
Non-Profit Incorporated Organisations |
|
|
1 660 |
4 970 |
1 740 |
5 220 |
|
Special Purpose Companies |
|
|
120 |
1 660 |
130 |
1 740 |
|
Restricted Scope Companies |
|
|
120 |
1 660 |
130 |
1 740 |
|
Protected Cell Companies |
|
|
120 |
1 660 |
130 |
1 740 |
|
Representative offices |
|
|
560 |
1 660 |
590 |
1 740 |
|
Foundations |
|
|
1 660 |
4 970 |
1 740 |
5 220 |
Fees for transfer of incorporation
Company or Partnership seeking to transfer its incorporation to or from the AIFC must pay to the Registrar of Companies an application fee in the amount of 5 000 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
5 250 |
5 510 |
5 790 |
* Online means submission through the AIFC approved digital systems (excluding email).
SCHEDULE 5-1: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FEES PAYABLE TO THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
An AIFC Participant must pay the following administrative services fees to the Registrar of Companies:
|
Administrative Services |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|||
|
online* |
paper |
online* |
paper |
online* |
paper |
|
|
Processing inquiries |
|
|
30 |
50 |
35 |
55 |
|
Post-registration procedures |
|
|
120 |
220 |
130 |
230 |
|
Merger/Arrangements |
N/A |
|
N/A |
270 |
N/A |
280 |
* Online means submission through the AIFC approved digital systems (excluding email).
** Fees for administrative services for Foundations and Non-Profit Incorporated Organisations is 100 USD for online based and 200 USD for paper-based processing inquiries. are set out below:
|
Administrative Services |
Fees falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|||
|
online* |
paper |
online* |
paper |
online* |
paper |
|
|
Processing inquiries |
110 |
210 |
120 |
220 |
130 |
230 |
|
Post-registration procedures |
320 |
630 |
340 |
660 |
360 |
690 |
*** Fees for administrative services for Foundations and Non-Profit Incorporated Organisations is 300 320 USD for online based and 600 630 USD for paper-based post-registration procedures.
SCHEDULE 5-2: FEES PAYABLE TO THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES IN RESPECT OF FILING AN ANNUAL RETURN, ANNUAL CONFIRMATION OF ACCURACY OF INFORMATION IN THE REGISTER OR ACCOUNTS IN RELATION TO EACH FINANCIAL YEAR
An AIFC Participant filing an annual return, annual confirmation of accuracy of information in the register or accounts in relation to each financial year must pay the following fees to the Registrar of Companies:
|
Annual report filings |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|||
|
online* |
paper |
online* |
paper |
online* |
paper |
|
|
Accounts in relation to each financial year |
|
|
60 |
120 |
65 |
130 |
|
Annual return |
|
|
60 |
120 |
65 |
130 |
|
Annual confirmation of accuracy of information in the register |
|
|
30 |
50 |
35 |
55 |
* Online means of submission through the AIFC approved digital systems (excluding email).
SCHEDULE 6: ANNUAL SUPERVISION FEES PAYABLE TO THE AFSA
6.1 Annual supervision fees for Regulated Activities
Annual supervision fees for Regulated Activities are determined by the activities the Authorised Firm conducts as set out below:
|
Regulated Activities |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Operating a Representative Office |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Managing a Collective Investment Scheme** |
· fixed fee – · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under management as at the end of the quarter are below · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under management as at the end of the quarter exceeding |
· fixed fee – 4 630 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under management as at the end of the quarter are below 37.3 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under management as at the end of the quarter exceeding 37.3 million USD. |
· fixed fee – 4 860 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under management as at the end of the quarter are below 39.2 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under management as at the end of the quarter exceeding 39.2 million USD. |
|
Arranging Custody |
|
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Providing Fund Administration** |
· fixed fee – · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under administration as at the end of the quarter are below · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under administration as at the end of the quarter exceeding |
· fixed fee – 3 090 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under administration as at the end of the quarter are below 24.9 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under administration as at the end of the quarter exceeding 24.9 million USD. |
· fixed fee – 3 240 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under administration as at the end of the quarter are below 26.1 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under administration as at the end of the quarter exceeding 26.1 million USD. |
|
Advising on Investments |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Arranging Deals in Investments |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Insurance Intermediation |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Managing Investments** |
· fixed fee – · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under management as at the end of the quarter are below · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under management as at the end of the quarter exceeding |
· fixed fee – 4 630 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under management as at the end of the quarter are below 37.3 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under management as at the end of the quarter exceeding 37.3 million USD. |
· fixed fee – 4 860 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under management as at the end of the quarter are below 39.2 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0031% applies to the amount of the assets under management as at the end of the quarter exceeding 39.2 million USD. |
|
Providing Custody |
|
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Providing Trust Services |
|
3 090 |
3 240 |
|
Acting as the Trustee of a Fund |
|
3 090 |
3 240 |
|
Dealing in Investments as Agent** |
· fixed fee – · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under brokerage as at the end of the quarter are below · a quarterly levy of 0.0005% applies to the amount of the assets under brokerage as at the end of the quarter exceeding |
· fixed fee – 10 800 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under brokerage as at the end of the quarter are below 540 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0005% applies to the amount of the assets under brokerage as at the end of the quarter exceeding 540 million USD. |
· fixed fee – 11 340 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · not applicable where assets under brokerage as at the end of the quarter are below 567 million USD; · a quarterly levy of 0.0005% applies to the amount of the assets under brokerage as at the end of the quarter exceeding 567 million USD. |
|
Dealing in Investments as Principal |
|
12 350 except as a matched principal; 7 720 as a matched principal. |
12 970 except as a matched principal; 8 110 as a matched principal. |
|
Managing a Restricted Profit Sharing Investment Account |
|
10 800 |
11 340 |
|
Islamic Banking Business |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Providing Islamic Financing |
|
10 800 |
11 340 |
|
Accepting Deposits |
|
15 440 |
16 210 |
|
Providing Credit |
|
10 800 |
11 340 |
|
Advising on a Credit Facility |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Arranging a Credit Facility |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Providing Money Services |
4 410
· |
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Insurance Business |
|
10 800 |
11 340 |
|
Takaful Business |
|
10 800 |
11 340 |
|
Captive Insurance Business through a Protected Cell Company |
|
5 410 plus 700 for each cell |
5 680 plus 700 for each cell |
|
Captive Insurance Business other than through a Protected Cell Company |
|
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Captive Takaful Business through a Protected Cell Company |
|
5 410 plus 700 for each cell |
5 680 plus 700 for each cell |
|
Captive Takaful Business other than through a Protected Cell Company |
|
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Insurance Management |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Opening and Operating Bank Accounts |
|
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Operation of a Payment System |
|
4 630 |
4 860 |
|
Operating a Multilateral Trading Facility** |
· fixed fee – · variable fee – trading levy of 0.0006% of the average daily trading value. Note: The AFSA will not invoice the variable fee unless it exceeds 500 USD. |
· fixed fee – 11 030 USD; and · variable fee – trading levy of 0.0006% of the average daily trading value. Note: The AFSA will not invoice the variable fee unless it exceeds 500 USD. |
· fixed fee – 11 580 USD; and · variable fee – trading levy of 0.0006% of the average daily trading value. Note: The AFSA will not invoice the variable fee unless it exceeds 500 USD. |
|
Operating an Organised Trading Facility** |
|||
|
Operating a Digital Asset Trading Facility** |
· fixed fee – · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · where the average daily trading value is less than 500 000 USD, is not applicable; · where the average daily trading value is more than 500 000 USD: - trading levy of 0.0006% of the average daily trading value; or - 5 000 USD, whichever is greater. |
· fixed fee – 33 080 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · where the average daily trading value is less than 500 000 USD, is not applicable; · where the average daily trading value is more than 500 000 USD: - trading levy of 0.0006% of the average daily trading value; or - 5 000 USD, whichever is greater. |
· fixed fee – 34 730 USD; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · where the average daily trading value is less than 500 000 USD, is not applicable; · where the average daily trading value is more than 500 000 USD: - trading levy of 0.0006% of the average daily trading value; or - 5 000 USD, whichever is greater. |
|
Providing Credit Rating Services
|
|
3 310 |
3 480 |
*Supervision fees prescribed herein for Islamic Banking Business, Providing Islamic Financing, Takaful Business, Captive Takaful Business through a Protected Cell Company and Captive Takaful Business other than through a Protected Cell Company, and the variable component of the annual supervision fee for Providing Money Services will apply from 1 January 2027.
(…)
6.1-1 Annual supervision fee in relation to Digital Assets
An Authorised Firm conducting Regulated Activities in relation to Digital Assets, except for the Regulated Activity of Operating a Digital Asset Trading Facility, must pay to the AFSA an additional annual supervision fee in the amount of 2 800 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
2 940 |
3 090 |
3 240 |
6.2 Annual supervision fees for Market Activities
Annual supervision fees for Market Activities are determined by the activities the Authorised Market Institution conducts as set out below:
|
Market Activities |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Operating an Exchange |
SF= FF+TVF+LF, · where SF – Supervision fee FF – Fixed fee, which is TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.003% of trading value in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) LF – Listing fee, calculated as 2% of all listing fees collected by an Authorised Investment Exchange in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and
· an additional annual fee of 5 000 if the Authorised Investment Exchange trades Investment Tokens and has Direct Access Members |
SF= FF+TVF+LF, · where SF – Supervision fee FF – Fixed fee, which is 22 050 (paid annually) TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.003% of trading value in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) LF – Listing fee, calculated as 2% of all listing fees collected by an Authorised Investment Exchange in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and · an additional annual fee of 5 000 if the Authorised Investment Exchange trades Investment Tokens and has Direct Access Members |
SF= FF+TVF+LF, · where SF – Supervision fee FF – Fixed fee, which is 23 150 (paid annually) TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.003% of trading value in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) LF – Listing fee, calculated as 2% of all listing fees collected by an Authorised Investment Exchange in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and · an additional annual fee of 5 000 if the Authorised Investment Exchange trades Investment Tokens and has Direct Access Members |
|
Operating a Clearing House |
SF=FF+SVF+DVF+CVF, where SF – Supervision fee FF – Fixed fee, which is SVF – Settlement value fee, calculated as 0.001% of settlement value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) DVF – Depository value fee, calculated as 0.00005% of depository value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) CVF – Clearing value fee, calculated as 0.001% of clearing value, applicable only to an Authorised Clearing House acting as a Central Counterparty (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and
an additional annual fee of 5 000 if the Authorised Clearing House clears Investment Tokens and has Direct Access Members |
SF=FF+SVF+DVF+CVF, where SF – Supervision fee FF – Fixed fee, which is 22 050 (paid annually) SVF – Settlement value fee, calculated as 0.001% of settlement value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) DVF – Depository value fee, calculated as 0.00005% of depository value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) CVF – Clearing value fee, calculated as 0.001% of clearing value, applicable only to an Authorised Clearing House acting as a Central Counterparty (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and
an additional annual fee of 5 000 if the Authorised Clearing House clears Investment Tokens and has Direct Access Members
|
SF=FF+SVF+DVF+CVF, where SF – Supervision fee FF – Fixed fee, which is 23 150 (paid annually) SVF – Settlement value fee, calculated as 0.001% of settlement value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) DVF – Depository value fee, calculated as 0.00005% of depository value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter) CVF – Clearing value fee, calculated as 0.001% of clearing value, applicable only to an Authorised Clearing House acting as a Central Counterparty (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and
an additional annual fee of 5 000 if the Authorised Clearing House clears Investment Tokens and has Direct Access Members
|
|
Operating a Loan Crowdfunding Platform*** |
· fixed fee - · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · where the funds raised during the quarter · where the funds raised during the quarter |
· fixed fee - 11 030; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · where the funds raised during the quarter are less than 5.5 million USD, is not applicable; · where the funds raised during the quarter are more than 5.5 million USD, a levy of 0.05% p.a. of the funds raised during the quarter. |
· fixed fee - 11 580; and · variable fee calculated on a quarterly basis: · where the funds raised during the quarter are less than 5.8 million USD, is not applicable; · where the funds raised during the quarter are more than 5.8 million USD, a levy of 0.05% p.a. of the funds raised during the quarter. |
|
Operating an Investment Crowdfunding Platform*** |
|||
|
[intentionally omitted] |
[intentionally omitted] |
N/A |
N/A |
Formula 1
SF= FF+TVF+LF,
where
SF – Supervision fee
FF – Fixed fee, which is 20 000 USD (paid annually)
TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.003% of trading value in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter)
LF – Listing fee, calculated as 2% of all listing fees collected by an Authorised Investment Exchange in one year (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter)
Formula 2
SF=FF+SVF+DVF+CVF,
where
SF – Supervision fee
FF – Fixed fee, which is 21 000 USD (paid annually)
SVF – Settlement value fee, calculated as 0.001% of settlement value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter)
DVF – Depository value fee, calculated as 0.00005% of depository value (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter)
CVF – Clearing value fee, calculated as 0.001% of clearing value, applicable only to an Authorised Clearing House acting as a Central Counterparty (paid quarterly within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter)
(…)
6.3 Annual supervision fees for Ancillary Services
Annual supervision fees for Ancillary Services are determined by the activities the Ancillary Service Provider conducts as set out below:
|
Ancillary Services |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Providing Legal Services |
|
2 760 |
2 900 |
|
Providing Audit Services |
|
3 310 |
3 480 |
|
Providing Accountancy Services |
|
2 760 |
2 900 |
|
Providing Consulting Services |
|
1 660 excluding Company service provider activity 3 310 including Company service provider activity |
1 740 excluding Company service provider activity 3 480 including Company service provider activity |
|
[intentionally omitted] |
[intentionally omitted] |
N/A |
N/A |
6.4 Annual recognition fees for Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institutions and Recognised Non-AIFC Members
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
Recognition fee |
Fees falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institution operating as an Investment Exchange |
· fixed fee - 21 000; and · variable annual recognition fee: 0.003% of trading value in one year generated for Authorised Market Institutions |
· fixed fee - 22 050; and · variable annual recognition fee: 0.003% of trading value in one year generated for Authorised Market Institutions |
· fixed fee - 23 150; and · variable annual recognition fee: 0.003% of trading value in one year generated for Authorised Market Institutions |
|
Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institution operating as a Clearing House |
· fixed fee - 21 000 USD; and · variable annual recognition fee: 0.001% of settlement value + 0.00005% of depositary value + 0.001% of clearing value* generated for Authorised Market Institutions, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facilities * Clearing value fee is applicable only to a Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institution acting as a Central Counterparty |
· fixed fee - 22 050 USD; and · variable annual recognition fee: 0.001% of settlement value + 0.00005% of depositary value + 0.001% of clearing value* generated for Authorised Market Institutions, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facilities * Clearing value fee is applicable only to a Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institution acting as a Central Counterparty |
· fixed fee - 23 150 USD; and · variable annual recognition fee: 0.001% of settlement value + 0.00005% of depositary value + 0.001% of clearing value* generated for Authorised Market Institutions, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facilities * Clearing value fee is applicable only to a Recognised Non-AIFC Market Institution acting as a Central Counterparty |
|
Recognised Non-AIFC Member |
For Recognised Non-AIFC Members that are admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, calculated according to formula 1 below: RF= FF+TVF, where RF – Annual recognition fee FF – Fixed fee, which is TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.001% of trading value, applicable only to Recognised Non-AIFC Members admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, whose trading value is over 25 million USD per quarter on each trading platform (paid within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and For Recognised Non-AIFC Members that are not admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, or whose trading value is lower than 25 million USD per quarter on each trading platform: a fixed amount of |
For Recognised Non-AIFC Members that are admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, calculated according to formula 1 below: RF= FF+TVF, where RF – Annual recognition fee FF – Fixed fee, which is 1 100 USD pro-rated over a calendar year TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.001% of trading value, applicable only to Recognised Non-AIFC Members admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, whose trading value is over 25 million USD per quarter on each trading platform (paid within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and For Recognised Non-AIFC Members that are not admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, or whose trading value is lower than 25 million USD per quarter on each trading platform: a fixed amount of 1 100 USD pro-rated over a calendar year. |
For Recognised Non-AIFC Members that are admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, calculated according to formula 1 below: RF= FF+TVF, where RF – Annual recognition fee FF – Fixed fee, which is 1 160 USD pro-rated over a calendar year TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.001% of trading value, applicable only to Recognised Non-AIFC Members admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, whose trading value is over 25 million USD per quarter on each trading platform (paid within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter); and For Recognised Non-AIFC Members that are not admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, or whose trading value is lower than 25 million USD per quarter on each trading platform: a fixed amount of 1 160 USD pro-rated over a calendar year. |
Formula 1
RF= FF+TVF,
where
RF – Annual recognition fee
FF – Fixed fee, which is 1 000 USD pro-rated over a calendar year
TVF – Trading value fee, calculated as 0.001% of trading value, applicable only to Recognised Non-AIFC Members admitted to trading by an Authorised Investment Exchange, Multilateral or Organised Trading Facility or Digital Asset Trading Facility, whose trading value is over 25 million USD per quarter on each trading platform (paid within 21 days after the issuance of invoice by the AFSA, but no later than within 1 month following each corresponding quarter).
(…)
SCHEDULE 8: FINTECH LAB FEES
8.1 Pre-application fee
A Person seeking to Test and/or Develop the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab, prior to commencing any eligibility assessment must pay to the AFSA the pre-application fee, in the amount of 2 000 USD as set out below: prior to commencing any eligibility assessment.
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
2 100 |
2 210 |
2 320 |
(…)
Notes
Fees for initial application—firm to conduct one or more activities within the FinTech Lab
An applicant seeking authorisation to conduct one or more activities specified in the fees table must pay:
(a) the fee specified for the activity in the table above (or, if the applicant intends to carry on more than one activity, the highest of the application fees specified in the table for any of those activities and 50% of the application fee in respect of each additional activity); and
(b) the fee amount of 200 USD for each individual for whom Approved Individual status is sought.
Application fee for Approval of Individuals
An applicant submitting applications on behalf of additional individuals seeking Approved Individual status must pay an application fee in the amount of 200 USD in respect of each additional Approved Individual application, as set out below.:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
210 |
220 |
230 |
Fees for application to modify or withdraw
Approved Individual applying to the AFSA to change the scope of his/her Approved Individual status, to have a condition or restriction varied or withdrawn must pay the fee in the amount of 200 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
210 |
220 |
230 |
(…)
8.7. Application fee for admission of Digital Assets to trading
A FinTech Lab Participant applying for admission of Digital Assets to trading must pay to the AFSA an application fee in the amount of 50 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
55 |
60 |
65 |
(…)
SCHEDULE 9: OTHER FEES FEES PAYABLE TO AFSA IN RELATION TO FUNDS
9.1. Application to register a Non-Exempt Fund and Exempt Fund or provide notification for an Exempt Fund
A Domestic Fund Manager that intends to manage a Domestic Fund which is a Non-Exempt or Exempt Fund and a Foreign Fund Manager that intends to manage a Domestic Fund which is an Exempt Fund must pay to the AFSA the following fees:
|
Application types |
|
Fees falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fees falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
Domestic Fund Manager that intends to manage a Non-Exempt Fund that is not an Umbrella Fund |
|
3 090 |
3 240 |
|
Domestic Fund Manager that intends to manage a Non-Exempt Fund that is an Umbrella Fund |
2 940 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 050 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
3 090 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 100 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
3 240 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 160 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
|
Domestic Fund Manager that intends to manage an Exempt Fund that is not an Umbrella Fund |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Domestic Fund Manager that intends to manage an Exempt Fund that is an Umbrella Fund |
1 470 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 050 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
1 540 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 100 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
1 620 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 160 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
|
Foreign Fund Manager that intends to manage an Exempt Fund that is not an Umbrella Fund |
|
1 540 |
1 620 |
|
Foreign Fund Manager that intends to manage an Exempt Fund that is an Umbrella Fund |
1 470 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 050 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
1 540 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 100 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
1 620 for the Umbrella Fund and its first Sub-Fund; and 1 160 for each additional Sub-Fund of the Umbrella Fund |
9.2 Application to make amendments to the Constitution or Offering Materials of a Non-Exempt Fund
A Domestic Fund Manager that intends to make material amendments to the Constitution or Offering Materials of a Non-Exempt Fund must pay to the AFSA an application fee in the amount of 700 USD., as set out below:
|
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
740 |
780 |
820 |
Guidance
Material amendments are defined in CIS 7.10-1.
SCHEDULE 10: LATE FEES PAYABLE TO THE AFSA
10.1 Late fees for failure to provide notification, report or return
A Person falling within FEES 7.1 must pay to the AFSA a late fee specified in table below. in the amount of 500 USD (300 USD for FinTech Lab Participants), if the Person fails to provide notification, report or return within 3 business days after it has committed a contravention. Non-payment of the late fee within 30 calendar days incurs a further late payment fee equal to 10% of the late fee for each calendar day.
|
Applicable to |
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
A Person |
530 |
560 |
590 |
|
FinTech Lab Participants |
320 |
340 |
360 |
10.2 Late fees for failure to comply with direction issued by the AFSA
A Person falling within FEES 7.4 must pay to the AFSA a late fee specified in table below. in the amount of 500 USD (300 USD for FinTech Lab Participants), if the Person fails to comply with direction issued by the AFSA within 3 business days after such failure. Non-payment of the late fee within 30 calendar days incurs a further late payment fee equal to 10% of the late fee for each calendar day.
|
Applicable to |
Fee falling due in 2027 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2028 (USD) |
Fee falling due in 2029 (USD) |
|
A Person |
530 |
560 |
590 |
|
FinTech Lab Participants |
320 |
340 |
360 |
(…)
Consultation Paper No. AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0003 from 15 July 2026 on Proposed AIFC Shari’ah Governance Framework
Please, press "PDF" button above to download a Consultation Paper.
INTRODUCTION
Why are we issuing this Consultation Paper (CP)?
The Astana Financial Services Authority (AFSA) has issued this Consultation Paper to seek suggestions from the market on proposed AIFC Shari’ah Governance Framework.
Who should read this CP?
The proposals in this paper will be of interest to current and potential AIFC Participants involved in carrying on or holding themselves out as carrying on a Financial Service in a Shari’ah-compliant manner.
Terminology
Defined terms have the initial letter of the word capitalised, or of each word in a phrase. Definitions are set out in AIFC Glossary. Unless the context otherwise requires, where capitalisation of the initial letter is not used, the expression has its natural meaning.
What are the next steps?
We invite comments from interested stakeholders on the proposed framework. All comments should be in writing and sent to the email specified below. When sending your comments by email, please use “Consultation Paper AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0003” in the subject line. You may, if relevant, identify the organisation you represent when providing your comments. AFSA reserves the right to publish, including on its website, any comments you provide, unless you expressly request otherwise. Comments supported by reasoning and evidence will be given more weight by AFSA.
The deadline for providing comments on the proposed framework is 15 September 2026. Once we receive your comments, we shall consider if any refinements are required to this proposal.
Following the public consultation, we may proceed with making relevant changes to the AIFC Acts as appropriate to reflect the points raised in the consultation. You should not act on the proposals until the framework is enacted.
AFSA prefers to receive comments by email at consultation@afsa.kz.
Structure of this CP
Part I – Background
Part II – Proposals
Part III – Public Consultation Questions
Annex 1 – Draft AIFC Shari’ah Governance Rules
Annex 2 – Consequential Amendments to the AIFC Rules
PART I – BACKGROUND
1. The development of Islamic finance is one of the strategic objectives of the AIFC. In support of this objective, the AIFC has established a regulatory framework designed to facilitate the provision of Shari’ah-compliant financial services across various areas, including banking, financing, investment, capital markets, and insurance while ensuring alignment with internationally recognised standards.
2. The AIFC framework has supported the development of Shari’ah-compliant financial activities within the AIFC. A number of Islamic banks, Islamic financing companies, and other Shari’ah-compliant institutions have been established within the AIFC, while Islamic securities and other Shari’ah-compliant financial instruments have been issued and listed on the Astana International Exchange.
3. Islamic finance activities are incorporated into the broader regulatory framework of the AIFC through specific rules applicable to Islamic banks, Islamic finance companies, takaful operators, and Islamic investment instruments. These rules address the distinctive features of Islamic finance, including the prohibition of activities that are not compliant with Shari’ah principles, requirements for Shari’ah-compliant contractual structures (such as murabahah, ijarah, musharakah, and sukuk), and the mandatory establishment of a Shari’ah governance framework at the corporate level.
4. As the Islamic finance ecosystem within the AIFC continues to mature, the AFSA considers it appropriate to further enhance the regulatory framework through the introduction of the comprehensive Shari’ah Governance Framework which includes the dedicated AIFC Shari’ah Governance Rules, together with consequential amendments to the AIFC General Rules, AIFC Glossary and AIFC Islamic Finance Rules.
PART II – PROPOSALS
Policy issue
5. While the AIFC has established a regulatory framework governing Islamic financial activities, the current regime does not yet provide a consolidated and detailed framework governing Shari’ah governance functions across Islamic financial institutions and Islamic windows.
6. The absence of a consolidated and detailed Shari’ah governance framework may lead to inconsistencies in the interpretation and application of Shari’ah principles, potential operational risks, and reputational concerns for the jurisdiction. A clear regulatory framework is therefore required to ensure consistency, transparency, and credibility of Shari’ah-compliant financial services.
7. Existing Islamic Finance Rules require institutions to appoint Shari’ah Supervisory Boards (SSBs) and conduct internal Shari’ah reviews; however, the regulatory framework does not currently provide:
· detailed requirements regarding the structure and independence of Shari’ah governance functions;
· clear reporting lines between Shari’ah governance functions and the Governing Body;
· a standardised framework for Shari’ah compliance monitoring and internal Shari’ah audit;
· regulatory expectations regarding external Shari’ah assurance; and
· a consistent framework for managing Shari’ah non-compliance events.
8. Internationally, major Islamic finance jurisdictions have introduced dedicated Shari’ah governance frameworks to regulate the internal governance structures of Islamic financial institutions.
For example:
· Malaysia has implemented a comprehensive Shari’ah Governance Policy issued by Bank Negara Malaysia.
· Bahrain regulates Shari’ah governance through the Central Bank of Bahrain Rulebook, which incorporates AAOIFI Governance Standards (GS).
· Pakistan has adopted a detailed Shari’ah Governance Framework issued by the State Bank of Pakistan.
· The UAE introduced a Higher Shari’ah Authority and national Shari’ah GS for Islamic financial institutions.
9. These frameworks demonstrate the growing importance of robust Shari’ah governance structures as a key element of Islamic finance regulation.
Policy proposal
10. It is proposed to introduce the AIFC Shari’ah Governance Rules, establishing a comprehensive governance structure encompassing the SSB, Shari’ah Compliance Function, Internal Shari’ah Audit, External Shari’ah Audit, and the Shari’ah Board Secretariat. Together, these components are designed to ensure effective oversight, operational independence, transparency, and accountability in the implementation of Shari’ah principles across all Islamic financial services and products offered within the AIFC.
11. The proposed Rules follow the principle of proportionality, recognising that Islamic financial institutions operating within the AIFC vary significantly in terms of size, complexity, and scope of activities. Accordingly, the application of certain requirements may be subject to transitional arrangements, waivers, or outsourcing options where appropriate, while ensuring that the core principles of Shari’ah governance are maintained.
Scope of application
12. These proposed Rules apply every Person who carries on, or holds itself out as carrying on a Financial Service in a Shari’ah-compliant manner; and a Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund which is operated or held out as being operated as an Islamic Fund, and where appointed, its Trustee; and an Authorised Firm which carries on, or holds itself out as carrying on, a Regulated Activity in a Shari’ah compliant manner.
13. The proposed Rules expressly reference the following AAOIFI GS:
GS 1: Shari’ah Governance Framework.
GS 8: Central Shari’ah Board.
GS 9: Shari’ah Compliance Function.
GS 11: Internal Shari’ah Audit.
GS 18: Shari’ah Decision-Making Process.
GS 19: SSB Appointment and Composition.
GS 20: SSB Functions and Operations.
GS 21: SSB Review and Report.
Shari’ah Governance Principles
14. The proposed Rules set out the core Shari’ah Governance Principles that Authorised Firms are required to implement in their operations, including:
· Accountability for Shari’ah compliance at all levels of the organisation.
· Independence in Shari’ah decision-making.
· Transparency of processes, rulings, and disclosures.
· Effective internal controls to prevent Shari’ah non-compliance.
· Proper documentation of all Shari’ah opinions, resolutions, and approvals.
· Timely identification, reporting, and remediation of any instances of Shari’ah non-compliance.
15. To ensure the effective implementation of these principles, it is proposed that Authorised Firms establish an internal Shari’ah governance structure comprising, at a minimum, the following components:
· A Shari’ah Supervisory Board.
· A Shari’ah Compliance Function.
· An Internal Shari’ah Audit Function.
· An External Shari’ah Audit.
· A Shari’ah Board Secretariat Function.
Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB)
16. The SSB must be independent, competent, empowered, and adequately resourced, with its members appointed by the Governing Body. The proposed Rules reinforce this independence through several complementary safeguards: SSB Members must not hold executive positions within the Firm; individuals responsible for product development, sales, or revenue generation may not serve as SSB Members or SSB Advisors; SSB Members and SSB Advisors must be free from conflicts of interest, with any conflict disclosed to the AFSA immediately; and where the SSB disagrees with the Firm's senior management, Governing Body, or shareholders on Islamic finance matters, the opinion of the SSB prevails, and SSB Members may not be dismissed on account of such disagreement.
17. An Authorised Firm, pursuant to the proposed Rules, must establish and maintain an independent and adequately resourced SSB appointed by the Governing Body and governed by an SSB Charter and individual appointment letters. These documents must define the SSB’s mandate, remuneration, tenure, meeting procedures, quorum and decision-making processes, record-keeping, and reporting lines. The SSB must meet at least four times annually, and at least one joint meeting with the Governing Body must be held each year. Outsourcing of the SSB is permitted, provided that such an arrangement is approved by the AFSA and is in full compliance with these Shari’ah Governance Rules.
18. The core functions of the SSB include:
· Supervising the Firm’s activities for compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules.
· Reviewing and approving Islamic financial products, contracts, and structures.
· Issuing binding Shari’ah opinions (fatwas, rulings, and resolutions).
· Overseeing the Shari’ah Compliance and Internal Shari’ah Audit functions.
· Reviewing Shari’ah non-compliance events and recommending remedial actions.
· Endorsing the annual Shari’ah compliance report.
· Issuing the annual Shari’ah Supervisory Report.
· Disclosing the total remuneration of the SSB.
· Formulating, elaborating, and implementing a 5-year strategic plan of the SSB.
Shari’ah Compliance Function
19. A Firm must establish and maintain an independent and adequately resourced Shari’ah Compliance Function responsible for monitoring transactions and operational processes, reviewing new products, marketing materials and client documentation, supporting the SSB through technical analysis and documentation, and keeping a register of Shari’ah non-compliance events. The Function shall also perform any additional responsibilities in accordance with the AAOIFI GS No. 9 “Shari’ah Compliance Function” or as delegated by the SSB.
20. The Shari’ah Compliance Function must report directly to the SSB, with a dotted-line reporting relationship to the CEO on Shari’ah-related matters. Subject to the size and complexity of the Firm, the Function may also oversee the Shari’ah Board Secretariat.
21. The Function shall be headed by a Shari’ah Compliance Officer (SCO), who must be an Approved Individual of the Firm and whose appointment and removal are subject to SSB approval and the AFSA’s approval. The SCO must possess appropriate expertise in Islamic finance and Shari’ah Principles and Rules, a sound understanding of the regulatory environment, and relevant academic and professional qualifications, including at least a bachelor’s degree (or its equivalent) in Shari’ah or Islamic finance (or a related discipline), a recognised professional certification such as the Certified Shari’ah Advisor and Auditor (CSAA), a minimum of three years of experience, and residency in the Republic of Kazakhstan is recommended.
Internal Shari’ah Audit
22. An Authorised Firm must establish and maintain an independent and adequately resourced Internal Shari’ah Audit Function responsible for reviewing the implementation and execution of Shari’ah-compliant products, verifying the proper implementation of rulings issued by the SSB, identifying and reporting Shari’ah non-compliance events, and recommending corrective actions.
23. Internal Shari’ah audits must be conducted at least annually, or more frequently depending on the Firm’s size and complexity. Audit reports shall be submitted to the SSB, the Governing Body, and Senior Management, and provided to the AFSA upon request. The Function must apply a documented audit plan and risk-based methodology and may be established as a separate department. The AFSA may grant waivers, transitional arrangements, or permit outsourcing of certain functions, particularly for firms conducting Islamic finance activities, Islamic windows, or Shari’ah-compliant investment arrangements, provided that the independence and effectiveness of the Function are not compromised.
24. The Internal Shari’ah Audit Function shall be headed by an Internal Shari’ah Auditor, who must be a Designated Individual of the Firm and whose appointment and removal require approval of the Governing Body. The Internal Shari’ah Auditor must possess appropriate expertise in Islamic finance and Shari’ah Principles and Rules, relevant professional qualifications such as the CSAA issued by the AAOIFI or the Certified Islamic Specialist in Shari’ah Auditing (CISSA) issued by the General Council for Islamic Banks and Financial Institutions, at least three years of relevant experience, and an appropriate qualification in Shari’ah, Islamic finance, auditing, or a related discipline.
External Shari’ah Audit
25. An Authorised Firm shall be subject to an External Shari’ah Audit conducted in accordance with Auditing Standard (AS) No. 6 “External Shari’ah Audit” issued by the AAOIFI. The implementation of this requirement shall be phased in over a period of up to 5 years from the proposed Rules’ commencement, taking into account market readiness and the availability of qualified Shari’ah audit professionals.
26. During the transitional period, the scope and frequency of External Shari’ah Audit engagements shall be determined by the Governing Body, having regard to the Firm’s risk profile and the complexity of its activities.
27. Upon completion of the audit, the External Shari’ah Auditor shall issue an independent Shari’ah Assurance Report to the SSB and the Governing Body, which shall be made available to the AFSA upon request.
Shari’ah Board Secretariat Function
28. All Shari’ah governance functions must have clear reporting lines, independence, and adequate resources in accordance with AAOIFI Standards, and the Shari’ah Board Secretariat Function may operate either as a standalone unit or under the Shari’ah Compliance Function, depending on the Firm’s size, providing administrative, technical, and procedural support to the SSB.
Recordkeeping and Conflict of Interest
29. The proposed Rules strengthen recordkeeping and conflict-of-interest requirements by mandating a structured retention of key Shari’ah governance documents, ensuring secure storage, accessibility, reproducibility in English upon the AFSA request, and protection from unauthorised alteration.
30. Authorised Firms must implement robust conflict-of-interest controls, ensure the independence of the SSB, Internal Shari’ah Audit, and Shari’ah Compliance functions, prohibit revenue-generating staff from serving in Shari’ah oversight roles, and prevent conflicted persons from participating in relevant decisions.
31. Additionally, Authorised Firms must maintain comprehensive training programmes to ensure ongoing competence of staff, Shari’iah Compliance Officer, Internal Shari’ah Auditor, SSB Members, the Governing Body, and Senior Management in Shari’ah governance and Islamic finance.
Consequential Amendments
32. To give effect to the proposed Shari'ah Governance Rules, consequential amendments are proposed to the AIFC General Rules (GEN), the AIFC Glossary (GLO), and the AIFC Islamic Finance Rules (IFR), set out in Annex 2 to this Consultation Paper.
33. The amendments to GEN require an Authorised Firm conducting Islamic Financial Business to appoint a Shari'ah Compliance Officer and an Internal Shari'ah Auditor as Controlled and Designated Functions respectively.
34. The amendments to the AIFC Glossary introduce the defined terms underpinning the new framework, including Audit Committee, External Shari'ah Audit, Internal Shari'ah Audit Function, Internal Shari'ah Auditor, Shari'ah Compliance Function, Shari'ah Non-Compliance Event, Shari'ah Non-Compliance Risk, Shari'ah Principles and Rules, and Shari'ah Supervisory Board (SSB).
35. The amendments to IFR remove the provisions on the Shari'ah Supervisory Board and internal and external Shari'ah reviews, which are consolidated into, and superseded by, the proposed Shari'ah Governance Rules, thereby ensuring that Shari'ah governance requirements are regulated within a single comprehensive framework and avoiding duplication or inconsistency across the AIFC Acts.
PART III – PUBLIC CONSULTATION QUESTIONS
Question 1. Do you have any comments on the proposed AIFC Shari’ah Governance Rules, including the proposed requirements relating to Shari’ah Supervisory Boards, Shari’ah Compliance Functions, Internal Shari’ah Audit, External Shari’ah Audit, and Shari’ah Board Secretariat arrangements? Please identify any provisions that may require clarification, adjustment, or an alternative approach, and provide supporting rationale.
Question 2. Are there any aspects of Shari'ah governance not addressed in the proposed Rules that you consider should be covered, or alternative approaches the AFSA should consider?
Question 3. In your view, what would be a reasonable implementation timeline for these Rules? Please explain the basis for your suggested timeframe. Please provide the basis for your suggested timeframe, including any practical challenges, resource constraints, or other factors that the AFSA should consider.
Annex 1 – Draft AIFC Shari’ah Governance Rules
CONTENTS
4. Shari’ah Governance Framework and Standards
5. Shari’ah Governance Structure
6. Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB)
7. Internal Shari’ah Audit Function
8. Shari’ah Compliance Function
10. Reporting and Disclosure Requirements
PART 1: GENERAL
1. Application
(1) These Rules apply to:
(a) every Person who carries on, or holds itself out as carrying on a Financial Service in a Shari’ah-compliant manner; and
(b) a Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund which is operated or held out as being operated as an Islamic Fund, and where appointed, its Trustee; and
(c) an Authorised Firm which carries on, or holds itself out as carrying on, a Regulated Activity in a Shari’ah compliant manner.
2. Purpose
(1) These Rules establish the mandatory Shari’ah governance framework to ensure compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules, maintenance of sound governance, and implementation of effective internal controls that safeguard the integrity, transparency, and stability of the Islamic financial sector under AFSA supervision.
(2) The Rules set out the minimum mandatory governance, oversight, reporting, and audit requirements, including the establishment and functioning of Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB), Shari’ah Compliance Function, Internal Shari’ah Audit Function and External Shari’ah Audit.
3. Definitions
(1) Words and expressions used in these Rules and interpretative provisions applying to these Rules are set out in the Glossary unless indicated otherwise.
(2) Where definitions in the Rules conflict with definitions in IFR, the IFR definitions prevail.
(3) Shari’ah Principles and Rules mean the principles, standards, rules, and rulings relating to Islamic finance recognised or adopted under the laws, rules, and regulatory framework of the AIFC, including applicable AAOIFI standards, and relevant Shari’ah Supervisory Board rulings.
(4) In these Rules, the terms “Shari’ah”, “Shari’ah compliance”, and “Shari’ah Principles and Rules” must be interpreted as having the same meaning and are used interchangeably.
(5) For the purposes of the Rules, references to AAOIFI Governance Standards (GS) include, at minimum, the following standards:
(a) GS 1: Shari’ah Governance Framework.
(b) GS 8: Central Shari’ah Board.
(c) GS 9: Shari’ah Compliance Function.
(d) GS 11: Internal Shari’ah Audit.
(e) GS 18: Shari’ah Decision-Making Process.
(f) GS 19: SSB Appointment and Composition.
(g) GS 20: SSB Functions and Operations.
(h) GS 21: SSB Review and Report.
(6) These standards are referenced for alignment purposes. Compliance with AAOIFI Governance Standards must apply only to the extent required by AIFC Acts.
(7) References to AAOIFI Governance Standards in these Rules must be construed as references to the latest version of such standards as amended, updated, or replaced from time to time.
(8) Where an Authorised Firm other than an Islamic Financial Institution conducts Islamic Financial Business as a part of its business operations (Islamic Window), the Rules apply in full to the Authorised Firm’s Islamic Window. The Authorised Firm must ensure in its internal policies and procedures effective segregation (which includes, at a minimum, separate personnel, segregated information technology systems, and segmental financial reporting), operational independence, and appropriate ring-fencing of the Islamic Window in accordance with Shari’ah governance requirements in a manner that enables full compliance with the Shari’ah governance requirements set out in these Rules, including, at a minimum:
(a) Shari’ah oversight through a Shari’ah Supervisory Board; and
(b) Shari’ah Compliance Function; and
(c) Internal Shari’ah Audit Function; and
(d) External Shari’ah Audit, where applicable; and
(e) compliance with the Shari’ah governance, reporting, disclosure, and record-keeping requirements under these Rules.
(9) An Authorised Firm must establish, maintain, and implement internal policies and procedures governing Shari’ah Non-Compliance Events and Shari’ah Non-Compliance Risks, which must be designed to ensure full compliance with the Shari’ah governance requirements set out in these Rules. Such policies and procedures must include, at a minimum:
(a) the prompt identification, documentation and escalation of any Shari’ah Non-Compliance Events and Risks by the Shari’ah Compliance Function or other relevant officers of the Authorised Firm; and
(b) appropriate mechanisms and procedures for remediation and purification, to be undertaken under the oversight and direction of the Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB); and
(c) reporting to the AFSA, where required and subject to an assessment of risks materiality by the SSB; and
(d) maintaining adequate records of Shari’ah Non‑Compliance Events, including identification, assessment, remediation, and purification.
4. Shari’ah Governance Framework and Standards
(1) An Authorised Firm must implement a Shari’ah governance framework that ensure:
(a) accountability for Shari’ah compliance across all levels of the organisation.
(b) independence of Shari’ah decision-making.
(c) transparency of processes, rulings, and disclosures.
(d) effective controls that prevent Shari’ah non-compliance.
(e) proper documentation of all Shari’ah opinions and approvals.
(f) timely identification, reporting and remediation of Shari’ah non-compliance.
(2) The Governing Body (Board of Directors) of an Authorised Firm is ultimately responsible for ensuring the effectiveness of the Shari’ah governance framework. It is the responsibility of the Governing Body of a Firm to ensure the Shari’ah compliance of the Authorised Firm they manage and control.
(3) An Authorised Firm must ensure that its Shari’ah governance arrangements are proportionate to the nature, scale, and complexity of its Islamic Financial Business.
(4) An Authorised Firm’s Shari’ah governance framework, including the structure and functioning of the Shari’ah Supervisory Board, the Shari’ah Compliance Function, the Internal Shari’ah Audit, and External Shari’ah Audit, must be consistent with the AAOIFI Governance Standards (GS) and AAOIFI Auditing Standards (AS). Where these AAOIFI standards provide more detailed or stringent requirements, the Authorised Firm must ensure alignment with such requirements unless they conflict with AIFC Acts.
(5) The AAOIFI Financial Accounting Standards (FAS) do not replace or supersede the IFRS requirements applicable in the AIFC. IFRS remains the primary accounting framework. The AAOIFI Financial Accounting Standards apply only to the extent that they introduce Shari’ah-related requirements relevant to Islamic Financial Business, or where no applicable IFRS standard exists.
5. Shari’ah Governance Structure
(1) An Authorised Firm must maintain the following minimum components:
(a) Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB).
(b) Shari’ah Board Secretariat Function.
(c) Shari’ah Compliance Function.
(d) Internal Shari’ah Audit.
(e) External Shari’ah Audit.
(2) All components of the Shari’ah governance structure listed above must have clear reporting lines (in accordance with AAOIFI Standards), independence and adequate resources. An Authorised Firm must ensure the Shari’ah Board Secretariat Function may operate as a standalone unit or under the Shari’ah Compliance Function, depending on the institution’s size. The Shari’ah Board Secretariat Function is responsible for administrative, technical, and procedural support to the SSB, including, but not limited to:
(a) preparation and coordination of SSB meetings.
(b) maintaining records of SSB resolutions, fatwas, and opinions.
(c) coordination between the SSB, Shari’ah Compliance Function and Internal Shari’ah Audit.
(d) monitoring follow-up actions arising from SSB decisions.
(e) ensuring proper documentation and archiving of Shari’ah governance materials.
(3) An Authorised Firm must ensure that individuals appointed as Shari’ah Compliance Officer and Internal Shari’ah Auditor are AFSA-approved individuals and have due capacity in Shari’ah matters.
Guidance: To provide flexibility to Authorised Firms, AFSA may consider granting a waiver or modification to these requirements, depending on the size of the Authorised Firm; flexibility, temporary exemptions, or outsourcing arrangements for providing Islamic finance activities, Islamic windows, and institutions offering investments through Shari’ah sleeves for certain functions, due to the scarcity of relevant expertise.
(4) The Internal Shari’ah Audit Function is an independent ex-post function that reviews transactions after execution and assesses the adequacy and effectiveness of intended controls for adherence to Shari’ah requirements, whereas the Shari’ah Compliance Function is an ex-ante function that reviews transactions before execution and is an ongoing process of monitoring the Authorised Firm’s overall activities and Shari'ah compliance environment.
PART 2: OPERATIONAL
6. Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB)
(1) An Authorised Firm must establish and maintain an independent, competent, empowered and adequately resourced Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB). The Governing Body must appoint the members of the SSB.
(2) The operation of the SSB must be governed by the Authorised Firm’s SSB charter and the appointment letters of its members.
(3) The charter and the appointment lettersmust set out the SSB’s operating framework, including:
(a) the scope of duties and remuneration of the SSB members (b)terms and conditions of appointment, (c) meeting frequency, quorum and decision-making processes, (d) record-keeping requirements, and (e) reporting arrangements to the Governing Body.
(4) The Governing Body and the SSB must meet at least once a year. The SSB must hold a minimum of 4 meetings per year.
(5) An Authorised Firm may establish its Shari’ah Supervisory Board on an outsourced basis, provided that such an arrangement is approved by the AFSA and is in full compliance with these Rules.
(6) The SSB must consist of at least 3 members (SSB Members) who are specialised jurists in Fiqh Al-Muamalat (Islamic commercial jurisprudence) and knowledgeable of Maqasid Al Shari’ah (the Noble Objectives of Shari’ah). An SSB Member must not hold membership on more than 3 SSB of Islamic banks, memberships in other jurisdiction subject to mandatory disclosure. The number of SSB Members must be odd.
(7) The SSB Members must collectively have:
(a) demonstrable expertise and competence in Fiqh Al-Muamalat (Islamic commercial jurisprudence); and
(b) knowledge of contemporary Islamic finance structures; and
(c) the ability to issue Shari’ah rulings and opinions; and
(d) integrity and independence of judgement; and
(e) transitional Flexibility in SSB Composition.
(8) Despite Rule 6.6, the SSB may include not more than 1 SSB Member who is not a specialised jurist in Fiqh Al-Muamalat, provided that such individual:
(a) is an expert in Islamic finance; and
(b) has demonstrated knowledge of Fiqh Al-Muamalat; and
(c) meets the eligibility requirements in Rule 6.19.
(9) Where Rule 6.8 applies:
(a) the SSB must include at least 2 specialised jurists in Fiqh Al-Muamalat; and
(b) the total number of SSB Members must remain odd.
(10) The Rule 6.7 is transitional and must apply only for the first 5 years from the commencement date of these Rules.
(11) In addition to jurists, the SSB may include non-voting SSB Advisors who are experts in finance, economics, accounting, or law, and have reasonable knowledge of Shari’ah Principles and Rules.
Guidance: Authorised Firms are strongly encouraged to appoint SSB Advisor(s), as this will improve the SSB's understanding of the broader picture, provide diversified exposure, and enable the SSB to discharge its functions and duties more effectively.
(12) Where the Authorised Firm appoints an SSB Advisor(s), they must be subject to all the relevant provisions of these Rules related to the members of SSB, insofar as suitable, in addition to the matters specifically related to SSB Advisors. The number of SSB Advisors must not exceed the number of SSB Members.
(13) The appointment, renewal, and removal of SSB Members and SSB Advisors must be approved by the Governing Body and must comply with AFSA’s fit and proper requirements. Their tenure must be for 3 years and renewable to a maximum of 9 years.
(14) An Authorised Firm must ensure that the SSB is provided adequate resources, information, and access to all operations to perform its duties effectively.
(15) The SSB must:
(a) supervise the Authorised Firm’s activities to ensure compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules; and
(b) review and approve all Islamic financial products, contracts, structures, and documentation; and
(c) issue binding fatwas, rulings, and resolutions (“Shari’ah Opinions”) that in compliance with Maqasid Al Shari’ah as well; and
(d) oversee the Shari’ah Compliance Function and the Internal Shari’ah Audit Function; and
(e) review Shari’ah non-compliance events and recommend corrective actions; and
(f) endorse the Authorised Firm’s annual Shari’ah compliance report; and
(g) issue the Shari’ah Supervisory Annual Report; and
(h) disclose the total remuneration of the SSB; and
(i) formulate, elaborate, and implement a 5-year strategic plan of the SSB.
(16) All SSB rulings and fatwas are binding on the Authorised Firm. The Governing Body must ensure full implementation of SSB decisions.
(17) An Authorised Firm must keep a complete record of all SSB resolutions, fatwas, and opinions, including supporting evidence, rationales, and conditions.
(18) An Authorised Firm must ensure that SSB Members, as well as SSB Advisors, are independent and free from conflict of interest. Any conflict must be disclosed to AFSA immediately.
(19) An Authorised Firm must consider the following criteria when assessing the fitness and propriety of individuals to serve as SSB Members:
(a) well-versed in Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) and Usul Al-Fiqh (the origins of Islamic law).
(b) Shari’ah-related (preferably Fiqh-related or Usul Al-Fiqh-related) academic qualification (equivalent of a master’s degree or above) from a recognised educational institution.
(c) suitable practical experience (minimum 10 years for Chairman of the SSB and minimum 5 years for other SSB Members) in Fiqh Al-Muamalat (Islamic Commercial Jurisprudence) or research and academic experience in the area of Fiqh Al-Muamalat (Islamic Commercial Jurisprudence) or as SSB Member of similar institutions.
(d) reasonable understanding of economics, law, banking, finance, and/or related fields demonstrated through relevant academic and/or professional qualification and/or practical experience in the relevant fields.
(e) understanding of the legal and regulatory framework applicable to financial institutions in the jurisdiction.
(f) integrity, good reputation, and absence of any disciplinary, regulatory or legal record inconsistent with fit-and-proper requirements.
(g) independent and free from conflict of interest.
(20) The Authorised Firm must consider the following criteria when assessing the fitness and propriety of individuals to serve as SSB Advisors:
(a) basic understanding of Shari’ah Principles and Rules and, preferably, an appropriate understanding of Fiqh Al-Muamalat (Islamic Commercial Jurisprudence) as applicable to Islamic banking and finance.
(b) well-versed and holds a high standing in their respective field of expertise.
(c) suitable academic (master’s degree or above) and/or professional qualification.
(d) suitable practical experience or research and academic experience in the relevant technical field(s) such as economics, law, banking, finance and/or related fields (not less than 10 years).
(e) good understanding of legal and regulatory framework of the jurisdiction related to the financial sector.
(f) good reputation and market recognition.
(g) independent and free from conflict of interest.
(21) If the SSB disagrees with the Authorised Firm’s senior management, Governing Body, or shareholders regarding Islamic finance matters, the opinion of the SSB prevails.
(22) An Authorised Firm must not dismiss SSB Members due to disagreements regarding Islamic finance matters.
(23) An Authorised Firm must notify AFSA in writing without undue delay and no later than 5 business days of any appointment, removal, resignation, or change in the composition of the Shari’ah Supervisory Board. The notification must include:
(a) the reason for the change; and
(b) supporting documentation; and
(c) confirmation that all new SSB Members and SSB Advisors meet the minimum requirements under Rules 6.18 and 6.19; and
(d) confirmation that the revised SSB composition remains compliant with AAOIFI Governance Standard (GS) №.19 “Shari’ah Supervisory Board: Appointment and Composition”.
(24) AFSA may review any proposed or completed appointment of an SSB Member or SSB Advisor. AFSA may request additional information, object to an appointment, or require the removal of the SSB Member or SSB Advisor where it determines that:
(a) the individual does not meet the minimum requirements under Rule 6.19; or
(b) the individual fails to satisfy AFSA’s fit-and-proper criteria; or
(c) the appointment creates a conflict of interest or compromises independence; or
(d) the appointment is inconsistent with AAOIFI Governance Standards; or
(e) the appointment may adversely affect the integrity, credibility, or soundness of the Authorised Firm’s Shari’ah governance framework.
(25) Where AFSA objects, Authorised Firm must not proceed with the appointment or must remove the individual from the SSB without delay.
(26) The structure, responsibilities, independence, and operating procedures of the SSB must be consistent with the relevant AAOIFI Governance Standards (GS), including requirements related to SSB appointment, dismissal, independence, documentation of decisions, and validation of Shari’ah compliance unless they conflict with AIFC Acts.
7. Internal Shari’ah Audit Function
(1) An Authorised Firm must establish an Internal Shari’ah Audit Function responsible, at minimum scope, for:
(a) periodic assessment of compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules; and
(b) reviewing product implementation and execution; and
(c) verifying that SSB rulings have been implemented correctly; and
(d) identifying and reporting Shari’ah Non-Compliance Events; and
(e) recommending corrective actions and remediation.
(2) The Internal Shari’ah Audit Function must be independent and must have unrestricted access to all operations and documentation relevant to Islamic Financial Business.
(3) An Authorised Firm must ensure that the Internal Shari’ah Audit Function is independent from business units and reports directly to the Governing Body in consultation with the SSB.
(4) The Internal Shari’ah Audit Function must have a dotted-line reporting relationship with SSB in Shari’ah Principles and Rules related issues.
(5) The Internal Shari’ah Audit must be conducted at least annually, or more frequently depending on the size and complexity of the Authorised Firm’s operations.
(6) The Internal Shari’ah Audit report must be submitted to:
(a) the SSB; and
(b) the Governing Body; and
(c) the senior management; and
(d) AFSA, upon request.
(7) An Authorised Firm must establish an Internal Shari’ah Audit Function with suitable resources and documentation standards that include audit plan and auditing and/or risk-based methodology.
(8) The Internal Shari’ah Audit Function must be led by an Internal Shari’ah Auditor who is a Designated Individual of the Authorised Firm.
Guidance: To provide flexibility to Authorised Firms, AFSA may consider granting a waiver or modification to these requirements, depending on the size of the Authorised Firm. flexibility or temporary exemption or outsourcing arrangements for providing Islamic finance activities, Islamic windows, and Islamic Financial Institutions offering investments through Shari’ah sleeves on certain functions, due to the scarcity of relevant expertise.
(9) The Internal Shari’ah Auditor must:
(a) Have appropriate level of knowledge in Islamic Finance and Shari'ah Principles and Rules; and
(b) Have a good understanding of the Authorised Firm’s relevant industry (banking, financing, insurance etc.) and the regulatory environment; and
(c) Hold at least a bachelor’s degree (or its equivalent) in:
(i) Islamic law, including the study of Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence), Usul Al-Fiqh (the origins of Islamic law) and/or Fiqh Muamalat (Islamic commercial jurisprudence); or
(ii) Islamic finance, Islamic banking, Islamic economics, or any other relevant discipline; or
(iii) finance, banking, business, economics, accountancy, audit, or any other relevant discipline; and
(d) Hold the relevant professional qualification (from recognised international and/or professional organisation) specific to this role, which may include but not limited to:
(i) AAOIFI Certified Shari’ah Advisor and Auditor (CSAA) qualification; or
(ii) CIBAFI Certified Islamic Specialist in Shari’ah Auditing (CISSA) qualification; and
(e) Have a minimum of 3 years of experience in Shari’ah compliance, internal or external Shari’ah audit, internal or external audit, or other relevant areas.
(10) Appointment and removal of the Internal Shari’ah Auditor must be approved by the Governing Body.
8. Shari’ah Compliance Function
(1) An Authorised Firm must maintain a dedicated Shari’ah Compliance Function responsible for:
(a) ensuring ongoing compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules; and
(b) monitoring transactions and processes; and
(c) reviewing new products, marketing materials, and client agreements; and
(d) supporting the SSB with technical analysis and documentation; and
(e) maintaining the Shari’ah compliance manual and related procedures; and
(f) other related functions defined in the AAOIFI Governance Standard (GS) № 9 “Shari’ah Compliance Function” and/or functions dedicated or delegated by the decision of the Authorised Firm’s SSB.
(2) The Shari’ah Compliance Function must be led by Shari’ah Compliance Officer who is an Approved Individual of the Authorised Firm.
(3) The Authorised Firm must ensure that the Shari’ah Compliance Function is independent from business units and reports directly to the SSB in consultation with the SEO.
(4) The Shari’ah Compliance Function must have a dotted-line reporting relationship with the CEO in Shari’ah Principles and Rules related issues.
(5) The Shari’ah Compliance Function must maintain a register of Shari’ah Non-Compliance Events that have occurred or a probable to occur within a reasonable outlook and ensure timely remediation.
(6) The Shari’ah Compliance Officer must:
(a) Have an appropriate level of knowledge in Islamic Finance and Shari'ah Principles and Rules; and
(b) Have a good understanding of the Authorised Firm’s relevant industry (banking, financing, insurance etc.) and the regulatory environment; and
(c) Possess a reasonable understanding of economics and finance; and
(d) Hold at least a bachelor’s degree (or its equivalent) in:
(i) Islamic law, including the study of Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), Usul Al-Fiqh (the origin of Islamic law) and/or Fiqh Muamalat (Islamic commercial jurisprudence); or
(ii) Islamic finance, Islamic banking, Islamic economics, or any other relevant discipline; and
(e) Hold the relevant professional qualification (from a recognized international and/or professional organisation) specific to this role, which may include but not limited to:
(i) AAOIFI Certified Shari’ah Advisor and Auditor (CSAA) qualification; and
(f) Have a minimum of 3 years of experience in Shari’ah compliance, internal or external Shari’ah audit, Shari’ah non-compliance risk management, or other relevant areas.
Guidance: AFSA recommends appointing residents of Kazakhstan given that the Shari'ah Compliance Officer's role requires continuous and direct engagement with the firm's operations, personnel, and Governing Body.
(7) Appointment and removal of the Shari’ah Compliance Officer must be approved by the SSB and the AFSA.
(8) Shari’ah Board secretariat function may be under Shari’ah Compliance Function depending on the size of the Authorised Firm.
9. External Shari’ah Audit
(1) An Authorised Firm must be subject to an External Shari’ah Audit (ESA) conducted in accordance with the AAOIFI Auditing Standard (AS) No. 6 “External Shari’ah Audit”.
(2) The full implementation of the requirements of AAOIFI AS No. 6 must follow a phased transition approach, with the full scope of the standard becoming mandatory within a period of up to 5 years, subject to readiness of the market, AFSA regulatory frameworks and capacity of qualified Shari’ah audit professionals (with AAOIFI CSAA qualification).
(3) During the transition period, the scope, frequency, and depth of external Shari’ah assurance engagements must be determined by the Governing Body based on the Authorised Firm’s risk profile, complexity of transactions and overall level of Shari’ah compliance maturity.
(4) Upon completion of each External Shari’ah Audit, the External Shari’ah Auditor must provide an independent Shari’ah Assurance Report to the SSB and the Governing Body. The report must be made available to AFSA upon request.
PART 3: ADMINISTRATIVE
10. Reporting and Disclosure Requirements
(1) Authorised Firms must disclose publicly, on their website:
(a) names of SSB Members, as well as SSB Advisors; and
(b) SSB brief profile; and
(c) the annual Shari’ah Supervisory Board Report issued by the SSB (within its published financial statements as well).
(2) An Authorised Firm must notify AFSA without undue delay of any Shari’ah Non-Compliance Event (SNCE) that is assessed by the SSB as material. A material SNCE is one that:
(a) results in the generation of material non-permissible income requiring purification; or
(b) significantly affects the rights or interests of customers or investors; or
(c) indicates a major deficiency in the Authorised Firm’s Shari’ah governance or control environment; or
(d) has been classified as material by the SSB, Shari’ah Compliance Function, Internal Shari’ah Audit or External Shari’ah Auditor.
11. Record-Keeping
(1) An Authorised Firm must retain, for a minimum of 6 years or the lifetime of the product, whichever longer, accurate and complete records of:
(a) SSB rulings, resolutions, and fatwas; and
(b) Shari’ah product approvals; and
(c) internal Shari’ah review reports; and
(d) Shari’ah compliance workpapers; and
(e) Shari’ah audit reports and working papers; and
(f) client documentation related to Islamic products; and
(g) remediation measures taken following non-compliance events.
(2) Records must be:
(a) Accessible; and
(b) securely stored; and
(c) reproducible in English upon AFSA request; and
(d) protected from unauthorised alteration.
12. Conflicts of Interest
(1) An Authorised Firm must implement controls to identify, prevent, and manage conflicts of interest involving:
(a) SSB Members and SSB Advisors; and
(b) Internal Shari’ah Audit Function and/or Internal Shari’ah Auditor; and
(c) Shari’ah Compliance Function and/or Shari’ah Compliance Officer; and
(d) senior management; and
(e) any business units engaged in Islamic operations.
(2) An Authorised Firm must ensure SSB Members and SSB Advisors do not participate in decisions where they have a direct or indirect conflict.
(3) All conflicts of interest must be disclosed to:
(a) the Governing Body; and
(b) the SSB; and
(c) AFSA (if material).
13. Independence Requirements
(1) An Authorised Firm must ensure the independence of:
(a) the SSB (including its Members and Advisors); and
(b) the Internal Shari’ah Audit Function; and
(c) the Shari’ah Compliance Function.
(2) No individual responsible for product development, sales, or revenue generation may serve as SSB Member or SSB Advisor or staff of the Internal Shari’ah Audit Function.
(3) SSB Members must not hold executive positions within the Authorised Firm.
14. Training and Competence
(1) An Authorised Firm must ensure that all staff involved in Islamic Financial Business receive adequate and ongoing training on:
(a) Shari’ah Principles and Rules; or
(b) Islamic finance contracts and structures; or
(c) relevant AIFC Acts; or
(d) product-specific operational requirements.
(2) An Authorised Firm must maintain a documented training programme and keep records of participation.
(3) Approved Individuals responsible for Shari’ah compliance and Shari’ah Audit Functions must maintain competence through continuous professional development.
(4) An Authorised Firm must ensure the SSB Members undergo special training at least once a year and the Governing Body and senior management undergo training on Shari’ah governance and accountability at least once a year.
Annex 2 – Consequential Amendments to the AIFC Rules
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE AIFC RULES
In these amendments, underlining indicates a new text, and strikethrough indicates a removed text.
AIFC GENERAL RULES
(…)
2. CONTROLLED AND DESIGNATED FUNCTIONS
2.1. Mandatory appointments
2.1.1. Appointments to be filled by Approved Individuals
(1) Subject to (2) an Authorised Person must make the following appointments and ensure that they are held by one or more Approved Individuals at all times:
(a) Senior Executive Officer;
(b) Finance Officer;
(c) Compliance Officer; and
(d) Money Laundering Reporting Officer.
(2) For an Authorised Person Operating a Representative Office the mandatory appointments in (1) may be carried on by its Principal Representative.
(3) An Authorised Firm which is a Credit Rating Agency:
(a) need not make the appointments referred to in (1)(b) and (d); and
(b) must ensure that the appointments referred to in 1(a) and (c) are held by different Approved Individuals at all times.
(4) An Authorised Firm which is conducting Islamic Financial Business in addition to the above must appoint a Shari’ah Compliance Officer.
(…)
2.2.1. Designation of roles as Controlled Functions
The functions specified in GEN 2.2.2 to 2.2.5 are Controlled Functions.
(…)
2.2.5-2. Shari’ah Compliance Officer
Shari’ah Compliance Function is carried out by an individual who is a Director, Partner or Senior Manager of an Authorised Person responsible for an integral part of an Authorised Firm’s governance and control structure, catering to certain crucial objectives of the Authorised Firm related to its compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules. It is an ex-ante control function charged with the mandate to review transactions before execution to ensure Shari’ah compliance.
(…)
2.3. Designated Functions
2.3.1. Designation of roles as Designated Functions
The functions specified in GEN 2.3.2 to 2.3.4 are Designated Functions.
(…)
2.3.6. Internal Audit Manager
(1) The Internal Audit Manager function is carried out by an individual who is a Director, Partner or Senior Manager of an Authorised Person and who has responsibility for all aspects of the internal audit function in relation to the Authorised Person's Regulated Activities.
(2) Where an Authorised Firm conducts Islamic Financial Business, it must appoint an Internal Shari'ah Auditor. The Internal Shari’ah Audit function is carried out by an individual who is a Director, Partner or Senior Manager of an Authorised Person and who has responsibility for an independent integral part of an Authorised Firm’s governance and control structure, catering to certain crucial objectives of the Authorised Firm related to its compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules. It is an ex-post control function charged with the mandate to review transactions after execution to ensure Shari’ah compliance.
AIFC GLOSSARY
(…)
1. INTERPRETATION
|
(…) |
(…) |
|
Audit Committee |
(in Shari’ah Governance Rules) A committee established and maintained by the Board to monitor and review the Reporting Entity’s internal audit function and other internal controls. |
|
External Shari’ah Audit |
An independent annual audit of compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules, conducted by a qualified external Shari’ah audit provider. |
|
Internal Shari’ah Audit Function |
An independent integral part of an Authorised Firm’s governance and control structure, catering to certain crucial objectives of the Authorised Firm’s related to its compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules. It is an ex-post control function charged with the mandate to review transactions after execution to ensure Shari’ah compliance. |
|
Internal Shari’ah Auditor |
The Designated Individual leading the Internal Shari’ah Audit Function of a Firm who has responsibility for ex post auditing of activities and transactions in accordance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules. |
|
Shari’ah Compliance Function |
An integral part of an Authorised Firm’s governance and control structure, catering to certain crucial objectives of the Authorised Firm related to its compliance with Shari’ah Principles and Rules. It is an ex-ante control function charged with the mandate to review transactions before execution to ensure Shari’ah compliance. |
|
Shari’ah Non-Compliance Event |
Any policy, financial arrangement, activity, contract, transaction and other event that does not comply with Shari’ah Principles and Rules. |
|
Shari’ah Non-Compliance Risk |
The risk that arises from an Authorised Firm’s failure to comply with Shari’ah Principles and Rules. This is a subset of operational risks and may, in certain circumstances, result in legal, financial or reputational risks. |
|
Shari’ah Principles and Rules |
The principles, standards, rules and rulings relating to Islamic finance recognised or adopted under the laws, rules and regulatory framework of the AIFC, including applicable AAOIFI standards adopted and rulings of the relevant Shari’ah Supervisory Board rulings. |
|
Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB) |
An independent body of specialised jurists (Fiqh Members) in Fiqh Al-Muamalat (Islamic commercial jurisprudence). An SSB may include advisors (referred to as “SSB Advisors”) who are experts in Islamic finance, Islamic economics, accounting or law, and have reasonable knowledge of Shari’ah Principles and Rules. SSB resolutions (fatwas) and rulings are binding on the Authorised Firm. |
AIFC ISLAMIC FINANCE RULES
(…)
5. SHARI’AH SUPERVISORY BOARD (SSB) [intentionally omitted]
5.1. Appointment of SSB
(1) An Islamic Financial Institution must appoint a Shari’ah Supervisory Board (SSB).
(2) An Islamic Financial Institution must ensure that:
(a) its SSB consists of at least 3 members; and
(b) the members appointed to the SSB are competent to perform their functions as SSB members taking into account their qualifications and previous experience; and
(c) any appointments, dismissals or changes in respect of members of the SSB are approved by the Governing Body of the Islamic Financial Institution; and
(d) no member of the SSB is a director or controller of the Islamic Financial Institution.
Guidance:
The AFSA may request the AIFC Central Shari’ah Board to provide guidance or advice on Shari’ah matters.
5.2. Policy in relation to SSB
An Islamic Financial Institution must document its policy in relation to:
(a) how appointments, dismissals or changes will be made to the SSB; and
(b) the process through which the suitability of SSB members will be considered; and
(c) the remuneration of the members of SSB.
5.3. Independence of SSB
(1) An Islamic Financial Institution must take reasonable steps to ensure that the members of the SSB are independent of and not subject to any conflict of interest with respect to the firm.
(2) An Authorised Firm conducting Islamic Financial Business must ensure that the systems and controls it is required to maintain under Rule 4.1 provides that:
(a) a member of the SSB is obliged to notify that Authorised Firm of any conflict of interest that such member may have with respect to the Authorised Firm or, in the case of an Investment Trust, the Trustee;
(b) the Authorised Firm will take appropriate steps to manage any such conflict of interest so that the Islamic Financial Business activities are conducted appropriately and in compliance with Shari’ah, the interest of a Client is not adversely affected, and all Clients are fairly treated and not prejudiced by any such interests; and
(c) If the Authorised Firm is unable to manage a conflict of interest as provided above, it must dismiss or replace the member as appropriate.
5.4. Information about SSB to be given to AFSA
An Islamic Financial Institution must provide AFSA upon request, with information on its appointed or proposed SSB members about their qualifications, skills, experience and independence.
5.5. Obligation to assist SSB
An Islamic Financial Institution must take reasonable steps to ensure that it and its employees:
(a) provide such assistance as the SSB reasonably requires to fulfil its duties; and
(b) give the SSB right of access at all reasonable times to relevant records and information; and
(c) do not interfere with the SSB’s ability to discharge its duties; and
(d) do not provide false or misleading information to the SSB.
5.6. Record-keeping
An Islamic Financial Institution must establish and retain records of:
(a) its assessment of the competence of the SSB members; and
(b) the agreed terms of engagement of each member of the SSB;
for at least 6 years following the date on which the individual ceased to be a member of the SSB.
5.7. Records of assessment of competency of SSB
The records of the assessment of competence of SSB members in Rule 5.6 above, where applicable, must include at a minimum:
(a) the factors that have been considered when making the assessment of competence; and
(b) the qualifications and experience of the SSB members; and
(c) the basis upon which the Islamic Financial Institution considers that the proposed SSB member is suitable; and
(d) details of any other SSBs of which the proposed SSB member is, or has been, a member.
5.8. Shari’ah reviews to be undertaken
An Islamic Financial Institution must ensure that all Shari’ah reviews are undertaken by the SSB in accordance with the AAOIFI Standards on Governance (GSIFI No 2).
5.9. Annual Shari’ah report
(1) An Islamic Financial Institution must commission an annual report from the SSB which complies with the AAOIFI Standards on Governance (GSIFI No 1).
(2) An Islamic Financial Institution must give the AFSA, a copy of each annual report of the institution’s SSB within 3 months after the day the relevant financial year of the institution ends.
5.10. Financial promotions and communications
(1) Before an Islamic Financial Institution issues or approves a financial promotion or communication, it must ensure that the communication material discloses the identity of the SSB which has reviewed the relevant products or services. These disclosures are in addition to the information required to be disclosed in financial promotions, by the AIFC COB Rules.
(2) Financial communication means any communication (made through any medium including brochures, telephone calls and presentations) the purpose or effect of which is:
(a) to promote or advertise specified products;
(b) to promote or advertise any regulated activity (or any activity that would be a regulated activity if it was carried on in or from the AIFC); or
(c) to invite or induce any person to enter into an agreement with any person in relation to a specified product; or
(d) to invite or induce any person to engage in any regulated activity (or an activity that would be a regulated activity if it was carried on in or from the AIFC)
5.11. Internal Shari’ah reviews
(1) An Islamic Financial Institution must perform an internal Shari’ah review to assess the extent to which the institution complies with fatwas, rulings and guidelines issued by its SSB.
(2) An Islamic Financial Institution must perform the internal Shari’ah review in accordance with the AAOIFI Standards on Governance (GSIFI No. 3).
(3) An Islamic Financial Institution must ensure that:
(a) the internal Shari’ah review is performed by its internal audit function or compliance oversight function; and
(b) the individuals or departments involved in performing the review are competent and sufficiently independent to assess compliance with Shari’ah.
Guidance
For the purposes of assessing competency of personnel or departments which perform the internal Shari’ah review, Islamic Financial Institutions should consult the AAOIFI Standards on Governance (GSIFI No. 3).
(…)
7.5. SSB for an Islamic Investment Fund [intentionally omitted]
(1) A Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund that is a Non-Exempt Fund must, subject to (3), appoint a SSB to its Fund that meets the following requirements:
(a) the SSB has at least three members;
(b) the members appointed to the SSB are competent to perform their functions as SSB members of the Fund;
(c) any appointments, dismissals or changes in respect of members of the SSB are approved by the Governing Body of the Fund Manager; and
(d) no member of the SSB is a director or Controller of the Fund or its Fund Manager.
(2) A Fund Manager may comply with the requirement in (1) by appointing to the Fund its own SSB, provided the requirements in (1) are also met.
(3) A Fund Manager is not required to comply with the requirement (1) in where it relies, for the purposes of making Investments for the Fund, on a widely accepted Shari'ah screening process such as investing in securities included in, or recognised by reference to, an Islamic index, Sukuk, or treasury instruments issued by a Shari'ah compliant financial services provider.
Guidance
i) In appointing a SSB for the purposes of Rule 7.5(1), the Fund Manager should consider the previous experience and qualifications of the proposed SSB members to assess whether the proposed SSB member is competent to advise on the activities undertaken by the Islamic Fund.
ii) Although the Fund Managers of Exempt Funds are not subject to the requirement for the appointment of a SSB for such a Fund, they would need to ensure that the Exempt Funds they manage continue to meet the applicable Shari’ah requirements applicable to the Fund. They may use a member of the SSB appointed at the firm level for the purposes of ascertaining compliance with the Shari’ah requirements. The manner in which they demonstrate to the Unitholder of the Exempt Fund as to how they achieve such compliance is a matter left to negotiation (i.e. subject to contractual terms) between the Unitholders and the Fund Manager.
iii) An External Fund Manager may not be able to take advantage of Rule 7.5 (2) above, unless it has a SSB appointed for their own firm. In contrast the Fund Manager of an External Fund will be able to use its SSB to meet the SSB requirement relating to the Fund as set out in Rule 7.5(2) above.
(4) If the Fund Manager appoints to the Fund the same SSB it has appointed to meet its own requirements at the firm level, the documents required under Rule 7.5 (5) below must be included in or otherwise form part of its Shari’ah Governance policies and procedures.
(5) The Fund Manager of a Fund must establish and retain, for six years, records pertaining to:
(a) Its assessment of the competency of the SSB members; and
(b) the agreed terms of engagement of each member of the SSB.
Guidance
The records of the assessment of competency of SSB members should clearly indicate, at least:
i) the factors that have been taken into account when making the assessment of competency; ii) the qualifications and experience of the SSB members;
iii) the basis upon which the Fund Manager has deemed that the proposed SSB member is suitable; and
iv) details of any other SSBs of which the proposed SSB member is, or has been, a member.
(6) The Islamic Financial Business policy and procedures manual must provide that:
(a) a member of the SSB is obliged to notify the Fund Manager of any conflict of interest that such member may have with respect to the Fund or the Fund Manager, and if appointed, or in the case of an Investment Trust, the Trustee; and
(b) the Fund Manager will take appropriate steps to manage any such conflict of interest so that the Islamic Financial Business is carried out appropriately and in compliance with Shari’ah, the interest of a Unitholder is not adversely affected, and all Unitholders are fairly treated and not prejudiced by any such interests.
(7) If a Fund Manager is unable to manage a conflict of interest as provided above in Rule
7.5(6), it must dismiss or replace the member as appropriate.
(8) The Fund Manager of a Fund must provide the AFSA at its request with information on the qualifications, skills, experience and independence of the individuals who are appointed or proposed to be approved as members of the SSB.
(9) The Fund Manager of a Fund must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Fund Manager and the Fund’s Employees:
(a) provide such assistance as the SSB reasonably requires to fulfill its duties;
(b) give the SSB right of access at all reasonable times to relevant records and information
(c) do not interfere with the SSB’s ability to discharge its duties; and (d) do not provide false or misleading information to the SSB.
(10) In the event of a Trustee being appointed to the Fund, the Trustee must also take reasonable steps to ensure that its Employees comply with (a)-(d) of the rule 7.5(9) above.
7.6. External Shari’ah reviews and periodic reports [intentionally omitted]
(1) A Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund that is a Non-Exempt Fund, must ensure that all Shari’ah reviews of the Fund, wherever applicable, are undertaken by the SSB in accordance with AAOIFI GSIFI No 2.
(2) In the case of a Domestic Fund that is a Non-Exempt Fund, the Fund Manager must commission an interim and an annual report relating to the Fund operations from the SSB which complies with AAOIFI GSIFI No 1.
(3) The Fund Manager must deliver a copy of the interim and annual report referred to in (2) above, to the Unitholders and must include the report of the SSB in the annual report required under the AIFC CIS Rules.
Guidance
Although the Fund Managers of Exempt Funds are not subject to the Shari’ah review process, they would need to ensure that the Exempt Fund continues to meet the Shari’ah requirements, particularly for the purposes of their annual and interim reports, which are required to be prepared under applicable the AIFC CIS Rules. However, the manner in which they demonstrate to the Unitholders of the Fund how they achieve such compliance is a matter left to negotiation (i.e. subject to contractual terms) between the Unitholders and the Fund Manager.
7.7. Internal Shari’ah review [intentionally omitted]
(1) The Fund Manager of a Domestic Fund that is a Non-Exempt Fund must perform an internal Shari’ah review to assess the extent to which the Fund complies with fatwas, rulings and guidelines issued by the Fund’s SSB.
(2) The Fund Manager must perform the internal Shari’ah review in accordance with AAOIFI GSIFI No. 3.
Guidance
i) The Fund Manager of an umbrella Fund which has an Islamic Sub-Fund should, to the extent possible, perform the internal Shari’ah review in accordance with AAOIFI GSIFI No. 3 and must document the manner in which it will conduct that part of the internal Shari’ah review that is not conducted in accordance with AAOIFI GSIFI No. 3.
ii) Although the Fund Managers of Exempt Funds are not subject to the specific internal Shari’ah requirements, they would need to ensure that the Exempt Fund continues to meet the applicable Shari’ah requirements. However, the manner in which they demonstrate to the Unitholders of the Fund how they achieve such compliance is a matter left to negotiation (i.e. subject to contractual terms) between the Unitholders and the Fund Manager.
iii) The Fund Manager must ensure that the internal Shari’ah review referred to in this section is performed by the internal audit function of the Fund or the compliance function of the Fund and that the individuals or departments involved in performing the review are competent and sufficiently independent to assess compliance with Shari’ah.
Guidance
For the purposes of assessing competency of personnel or departments which perform the internal Shari’ah review, Fund Manager should consult AAOIFI GSIFI No. 3 paragraphs 9 to 16 inclusive.
Consultation Paper No. AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0002 from 15 July 2026 on Amendments to the AIFC Financial Technology framework
Please, press "PDF" button above to download a Consultation Paper.
INTRODUCTION
Why are we issuing this Consultation Paper (CP)?
The Astana Financial Services Authority (AFSA) has issued this Consultation Paper (CP) to seek suggestions from the market on the proposed amendments to the AIFC Financial Technology (FinTech) framework.
Who should read this CP?
The proposals outlined in this paper will be relevant for current and potential AIFC Participants engaged in activities related to the FinTech Lab, as well as for the broader market and other stakeholders.
Terminology
Defined terms have the initial letter of the word capitalised, or of each word in a phrase. Definitions are set out in the AIFC Glossary (GLO). Unless the context otherwise requires, where capitalisation of the initial letter is not used, the expression has its natural meaning.
What are the next steps?
We invite comments from relevant stakeholders on the proposed framework. All comments should be in writing and sent to the email specified below. If sending your comments by email, please use “Consultation Paper AFSA-PSRD-CSP-2026-0002” in the subject line. You may, if relevant, identify the organisation you represent when providing your comments. The AFSA reserves the right to publish, including on its website, any comments you provide, unless you expressly request otherwise. Comments supported by reasoning and evidence will be given more weight by the AFSA.
The deadline for providing comments on the proposed framework is 15 September 2026. Once we receive your comments, we shall consider if any refinements are required to this proposal.
Following the public consultation, we may proceed with making relevant changes to the AIFC Acts as appropriate to reflect the points raised in the consultation. You should not act on the proposals until the framework is enacted.
AFSA prefers to receive comments by email at consultation@afsa.kz.
Structure of this CP
Part I – Background
Part II – Proposals
Part III – Public Consultation Questions
Annex 1 – Proposed Amendments to the AIFC Rules
PART I – BACKGROUND
1. The AIFC FinTech Rules have been in place since 2018, providing the foundational framework for the supervision of innovative financial services. The Rules were subsequently amended in 2019 to refine certain aspects of the regime. In 2026, the AFSA is undertaking a comprehensive review and enhancement of this framework to ensure its continued relevance in light of evolving market practices, technological developments, and international regulatory standards.
2. As AIFC continues to develop as an international financial centre, it is essential that the regulatory framework remains responsive to market needs, supports sustainable growth, addresses emerging risks, and reinforces the AIFC’s competitiveness as a jurisdiction for FinTech activities. This requires a careful balance between enabling innovation and ensuring regulatory robustness and investor protection.
3. In this context, the AFSA has undertaken post-implementation monitoring of the AIFC FinTech Rules, combined with supervisory engagement with FinTech Lab participants. This process has been complemented by a comparative analysis of peer jurisdictions, allowing for benchmarking of regulatory approaches and identification of international best practices. The combined outcomes of supervisory observations and jurisdictional analysis have enabled the AFSA to identify a targeted set of policy issues to be addressed within the current review.
4. While international practices provide useful benchmarks, AFSA’s supervisory engagement through the FinTech Lab has identified a number of practical issues arising in the application of the current framework, including areas where greater clarity, proportionality, or operational alignment may be required. Accordingly, the next section sets out policy proposals to amend the FinTech framework, with a focus on addressing these implementation challenges while preserving the principles-based and flexible nature of the existing regime. The proposed measures are designed to enhance regulatory certainty, support market development, and ensure that the sandbox continues to operate as an effective gateway for innovation within AIFC.
PART II – PROPOSALS
Revising the FinTech Lab Eligibility Criteria
Introduction of a consolidated eligibility framework
5. The AFSA proposes to replace the Testing and Developing regimes with a single, consolidated eligibility framework comprising three criteria. These criteria are designed to be mutually reinforcing rather than mutually exclusive: an applicant needs only satisfy one criterion, and the AFSA will assess the application against the applicable regulatory conditions that correspond to that criterion.
6. While the substantive scope is not materially different from the current framework, the objective is to express the existing policy intent in a more consistent and internationally aligned manner. Each criterion is addressed below:
Criterion (a): Innovative Technologies and Processes
This criterion captures the core use case of the FinTech Lab: a firm with a genuinely novel product, service, process, or technology that it wishes to validate in a live market setting under regulatory supervision.
Criterion (b): Novel Application of Existing Technologies
This criterion addresses a distinct and increasingly prevalent category of FinTech Lab applicants: firms that are not deploying new technology per se, but are applying established technologies to financial services in ways that give rise to new or substantially modified business models.
Criterion (c): Presence and Recognition for Foreign Regulated Institutions
This criterion introduces an explicit recognition pathway for Regulated Financial Institutions (meaning institutions holding a licence or authorisation from a recognised financial services regulator in a foreign jurisdiction) that wish to participate in the FinTech Lab without obtaining a full AFSA licence.
7. At this stage, the proposed amendments establish the principle that participation in the FinTech Lab may be available to recognised foreign Regulated Financial Institutions. The detailed recognition framework, including eligibility requirements, assessment criteria, application procedures and any conditions applicable to recognised entities, will be developed separately by the AFSA and communicated through a subsequent notice. This approach provides the necessary regulatory basis for the recognition pathway while allowing the AFSA flexibility to design a proportionate operational framework informed by market engagement and implementation considerations.
Extend consumer benefit requirement to all FinTech Lab Activities
8. It is proposed to extend the consumer benefit requirement, currently applicable under criterion (a) only, to all Participants conducting FinTech Lab Activities, irrespective of the eligibility criterion under which they were admitted. Under the revised framework, all Participants will be required to demonstrate that their proposed activities offer benefits to consumers, such as increased accessibility, efficiency, security, or quality in the provision of financial services. This approach is consistent with international best practices, which require regulatory sandboxes to demonstrate a clear value proposition and consumer benefit.
Reintroduce an explicit “Scaling Intent” requirement
9. A common eligibility criterion in leading sandbox regimes, which is currently absent from the AFSA framework, is the requirement for applicants to demonstrate both an intention and capability to scale their solution following successful testing. This requirement is consistently reflected in peer jurisdictions.
10. The AIFC regulatory framework initially included a comparable requirement aligned with these international practices. However, this requirement was removed in 2019 on the basis that such intent was considered inherent and generally assumed from the applicant. Given the significant maturation of the FinTech ecosystem since 2019, it is proposed to revisit this position and reintroduce an explicit scaling intent requirement.
11. The reintroduction of an explicit “scaling intent” requirement would align the AIFC FinTech Lab with international best practices and provide clearer supervisory expectations regarding the ultimate objective of sandbox participation. It would reinforce the principle that the FinTech Lab is not solely a controlled environment for experimentation, but a structured pathway for enabling the responsible deployment of viable innovative solutions.
12. In addition, this requirement would strengthen the strategic role of the FinTech Lab in supporting the development of the local financial ecosystem by ensuring that participating firms are oriented towards real-world application and market deployment, where feasible. It would also enhance the quality of applicants by ensuring that admitted participants demonstrate not only technical feasibility, but also commercial and operational readiness to progress beyond the testing phase.
Self-Assessment of FinTech Lab Eligibility
13. The AFSA proposes to introduce guidance clarifying that a Person seeking admission to the FinTech Lab should undertake a self-assessment to determine whether there is a demonstrable need to test the relevant technology, process, service, or product within the FinTech Lab. The purpose of the guidance is to reinforce the policy objective of the FinTech Lab as a controlled testing environment intended for genuinely innovative solutions requiring regulatory engagement or testing, rather than as a general market entry mechanism.
Streamlining the Authorisation process by combining pre-application and application stages
14. Under the existing framework, the FinTech Lab authorisation process consists of two stages: pre-application and application. At the pre-application stage, the AFSA conducts Controllers’ fitness and propriety checks, assesses sources of funds and wealth, and reviews the business plan’s eligibility for testing. At the application stage, the AFSA assesses candidates for Controlled Functions, reviews internal control documents (e.g. AML/CTF Policy, Internal Control Rules, material outsourcing arrangements, Client assets safeguarding, Client agreement, Exit strategy) and approves a Test Plan.
15. It is proposed to combine the pre-application and application stages into a single-stage authorisation process. Under this approach, applicant’s eligibility, core systems and controls, and fitness and propriety will be assessed based on their business plan, sources of funds and wealth, proposed candidates for Controlled Functions, exit strategy, and the development of a Test Plan.
16. Detailed internal control documentation would not be required at the point of entry but would instead be developed in parallel with testing under supervisory oversight. Nevertheless, FinTech Lab Participants will be formally notified through the Licence Notice and Test Plan that no operations may commence until internal controls are established to the satisfaction of AFSA.
17. Importantly, the proposed approach also reflects existing supervisory practice implemented through Class Modification. AFSA issued Notice No. AFSA-ATD-NOT-2026-0007, dated 13 February 2026, to give effect to this approach. The Notice came into force on the date of issuance and remains in effect. Since its introduction, the approach has demonstrated effectiveness in practice; accordingly, it is now proposed to formalise it within the Rules.
18. The proposed model is expected to improve accessibility and encourage innovation, while maintaining a risk-based approach to supervision. Additionally, the pre-application fee of USD 2,000 will be removed, which is currently payable prior to the commencement of the eligibility assessment.
Facilitating Entry to the FinTech Lab for Authorised Persons
19. Under the current FinTech Lab framework, all applicants are required to obtain a FinTech Lab Licence as a precondition for participation. This uniform licensing requirement does not distinguish between firms that have no prior regulatory relationship with the AFSA and firms that are already subject to the AFSA's ongoing supervision as Authorised Persons. For the latter category, the FinTech Lab Licence requirement imposes a duplicative and disproportionate regulatory burden.
20. Under the proposed framework, an Authorised Person wishing to conduct FinTech Lab Activities will not be required to obtain a separate FinTech Lab Licence. Instead, it will engage directly with the AFSA through a process that builds on its existing authorisation and supervisory relationship. Where the proposed activities fall within the Authorised Person's current permissions, no additional licensing action will be required. Where they do not, the firm may apply for a Licence Modification or seek a waiver or modification of specific provisions of the AIFC Financial Services Framework Regulations (Framework Regulations) or the Rules, where the AFSA considers that their application would be disproportionate to a testing context of the specific product/service/process.
21. The possible scenarios are as follows: (i) Where an Authorised Person proposes to conduct FinTech Lab Activities that fall within the scope of its existing Licence, the Authorised Person may proceed to test upon completing the required engagements with the AFSA. (ii) Where the proposed FinTech Lab Activities fall outside the scope of the Authorised Person's existing Licence, two pathways are available:
(a) Licence Modification. The Authorised Person may apply to the AFSA for a modification of its existing Licence to extend the permitted scope of its authorisation to cover the proposed FinTech Lab Activities.
(b) Waiver or Modification of specific provisions of the Framework Regulations and the Rules. Alternatively, where certain requirements of the applicable AIFC Acts are not suited to or are disproportionate in the context of the specific product, service, or process being tested, the Authorised Person may apply for a waiver or modification of those specific requirements. Any waiver or modification granted will be limited in scope to the particular product, service, or process under testing and will remain in effect only for the duration of the agreed testing period, after which full compliance with the relevant requirements will be reinstated.
22. In both cases, no FinTech Lab Licence is required. The Authorised Person remains subject to its existing authorisation throughout, and the AFSA retains full supervisory oversight over the FinTech Lab Activities. This proposal reflects a well-established principle in international sandbox regulation that existing authorisation constitutes a sufficient and proportionate basis for entry into a controlled testing environment, provided appropriate safeguards remain in place.
23. The proposed approach is adopted by several leading financial regulators. The frameworks share the same foundational logic: the existing authorisation of the firm is treated as a sufficient regulatory foundation for FinTech testing, the licensing gate is replaced by a structured engagement process, and rule waivers or modifications are available for a defined testing period on a case-by-case basis.
24. It is important to note that the AFSA intends to publish a separate Notice to Authorised Persons setting out the engagement expectations that apply to firms seeking to participate in the FinTech Lab under proposed Rule.
Clarifying the Licensing framework for FinTech Lab Participants
Conditions precedent to commencement of operations
25. Under rule 2.5.1(b) of the AIFC FinTech Rules, a Licence serves as an authorisation of a Centre Participant to Test and/or Develop FinTech Activities and can be subject to a set of conditions. In practice, such conditions frequently include requirements that must be fulfilled prior to the commencement of operations, particularly in relation to internal controls, systems, and operational readiness. However, the current framework does not explicitly clarify the regulatory status of a FinTech Lab Participant during the period between the issuance of the Licence and the fulfilment of these conditions, which may create ambiguity for market participants and reduce transparency in the Public Register.
26. In light of supervisory experience, it is proposed to introduce guidance clarifying that, following the issuance of a Licence, the status of a FinTech Lab Participant in the Public Register shall remain “pending approval” where conditions precedent to commencement of operations remain outstanding. Only upon submission of satisfactory evidence demonstrating fulfilment of such conditions, and receipt of formal confirmation from the AFSA, should the status be updated to “active”, thereby enabling the Participant to commence operations with Clients. This approach is intended to enhance transparency, ensure clear signaling to the market, and reinforce supervisory control over the transition from authorisation to live operations.
Suspension, revocation and withdrawal of the Licence
27. Rule 2.5.3 of the AIFC FinTech Rules is currently addresses the suspension and revocation of a Licence; however, in substance, the provision also covers circumstances of withdrawal. It is therefore proposed to amend the title and relevant provisions of rule 2.5.3 to explicitly include withdrawal (and, where appropriate, expiry), thereby ensuring that the full range of licence termination scenarios is clearly reflected.
28. Similarly, rule 2.8.1 provides that, upon expiry of a Licence, any legal and regulatory requirements waived or modified by the AFSA cease to have effect. It is proposed to extend this provision to also cover cases of suspension, withdrawal and revocation, thereby ensuring that all scenarios in which a Licence becomes invalid are treated consistently. These clarifications will enhance legal certainty and avoid potential misinterpretation.
29. In addition, pursuant to rule 2.5.3(d)(iv) of the AIFC FinTech Rules, a FinTech Lab Participant is required, upon revocation or withdrawal of its Licence, to implement its exit strategy and ensure that all obligations to its customers are “fulfilled or addressed”. It is proposed to amend this requirement to clarify that such obligations must be “fulfilled and addressed”. This amendment is intended to remove ambiguity in the standard expected from the FinTech Lab Participants by ensuring both the full discharge of contractual and financial obligations, as well as the proper resolution of any residual matters, including client communications, complaints, and orderly wind-down arrangements. This clarification strengthens consumer protection and aligns with the AFSA’s risk-based supervisory approach.
Enhancing the framework for waivers, conditions, restrictions
Enhance the baseline applicability of the AIFC Legislation
30. Under rule 2.6.1(a) of the AIFC FinTech Lab Rules, existing requirements of the Framework Regulations and the Rules would not generally apply initially to FinTech Lab Participants. Instead, upon receipt of an application, the AFSA engages with the applicant to identify relevant provisions and may issue individual guidance tailored to the specific characteristics and risks of the proposed FinTech Lab Activities. While this approach provides flexibility, it may create ambiguity as to the baseline regulatory position applicable to FinTech Lab Participants and may lead to inconsistent interpretation by market participants.
In light of this, it is proposed to clarify the framework by establishing that all relevant AIFC Acts apply to FinTech Lab Participants by default, except for those provisions that are waived or modified, or where the timeline for application of certain provisions of the Framework Regulations and the Rules are clearly specified within the testing plan agreed with AFSA. In other words, AFSA may, based on applicant’s/Fintech Lab Participant’s request, waive or modify specific provisions of the Framework Regulations and the Rules during the entire period of Testing and/or Development of FinTech Lab Activities. Additionally, the test plan will provide for a time schedule for the gradual compliance of Fintech Lab Participant with specific provisions of the Framework Regulations and the Rules.
31. This approach reverses the current formulation and provides a clearer legal baseline, ensuring that any deviations from the standard regulatory framework are transparent, deliberate, and risk justified. Such clarification enhances legal certainty, strengthens regulatory discipline, and aligns with the principle of a risk-based and proportionate application of requirements, while preserving the flexibility necessary for innovation within the FinTech Lab.
Enhance flexibility in specification of conditions
32. It is proposed to amend rule 2.6.1(c) of the AIFC FinTech Rules to clarify that conditions imposed by the AFSA on a FinTech Lab Participant are not limited to those reflected in Schedule 1 of the Rules, which set out conditions for commencing business with Clients. While Schedule 1 may continue to serve as a non-exhaustive reference point for common conditions, it should not be interpreted as an exhaustive or restrictive list governing the AFSA’s licensing powers.
33. It is therefore proposed to remove the explicit reference to Schedule 1 and instead provide that conditions may be imposed, varied, or supplemented by the AFSA as appropriate, allowing the AFSA as it considers appropriate. This approach ensures that conditions can be applied in a proportionate and risk-sensitive manner, reflecting the specific risks, business models, and stages of testing of individual FinTech Lab Participants. It also reflects existing supervisory practice, under which conditions are tailored on a case-by-case basis.
Separation of Regulatory Requirements and Internal Governance
34. It is proposed to remove Part 3 of the AIFC FinTech Rules in its entirety. Under this approach, the administration of the FinTech Lab, including internal roles, responsibilities, and decision-making processes, will be governed through internal AFSA documents and the AIFC FinTech Rules will remain focused on their core purpose of regulating market participants and FinTech Activities. This approach enhances legal consistency, reduces regulatory rigidity by allowing AFSA to adjust its internal structure without requiring amendments to the Rules and aligns the AIFC framework with best practices.
35. We would like to highlight that the proposed repeal is not intended to alter the substantive powers, functions or responsibilities currently exercised in relation to the FinTech Lab. Accordingly, the removal of Part 3 does not result in any loss of regulatory authority or operational capability, but rather relocates internal administrative matters from the Rules to the AFSA's internal governance framework.
Enhance conditions for commencing business with Clients
36. As a result of the amendments outlined above, it is proposed to remove paragraphs (a)–(d) of Schedule 1 in order to avoid duplication. These provisions currently restate existing obligations under the AML, GEN and COB frameworks applicable to FinTech Lab participants. It is therefore considered unnecessary to retain them within Schedule 1.
37. In addition, it is proposed to introduce accompanying Guidance clarifying that the full set of requirements to be satisfied prior to the commencement of operations by FinTech Lab participants will be specified in the relevant licensing documentation issued to such participants. This will ensure regulatory clarity and avoid potential ambiguity regarding pre-commencement obligations.
Ongoing Maintenance of Adequate Financial Resources
38. The current framework requires a FinTech Lab Participant to provide evidence to the AFSA of the availability of adequate funds to meet at least 12 months of operational expenses, based on the participant’s application. It is proposed to amend this requirement to clarify that a FinTech Lab Participant must maintain adequate financial resources at all times, in line with its financial projections, to cover its remaining operational period. For example, following six months from the issuance of the Licence, the Participant should maintain sufficient funds to cover the remaining six months of projected operational expenses and provide evidence of such upon request by the AFSA. This approach ensures ongoing financial soundness, rather than a one-off assessment at the point of authorisation.
Alignment of Digital Asset Storage Requirements with DAA Framework
39. Under the current framework, where a FinTech Lab Participant provides Digital Asset transactions, it must have arrangements in place to ensure that at most 10% of Client funds or assets are held in a hot digital wallet. AFSA proposes that at most 30% of all Client funds or assets may be held in the Hot Digital wallet. The amendment aligns the FinTech Lab framework with the Digital Asset Activities Rules (rule 2.13.9), which provides that a Digital Asset Service Provider must ensure that no more than 30% of Client Digital Assets are held in a hot wallet.
40. We would also note that the proposed increase from 10% to 30% is not merely a harmonisation measure; but rather it reflects operational necessity. A 10% hot wallet threshold has proven in practice to be insufficient, as it limits the liquidity available for client withdrawals and transaction settlement. The 30% cap adopted under the DAA Rules was developed to balance operational efficiency against custody risk, and it is that same balance which the proposed amendment seeks to bring into the FinTech Lab framework.
Revise Testing Limits
Removal of References to BTC and other Digital Assets in Testing Limits
41. It is proposed to remove references to BTC and other Digital Assets within the FinTech Rules and standardize all monetary thresholds by reference to USD. This approach is justified on two main grounds. First, Digital Assets are inherently volatile and referencing them in regulatory thresholds introduces unnecessary uncertainty and inconsistency. Second, all AIFC regulatory frameworks apply USD as the standard unit of account. Aligning the FinTech Rules with this approach will improve regulatory consistency and clarity across the framework. In addition, references to “equivalent Fiat Currency” have been removed, with all amounts now specified solely in USD for consistency and clarity.
Increasing Testing Limits
42. The FinTech Lab framework currently imposes per-client and aggregate monetary limits on the amount of Client Money that FinTech Lab Participants may receive and hold during the testing period. These limits serve an important consumer protection function: they cap individual and systemic exposure to firms that are operating in a pre-authorisation or controlled testing environment.
43. The proposed limits, set out in the revised Table 1 of the FinTech Rules, are as follows.
Proposed Per-Client Limits (Fiat Currency): Revised Table 1
|
Client Category |
Previous Limit |
Proposed Limit |
Proposed Enhanced Limit (assessment required) |
|
Retail Clients/Investors (Natural Persons) |
$1,000 |
$15,000 |
$100,000 |
|
Retail Clients/Investors (Body Corporates) |
$20,000 |
$100,000 |
$500,000 |
|
Professional Clients & Accredited Investors |
within aggregated limits |
within aggregated limits |
N/A |
44. The proposed base limit of USD 15,000 for Retail Clients and Investors who are natural persons is calibrated by reference to the threshold established under the Rules of the Agency for Regulation and Development of Financial Markets of Kazakhstan (ARDFM). Those Rules provide that, in respect of bank clients conducting transactions with an AIFC participant providing digital asset platform management services, simplified customer due diligence measures apply to single banking transactions not exceeding 7,000,000 (seven million) Kazakhstani tenge, or the equivalent amount in foreign currency at the market exchange rate on the date of the transaction. At or above that threshold, enhanced customer due diligence applies, including source-of-funds verification and full AML/CFT obligations.
45. The proposed limit of USD 15,000 is further supported by the international AML standard established by the Financial Action Task Force. Under FATF Recommendation 10, the designated threshold for transactions above which full customer due diligence measures are required is USD/EUR 15,000, whether effected in a single operation or through linked operations that together reach that amount. Below that threshold, and in the absence of suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing, full CDD is not mandatorily triggered under the FATF framework, and proportionate simplified measures may be applied.
46. The enhanced limit of USD 100,000 for Retail Clients who are natural persons is aligned with the threshold at which the AFSA's Conduct of Business Rules recognises a professional-equivalent level of engagement for individual clients. The enhanced limit of USD 500,000 for Retail Body Corporates that pass the relevant assessment reflects the significantly greater financial capacity and organisational sophistication of corporate entities relative to natural persons.
47. In assessing the knowledge, experience and qualifications of Retail Clients for the purpose of increasing the limits, a FinTech Lab Participant must apply the assessment criteria set out in COB 2.5.3. Accordingly, a Retail Client seeking an increase in such limits must satisfy the criteria applicable to an Assessed Professional Client under the COB, except for the requirement to meet the minimum net asset threshold for reclassification.
48. The AFSA proposes the following revisions to the aggregate limits:
Proposed Revisions to Aggregate Limits
|
Client Category |
Previous Cap |
Proposed Cap |
|
Retail Clients |
$200,000 |
$1,000,000 |
|
Professional Clients |
$5,000,000 |
$10,000,000 |
The revised aggregate limits are grounded in the AFSA's supervisory knowledge. Feedback from Participants and applicants consistently indicated that the previous caps were reached at client volumes too low to generate statistically meaningful test outcomes. The revised figures reflect the AFSA's current understanding of market transaction sizes and are designed to allow Participants to conduct operationally credible tests.
Mandatory Segregation of Client Money and Client Investments
49. The AFSA proposes to amend Schedule 1, rule 5.1 of the FinTech Rules in two respects. First, it replaces the permissive "allowed to receive and hold" with a mandatory requirement, making segregation of Client assets from the Participant's own money and investments a condition of participation. Second, by replacing "corporate bank accounts" with "segregated Client Money/Investment Accounts of a Third-Party Account Provider," it ensures the rule is technology neutral. The amendment reflects both a strengthening of the client asset protection standard and an expansion of its scope.
Clarification of AFSA’s Role
50. It is proposed to remove the requirement under rule 2.6 of the FinTech Rules for AFSA to be appointed as trustee of any performance assurance or guarantee provided by a FinTech Lab Participant. This requirement is considered to extend beyond the appropriate functions of AFSA as a financial regulator.
51. In addition, it is proposed to remove references to the AFSA Committee on Authorisation within the FinTech Rules, as it is an internal body. References should instead be made directly to AFSA to avoid an unnecessary operational detail in the regulatory framework.
Revise exit from the FinTech Lab
52. Under rule 2.8.2, upon exiting the FinTech Lab, a FinTech Lab Participant is required to leave the sandbox and choose one of the following options: (a) migrate to the full regulatory regime under the AIFC framework; (b) continue its business in the AIFC as a non-regulated activity; or (c) exit the AIFC in accordance with the procedure specified in rule 2.5.3(d), including in cases of suspension or revocation of the Licence.
53. A comparative jurisdictional review indicates that leading sandbox regimes generally provide two core exit pathways: transition to full authorisation, or withdrawal of the sandbox licence. Withdrawal does not, in itself, prescribe a single outcome for the participant. Following withdrawal, a participant may pursue a range of options, including continuing its business as a non-regulated activity, discontinuing the activity, or pursuing other available arrangements.
54. On this basis, the AFSA considers that the standalone option in subrule 2.8.2(b) is unnecessary, as it is already captured within the broader exit mechanism under subrule 2.8.2(c). The ability to continue as a non-regulated activity is preserved: rule 2.8.4 clarifies that a Participant may continue its business in the AIFC as a non-regulated activity where the AFSA determines that the relevant FinTech Lab Activities do not constitute Regulated Activities. Accordingly, it is proposed to remove the standalone option for continued non-regulated activity following exit from the FinTech Lab (rule 2.8.2(b)).
Enhance final reporting requirements
55. Rule 2.7.3 requires a FinTech Lab Participant to submit a final report to the AFSA within 30 calendar days from the expiry, revocation, or withdrawal of its Licence. While this requirement ensures an orderly conclusion regarding FinTech Lab activities, it does not expressly address its application in the context of a transition to a full authorisation regime. Although such transition would typically coincide with the expiry or withdrawal of the Licence, supervisory experience indicates that Participants may not consistently interpret migration as triggering final reporting obligations. It is therefore proposed to introduce Guidance, ensuring a consistent and complete supervisory record across all exit scenarios from the FinTech Lab.
56. In addition, the enhancement of rule 2.7.3(b) is proposed to strengthen the protection of Clients and reinforce accountability at the conclusion of FinTech Lab activities. By requiring explicit confirmation that all obligations to Clients have been satisfied, the amendment ensures that Participants formally attest to the proper handling of Client relationships, including the resolution of complaints and the discharge of any outstanding obligations. This approach enhances supervisory certainty, supports orderly exit or transition, and reinforces the integrity of the FinTech Lab framework.
Technical Amendments
Harmonisation of Terminology
57. Currently, the term “FinTech Lab Activities” is defined in the Glossary, the FinTech Rules and GEN 1.4. However, the Rules occasionally also refer to the same concept as “FinTech Activities,” creating inconsistency in terminology across the framework. It is therefore proposed to standardise usage by adopting a single unified term, namely “FinTech Lab Activities,” throughout the Rules and related instruments. This will ensure consistency, improve legal clarity, and avoid interpretational ambiguity.
58. In addition, defined terms such as FinTech Lab Participant, Regulated Activity, Financial Service, and Ancillary Service have been capitalised throughout the Rules for consistency with the AIFC Glossary. Also, references in Schedule 1 to the term “participant” have been removed, as there is no clear justification for introducing a new term where FinTech Lab Participant is already defined in the GLO. Accordingly, the terminology has been aligned with the GLO to ensure consistency and clarity in drafting.
Alignment of Drafting Style with the AIFC Framework
59. Part 1 of the FinTech Rules sets out provisions relating to the title, commencement date, application, interpretation, and administration of the Rules. It is proposed to remove Part 1 as its content is inconsistent with requirements in the AIFC Regulations on AIFC Acts. In particular, the AIFC Rules do not replicate the title and commencement date within the body of the Rules, as these are already reflected in the title list. Similarly, provisions relating to application and interpretation are generally addressed in the introductory sections and in the AIFC Glossary and General Rules, and do not require repetition. In addition, the reference to administration by division is not aligned with current drafting practice, under which responsibilities are attributed collectively to the AFSA. Accordingly, the removal of Part 1 would improve consistency, reduce duplication, and align the FinTech Rules with the broader AIFC legislative framework.
60. It is proposed to further enhance consistency in drafting style and internal cross-referencing within the Rules. In particular, references contained in subrules 2.5.3(d)(v) and 2.7.1(a) should be reviewed and aligned to ensure uniformity in formulation, structure, and terminology across comparable provisions. This amendment is intended to improve readability and ensure consistent interpretation of related obligations.
PART III – PUBLIC CONSULTATION QUESTIONS
Question 1. Do you agree with the proposed amendments to the FinTech Lab eligibility framework, including the introduction of a single, consolidated eligibility framework and the proposed approach for existing Authorised Persons? If not, why?
Question 2. Do you agree with the proposal to combine the pre-application and application stages into a single-stage authorisation process? If not, why?
Question 3. Do you agree with the proposals to increase the per-client and aggregate testing limits, including the introduction of enhanced limits subject to knowledge, experience and qualification assessment? If not, why?
Question 4. Do you have any comments on the proposals set out in this Consultation Paper, or any suggestions that the AFSA should consider before finalising the proposed amendments?
Annex 1 – Proposed Amendments to the AIFC Rules
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO AIFC RULES
In these amendments, underlining indicates a new text, and strikethrough indicates a removed text.
AIFC FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY RULES
Guidance: Purpose of these Rules
The purpose of these Rules is to establish the AIFC framework in FinTech, which regulates the FinTech Lab, a special regulatory environment to Test and/or Develop test the FinTech Activities.
The purpose of this rulebook, “FINTECH”, is to complement the regulatory framework established by the Financial Services Framework Regulations (“the Framework Regulations”).
Part 1 sets out the commencement date, application scope, interpretation and administration matters. [intentionally omitted]
Part 2 sets out the features of the FinTech Lab.
Part 2.1 is an introduction to the FinTech Lab.
Part 2.2 describes the approach to Testing testing FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab.
Part 2.3 describes the approach to Developing FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab. [intentionally omitted]
Part 2.4 describes the Licence application process.
Part 2.5 describes the waivers, conditions and restrictions to which the Licence may be subject.
Part 2.6 describes the reporting obligations of the FinTech Lab Participant.
Part 2.7 describes the results of Testing and/or Developing testing the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab.
Part 3 provides for the general overview of the AFSA FinTech Office, outlines the objectives and scope of the functions performed by the CFTO. [intentionally omitted]
PART 1. INTRODUCTION [intentionally omitted]
1.1. Title
These Rules may be cited as the AIFC Financial Technology Rules (or FINTECH).
1.2. Commencement
These Rules commence on 15 March 2019, meaning that the AIFC FinTech Regulatory Sandbox Guidance expires.
1.3. Application
These Rules apply within the jurisdiction of the AIFC.
1.4. Interpretations
Words and expressions used in these Rules and interpretative provisions applying to these Rules are specified in the Glossary.
1.5. Administration of the Rules
These Rules are administered by the Chief FinTech Officer (hereinafter, the “CFTO”) of the AFSA FinTech Office.
PART 2. FINTECH LAB
2.1. General introduction to FinTech Lab
2.1.1. The FinTech Lab is a controlled regulatory environment within the AIFC that allows a Person to Test and/or Develop test the FinTech Lab Activities. without being immediately subject to the full set of regulatory requirements under the Framework Regulations and Rules made thereunder.
2.1.2. FinTech Lab is designed to allow Persons to deliver effective competition in the interests of consumers by:
(a) reducing the time, and potentially the cost, of getting FinTech to market;
(b) enabling greater access to the market for innovative Persons, including start-ups;
(c) the AFSA collaborating with the Person to ensure that appropriate consumer protection safeguards are built into their FinTech Lab Activities; and
(d) enabling FinTech Lab Activities to be Tested and/or Developed.
2.1.3. Risk and failure are an integral part of innovation. The FinTech Lab is intended to incorporate appropriate safeguards to identify and manage potential and actual risks in order to promote development of FinTech Lab Activities. Given that the FinTech Lab operates in a live environment, failure may result in financial losses to FinTech Lab participants Participants and their customers arising from potential risks.
2.1.4. The FinTech Lab Activities must be intended to bring benefits to consumers, which may include, for example, increase of the accessibility, efficiency, security and quality in the provision of financial services, thus promoting better risk management solutions and regulatory outcomes for the financial industry.
2.1.5. A FinTech Lab Participant must intend to roll-out its business on a broader scale in or from the AIFC once it has successfully completed testing.
2.1.6. Authorised Persons may apply to the FinTech Lab subject to the relevant engagements with the AFSA without seeking additional FinTech Lab Licence.
2.2. Testing the FinTech Activities Eligibility Criteria for the FinTech Lab
2.2.1. Eligibility Criteria
(a) The regime for Testing the FinTech Activities FinTech Lab is a live environment which allows a Person to test the feasibility of: validity of the following types of activities in a cost-effective and timely manner, in close collaboration with the AFSA:
(a) innovative technologies, processes, services or products in a controlled environment, in close collaboration with the AFSA;
(b) the application of existing technologies, processes, services or products in a novel manner, resulting in the development of new business models; and
(c) establishing a presence or obtaining a recognition in the AIFC by Regulated Financial Institutions for the purpose of testing activities that are currently regulated or not regulated by the AFSA (test the waters).
Guidance
A Person seeking admission to the FinTech Lab must conduct a self-assessment to determine whether there is a demonstrable need to test the relevant technology, process, service, or product within the FinTech Lab. Such self-assessment must be undertaken irrespective of whether the proposed activity is regulated or unregulated under the AIFC Acts.
(i) Financial Activities which are being regulated in the AIFC or similar to those that are already being regulated in the AIFC, where:
i. a different technology or process is being applied; or
ii. the same technology or process is being applied differently, meaning that an established technology or process is being applied to create a new business model;
(ii) Financial activities not currently regulated in the AIFC but regulated in other jurisdictions; and
(iii) Activities likely to be regulated in the AIFC as a financial Financial or an ancillary service Ancillary Service.
(b) The regime for Testing the FinTech Activities is also suitable for a start-up that does not satisfy the full set of requirements for regulated activities Regulated Activities, but intends to deploy FinTech Lab Activities and to commit to complying with regulatory obligations gradually and with the approval of the AFSA.
(c) The FinTech Lab Activities specified in (a) and (b) above must be intended to bring benefits to consumers, which may include, for example, increase of the accessibility, efficiency, security and quality in the provision of financial services, thus promoting better risk management solutions and regulatory outcomes for the financial industry.
2.3. Developing the FinTech Activities [intentionally omitted]
2.3.1. Eligibility Criteria
(a) Developing FinTech Activities provides access to a live market environment in which a Person can engage in activities that are currently not regulated by the AFSA, or not regulated, without immediately being subject to the full set of regulatory requirements under the Framework Regulations and Rules made thereunder.
(b) Developing FinTech Activities is appropriate in the circumstances where:
(i) it is not clear whether the proposed FinTech Lab Activity would have demand in Kazakhstani or regional market (test the waters), and
(ii) a Person has a licence to operate the proposed FinTech Lab Activity in other jurisdiction(s) which are not currently regulated by the AFSA, subject to the AFSA being satisfied that those jurisdictions have appropriate regulatory standards and practice.
(c) For the purposes of 2.3.1, the FinTech Activities eligible for the FinTech Lab are those that are regulated and not regulated by the AFSA.
2.4. Application process
2.4.1. General overview
(a) A Person seeking to Test and/or Develop the FinTech Activities within be admitted to the FinTech Lab must meet the eligibility criteria specified in rules 2.2.1. and 2.3.1. and satisfy the application requirements specified in 2.4.3(b) to be granted with a Licence.
(b) A Person may apply to the AFSA for a FinTech Lab Licence to Test and/or Develop the FinTech Activities by:
(i) completing the pre-application and application forms form and filing each the completed form with the AFSA accompanied by such documents as are specified in the form; and
(ii) providing such further information as the AFSA may require.
2.4.2. Pre-application form [intentionally omitted]
(a) The pre-application process is intended to verify the eligibility of a Person to Test and/or Develop the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab.
(b) The pre-application form is intended to provide information to the AFSA regarding the proposed FinTech Activities; to verify its suitability for support from the FinTech Lab; and to enable the applicant to become familiar with the AFSA’s approach in fostering innovation within the FinTech Lab.
(c) A Person must comply with the eligibility criteria before lodging the application form.
2.4.3. Application form
(a) Once the AFSA is satisfied that the Person meets the eligibility criteria, the AFSA will invite the Person to proceed with submission of additional information necessary for assessment and authorisation purposes. [intentionally omitted]
(b) In assessing the application, the AFSA will consider whether:
(i-1) the Person is eligible to test FinTech Lab Activities within the FinTech Lab and has submitted to the AFSA the outcome of the self-assessment conducted in respect of its eligibility for admission to the FinTech Lab; and
(i) the Person has performed a rigorous due diligence on legal and regulatory requirements of the AIFC for deploying the proposed FinTech Activities and understands them; and
(ii) the Person has the necessary financial and non-financial resources to support Testing and/or Developing the FinTech Activities in the FinTech Lab; and
(iii) the applicant is fit and proper; and
(iv) the Person has submitted to the AFSA the business, testing and/or development plan(s); and
(vi) other criteria that the AFSA may consider relevant have been met.
(c) Upon submission of materially complete application form, the AFSA will review the application and inform the applicant of its authorisation decision.
(d) The procedures for assessing the application, terms and conditions of issuance of the Licence are defined by the AFSA.
(e) Nothing in these Rules prevents the Person whose application had been rejected from applying to the FinTech Lab again, provided that the issues causing the rejection of application have been addressed.
2.5. Licence
2.5.1. General
(a) A Person must not Test and/or Develop test FinTech Lab Activities within the FinTech Lab unless it holds a Licence or obtains a recognition from issued by the CFTO on behalf of the AFSA.
(b) A Licence issued by the CFTO, which can be subject to a set of conditions, serves as an authorisation of a Centre Participant to:
(i) Test the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab; and/or
(ii) Develop the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab.
Guidance
A FinTech Lab Participant whose Licence is subject to conditions precedent to commencement of operations shall be designated in the Public Register as “pending approval” until such conditions are satisfied.
(c) The Licence has effect for 2 years from the date of its issuance.
2.5.2. Extension, varying, withdrawal of the Licence
(a) The FinTech Lab Participant is entitled to apply to the AFSA to extend, vary or withdraw the Licence.
(b) The FinTech Lab Participant may submit an application for the Licence extension, but no later than 2 months prior to the Licence expiration date.
(c) The FinTech Lab Participant is entitled to apply to the AFSA to extend the validity, to change the scope, and to have a condition/restriction varied or withdrawn from its Licence (or to have its Licence withdrawn) by:
(i) filing a written request with the AFSA accompanied by such documents as may be requested by the AFSA;
(ii) providing a detailed report outlining the reasons for the request. This report should include:
- The specific challenges or circumstances necessitating the extension;
- The steps taken to address these challenges or circumstances; and
- The proposed timeline for achieving full compliance with the licencing requirements.
(iii) providing such further information as the AFSA may require.
(d) Each application for an extension, variation or withdrawal of the Licence must be accompanied by sufficient reasons for such an application.
(e) In the case of withdrawal of the Licence, the FinTech Lab Participant follows the procedure specified in rule 2.5.3(d) of these Rules.
(f) The CFTO AFSA may approve the extension, variation or withdrawal of the Licence on a case-by-case basis.
(g) The CFTO AFSA, subject to 7 days prior notification to the FinTech Lab Participant and consideration of any comments received from the FinTech Lab Participant, may vary the terms of the Licence on his/her its own initiative and at his/her its own discretion based on the progress of the FinTech Lab Participant in Testing and/or Developing the FinTech Activities.
2.5.3. Suspension, revocation, withdrawal of the Licence
(a) The CFTO AFSA may suspend or withdraw the Licence based on an application of the FinTech Lab Participant.
(b) The CFTO AFSA is entitled to suspend or revoke all or some of the terms of the Licence at his/her own its discretion.
(c) For the purposes of rule 2.5.3(b), the CFTO AFSA may exercise its power only if the CFTO AFSA:
(i) is satisfied that there is a breach, or likely breach of a provision of legislation administered by the AFSA; or there is a failure, or likely failure, to comply with any obligation to which the FinTech Lab Participant is subject under the Licence; or
(ii) considers that the exercise of the power is necessary or desirable in the interests of the AIFC as the risks posed by the Testing and /or Developing FinTech Lab Activities exceed the benefits to consumers or the financial system.
(d) Upon expiration, revocation or withdrawal of the Licence, the FinTech Lab Participant must:
(i) immediately implement its exit strategy to cease provision of the FinTech Lab Activities to new and existing customers;
(ii) provide notification to customers informing them of the cessation and their rights to redress, where relevant;
(iii) compensate any customers who had suffered financial losses from engaging with the FinTech Lab Participant pursuant to the safeguards submitted by the FinTech Lab Participant while submitting the application for authorisation;
(iv) ensure that the exit strategy is employed and all the existing obligations to its customers must be fully fulfilled or and addressed; and
(v) submit a final report to the AFSA on the actions taken pursuant to the paragraph rule 2.7.3. of these Rules within 30 days after the revocation or withdrawal.
2.6. Waivers, conditions, restrictions
2.6.1. General
(a) Existing legislative requirements of the Framework Regulations and the Rules would not generally apply initially to FinTech Lab Participants. On receipt of an application for a Licence to carry out FinTech Lab Activities, the AFSA works with the applicant to identify the provisions of the Framework Regulations and the Rules that are relevant to the proposed FinTech Lab Activities and issues, as appropriate, individual guidance to the applicant or a FinTech Lab Participant according to the specific characteristics of, and risks associated with, the proposed FinTech Lab Activities.
(b) The AFSA may, on the application of a Person or its own initiative and by written notice:
(i) waive or modify any condition, restriction or requirement of the Framework Regulations and the Rules in relation to FinTech Lab Activities or proposed FinTech Lab Activities; and
(ii) define appropriate conditions for a FinTech Lab Participant at authorisation and through different stages of Testing and / or Developing testing the FinTech Lab Activities.
(c) Conditions defined by the AFSA in relation to a FinTech Lab Participant, referred to in (b), are reflected in the Schedule 1 of these Rules, may include, for example, conditions in relation to the following:
(i) type of Clients with or for whom the FinTech Lab Participant is permitted to carry on FinTech Lab Activities;
(ii) the type and size of Client transactions that the FinTech Lab Participant is permitted to enter into;
(iii) whether the FinTech Lab Participant is permitted to hold or control Client Money and Client assets, including Investments or other financial instruments.
Guidance
AFSA may, based on applicant’s or Fintech Lab Participant’s request, waive or modify specific provisions of Framework Regulations and the Rules. Additionally, the testing plan should provide for a time schedule for the gradual compliance of Fintech Lab Participant with specific parts/provisions of Framework Regulations and the Rules.
2.7. Reporting
2.7.1. Monitoring
(a) The FinTech Lab Participant is subject to monitoring by the AFSA throughout the validity period of the Licence. The AFSA requires that the FinTech Lab Participant submit information on fulfillment of the testing and/or development plan according to the paragraph rule 2.4.3(b)(iv) of these Rules.
(b) The FinTech Lab Participant must ensure proper maintenance of records during the Testing and/or Developing period in the FinTech Lab to support reviews by the AFSA of the testing and/or development plan.
2.7.2. Interim reports
(a) The FinTech Lab Participant must submit interim reports to the AFSA on the progress of fulfilment of the testing and/or development plan, which must, without limitations, include information on the following:
(i) key performance indicators, key milestones and statistical information, covering the number of clients served, number of transactions performed, values of transactions, the number of customer complaints and other indicators;
(ii) key issues observed from his fraud or operational incident reports and resolution of customer complaints (if any); and
(iii) actions or steps taken to address the key issues referred to in (ii) above.
(b) The frequency of, and specific details for, reporting will be defined by the AFSA, depending on the duration, complexity, scale and risks associated with the Testing and/or Developing the FinTech Lab Activities.
2.7.3. Final report
The FinTech Lab Participant must submit a final report containing the following information to the AFSA within 30 calendar days from the expiry, or the revocation, or withdrawal of the Licence:
(a) key outcomes, key findings, risk management measures of the Testing and/or Developing from the FinTech Lab Activities and other information as per the request of the AFSA;
(b) a full account of all incident reports and resolution of customer complaints (if any), accompanied by confirmation that all obligations to Clients have been satisfied; and
(c) in the case of a failed Test and/or Development, the lessons learnt.
Guidance
For the purposes of this Rule, the requirement to submit a final report also applies where a FinTech Lab Participant transitions to a full authorisation regime.
2.8. Miscellaneous
2.8.1. Upon expiry, suspension, revocation or withdrawal of the Licence’s validity, the legal and regulatory requirements which have been waived or modified by the AFSA will expire.
2.8.2. Unless an extension of the Licence is requested pursuant to paragraph rule 2.5.2. of these Rules, or at such time as otherwise might be necessary and agreed by the CFTO AFSA, the FinTech Lab Participant will be required to exit the FinTech Lab and choose to either:
(a) migrate to the full authorisation and supervisory regime under the AIFC regulatory framework and deploy its FinTech Activities on a broader scale; or
(b) continue its business in the AIFC as a non-regulated activity; or [intentionally omitted]
(c) exit following the procedure specified in paragraph rule 2.5.3(d).
2.8.3. Migration to full authorisation is possible provided that:
(a) both AFSA and the FinTech Lab Participant are satisfied that the intended Test and/or Development testing outcomes of the FinTech Lab Activities are achieved; and
(b) the FinTech Lab Participant can fully comply demonstrate compliance with the relevant legal and regulatory requirements envisaged under the AIFC acts Acts to carry on the Regulated and/or Market Activities.
2.8.4. The FinTech Lab Participant may continue its business in the AIFC as a non-regulated activity in certain circumstances when, for instance, the Testing and/or Developing FinTech Lab Activities will be classified by AFSA as a non-regulated activity non-Regulated Activity.
2.8.5. The content of the exit strategy of the FinTech Lab Participant may vary based on commercial needs, and may include ceasing the business, or transferring the FinTech and engaged customers to other authorised financial institution(s).
PART 3. THE AFSA FINTECH OFFICE
3.1. Overview
3.1.1. The FinTech Lab and the FINTECH are administered by the CFTO.
3.1.2. The CFTO is an agent and employee of the AFSA and is subject to the same responsibilities and has the same rights as other agents or employees of the AFSA under the AIFC laws.
3.1.3. The CFTO is accountable to the AFSA Board of Directors.
3.2. Objectives and functions
3.2.1. Objectives
(a) In exercising the CFTO’s functions, the CFTO acts in an independent and non-biased way.
(b) The CFTO exercises the CFTO’s functions only in pursuit of the following objectives:
(i) to promote good practices and observance of the requirements of these Rules; and
(ii) to pursue effectiveness and transparency in administering of these Rules.
3.2.2. Functions
(a) The CFTO has the powers given to the CFTO by or under the applicable law of the AIFC, decisions of Governor, AFSA Board of Directors and AFSA Executive Body.
(b) Without limiting paragraph (a), the CFTO’s functions include the following:
(i) preparing draft rules, codes of practice and submitting them to the AFSA Board Legislative Committee for consideration;
(ii) preparing and adopting guidance for the AIFC FinTech Lab Participants, and seeking approval of the Board of Directors of the AFSA of any guidance adopted by the CFTO;
(iii) issuing or approving the necessary forms, procedural guidance and other necessary documents pertinent to these Rules;
(iv) initiating and convening the AFSA Committee on Authorisation of FinTech Lab applicants;
(v) devising a tailored regulatory regime for FinTech Lab Participant to Test and/or Develop the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab, including, without limitations, the following:
i. create and modify eligibility criteria on a case by case basis at his/her own discretion after due consideration of risks posed by the proposed FinTech;
ii. issue individual guidance to the FinTech Lab Participant having regard to specific characteristics of the participant, or risk posed by, a specific FinTech Activity of the FinTech Lab participant;
iii. holding the signature right of various legal matters:
i. approve the form of the Licence and other application forms, and make modifications thereto;
ii. issue the Licence;
iii. modify, suspend or revoke the Licence at any time at his/her own discretion due to necessity to pursue one or more regulatory objective.
(vi) waiving or modifying any conditions, restriction, requirements of the Framework Regulations or the Rules defining the conditions to apply to FinTech Lab Participants upon authorisation through different stages of Testing and/or Developing their FinTech Activities; and/or
(vii) exercise all or any of the following functions on behalf of the AFSA in relation to FinTech Activities:
i. approving the form of Licence;
ii. issuing Licences; and
iii. modifying, suspending or revoking Licences at any time, at the CFTO’s own discretion, to give effect to or further 1 or more regulatory objectives.
(c) The CFTO may make a decision under (vi), (vii).iii with immediate effect. However, if the CFTO makes a decision under (vi), (vii).iii the CFTO must refer the decision to the AFSA Committee on Authorisation for its consideration. The committee may confirm, set aside or change the condition in any way it considers appropriate.
3.2.3. Other powers
(a) These Rules are not an exhaustive source of the CFTO’s exercise of AFSA’s statutory powers and discretion. In discharge of his/her regulatory duty, the CFTO is entitled to exercise other powers or functions which the CFTO considers necessary or desirable for or in connection with, or reasonably incidental to, the exercise of the CFTO’s functions, where it might be relevant to address any specific matter in FinTech.
(b) The CFTO may delegate all or any of the CFTO’s functions to any AFSA employee.
(c) The CFTO, and any delegate of the CFTO, is not liable to third parties for anything done or omitted to be done in the exercise or purported exercise of the CFTO’s functions (including any function delegated to the CFTO) under the AIFC Acts, decisions of Governor and AFSA Executive Body, except when it is established that such an action or omission was committed with unfair intentions and/or malicious intent and/or for the purpose of deliberate non-fulfillment or violation of his/her official duties.
Schedule 1: Conditions
1. Conditions for commencing business with Clients
1.1. A FinTech Lab Participant (the participant) must meet the following minimum requirements before commencing business with Clients:
a) the participant it must demonstrate evidence of the availability of the policies, procedures, arrangements, systems and controls required by AML;[intentionally omitted]
b) the participant it must make the mandatory appointments as required by GEN 2.1 and must appoint a Chief Information Technology Officer, who must be an individual responsible for the participant’s ongoing information technology (IT) operations, maintenance and security oversight to ensure that the participant’ IT systems are reliable and adequately protected from external attack or incident where required under the DAA; [intentionally omitted]
c) the participant it must have a Client agreement that outlines the risk disclosure measures required by the participant’s licence issued by the AFSA; [intentionally omitted]
d) the participant it must comply with GEN 5.2 (Outsourcing); [intentionally omitted]
e) the participant it must provide to the AFSA a signed statement, certifying that the participant has adequate measures in place to ensure the following:
(i) that the participant’s IT systems are resilient and not prone to failure;
(ii) business continuity if a part of the IT system fails;
(iii) the protection of the IT systems from damage, tampering, misuse or unauthorised access;
(iv) the integrity of data forming part of, or being processed through, the IT systems;
(v) real time monitoring and reporting on system performance, availability and integrity;
(vi) that policies and procedures for the IT systems are adequately established and maintained;
(vii) that the participant has sufficient resources to operate without disruption, maintain and supervise the participant’s IT facilities.
f) the participant it must provide to the AFSA evidence of the availability of adequate funds to meet at least 12 months of operational expenses, as per the participant’ application to become a FinTech Lab Participant, and must ensure that such adequacy is maintained at all times in line with its financial projections for the remaining operational period;
g) the participant it must ensure that Client Money is held in a segregated Client Money Account with a third-party account provider Third Party Account Provider that is a Bank or a Regulated Financial Institution that is authorised in any jurisdiction to Accept Deposits;
h) if the participant a FinTech Lab Participant is providing provides Digital Asset transactions -, the participant it must have arrangements in place to ensure storage of Client funds on a Hot Digital wallet at most equivalent to 10 Bitcoin (further BTC) or 10 30% of all Client funds or assets, whichever is greater.
2. Testing limits
2.1. The AFSA defines conditions for activities of the FinTech Lab Participants by setting standardised tailored limits on size of funds, types of Clients permitted for the purpose of Testing FinTech Activities, which are determined based on the maturity of the applicants and/or FinTech Lab Participants firm, riskiness and type of activities.
2.2. The AFSA does not may impose any limits on the number of Clients, size of funds, types of Clients for Developing FinTech Activities given that they are performed by the firms authorised in foreign jurisdiction/-s. the FinTech Lab Participants admitted under rule 2.2.1.(c).
2.3. The maximum size of funds amount of Client Money/Investment (per Client/Investor) up to which the Client Money/Investment Accounts are permitted to be deposited and/or refilled for the FinTech Lab Participants during the period of testing in the FinTech Lab is reflected in the Table 1:
Table 1:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency |
Retail Clients and Investors: natural persons |
Retail Clients and Investors: Body Corporates |
Professional Clients and Accredited Investors |
|
|
Fiat Currency |
15,000 (fifteen thousand) USD 100,000 (one hundred thousand) USD or equivalent - if Retail Client – natural person, passes the relevant assessment conducted by the FinTech Lab Participants, confirming the knowledge, experience, and qualifications in the relevant field.
|
100,000 (one hundred thousand) USD
500,000 (five hundred thousand) USD or equivalent - if Retail Client – Body Corporate, passes the relevant assessment conducted by the FinTech Lab Participants, confirming the knowledge, experience, and qualifications in the relevant field. |
within aggregated limits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guidance
In assessing the knowledge, experience and qualifications of Retail Clients for the purpose of increasing the limits, a FinTech Lab Participant must apply the experience and understanding assessment criteria set out in COB 2.5.3. Accordingly, a Retail Client seeking an increase in such limits must satisfy the criteria applicable to an Assessed Professional Client under the COB, except for the requirement to meet the minimum net asset threshold for reclassification.
2.4. The maximum size of aggregated funds of Clients The aggregated amount of Client Money/Investment that a FinTech Lab Participant is permitted to hold without ensuring compensation arrangement (which can be, for instance, in the form of performance assurance or guarantee) at any given instance during the period of testing in the FinTech Lab for the purpose of Testing the FinTech Lab Activities is determined by AFSA:
a) for Retail Clients and Investors:
(i) 1,000,000 (one million) 200,000 (two hundred thousand) USD or equivalent Fiat Currency; or
(ii) 50 (fifty) BTC or equivalent Digital Asset. [intentionally omitted]
b) for Professional Clients and Accredited Investors:,
(i) 10,000,000 (ten million) 5,000,000 (five million) USD or equivalent Fiat Currency; or
(ii) 1,250 (one thousand and two hundred fifty) BTC or equivalent Digital Asset. [intentionally omitted]
2.5. If a FinTech Lab Participant has an adequate arrangement to compensate its Clients against losses or damages, the AFSA may consider increasing the values of maximum sizes of Retail Clients funds Money/Investment outlined in paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 above.
2.6. The AFSA must be appointed as the trustee of a performance assurance or guarantee provided by a FinTech Lab Participant. [intentionally omitted]
2.7. The AFSA Committee on Authorisation may, at any time, increase or reduce a testing limits under 2.3. and/or 2.4. for a particular FinTech Lab Participant, or a Person who is an applicant to become a FinTech Lab Participant, if satisfied that it is justified to do so.
2.8. A FinTech Lab Participant may apply to the AFSA Committee on Authorisation for a testing limits applying to it under this 2.3. and/or 2.4. to be increased. Without limiting the grounds on which the participant a FinTech Lab Participant may justify the application, the participant may justify the application on 1 or more of the following grounds:
i. successful performance of the authorised FinTech Lab Activities during a period of 6 (six) months without any incident and with properly execution of the participant’s Testing/Developing plan;
ii. fulfillment of all requirements in relation to systems and controls and all legal and regulatory requirements;
iii. providing adequate arrangement to compensate its Clients against losses or damages in the case of default.
3. Outsourcing core functions
3.1. The AFSA generally permits a FinTech Lab Participant to outsource any of the participant’s functions to a service provider (including a service provider within the participant’s Group). However, the FinTech Lab Participant remains responsible for compliance with the requirements of the Framework Regulations and the Rules.
3.2. If the AFSA has difficulty in obtaining information from the FinTech Lab Participant about an outsourced function, the AFSA may limit the outsourcing of the function.
4. Minimum number of employees
4.1. FinTech Lab Participant shall appoint at least 2 (two) individuals who can carry out the functions of Approved Individuals and Designated Individuals and at the same time ensure that there is no conflict of interests in the carrying out of the functions.
Guidance
One Person may hold the positions of Senior Executive Officer and Finance Officer, and another Person may hold the positions of Compliance Officer and Money Laundering Reporting Officer.
5. Use of corporate bank accounts Segregation of Client Money/Investment
5.1. A FinTech Lab Participant is allowed required to receive and hold Client Money/Investment in corporate bank accounts segregated Client Money/Investment Accounts of a Third-Party Account Provider, which is a Bank or a regulated financial institution which is authorised to accept Deposits or funds, subject to relevant segregation of funds in place., ensuring separation from its own Money/Investment.
AIFC FEES RULES
8. FINTECH LAB FEES
8.1. Application and other fees payable to the AFSA by the FinTech Lab firms
8.1.1. Pre-application fee to the FinTech Lab A Person seeking to Test and/or Develop the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab must pay to the AFSA the pre-application fee specified in Schedule 8 prior to commencing any eligibility assessment in accordance with FINTECH 2.4.2. [intentionally omitted]
(…)
SCHEDULE 8: FINTECH LAB FEES
(…)
8.1 Pre-application fee [intentionally omitted]
A Person seeking to Test and/or Develop the FinTech Activities within the FinTech Lab must pay to the AFSA the pre-application fee in the amount of 2 000 USD prior to commencing any eligibility assessment.
AIFC GLOSSARY
2. INTERPRETATION
|
|
|
|
FinTech Lab Activities |
Activities specified in GEN 1.4. |
|
FinTech Lab Participant |
Means an Authorised Person who was issued a Licence to carry on one or more FinTech Lab Activities within the FinTech Lab. |
|
|
|