Crypto in Tanzania: What the Law Says Now
As of 14 September 2026, crypto in Tanzania is not legal tender, the Bank of Tanzania (BoT) warns against its use, and no dedicated provider-licensing regime is in force. Yet BoT has also said cryptocurrencies are not legally prohibited, tax law covers digital-asset transfers, and a 2024 High Court judgment rejected the argument that cryptocurrency business was automatically illegal.
These statements answer different questions. A tax rule is not a licence, and “not prohibited” does not mean “regulated and protected.”
The legal position in five dated steps
| Date | Development | What it means—and does not mean |
|---|---|---|
| 12 November 2019 | BoT warned against trading, marketing and using virtual currencies | Crypto was not accepted as legal tender; the notice was a warning, not a licensing framework |
| 1 July 2024 | Finance Act 2024 took effect | Certain digital-asset payments became subject to 3% withholding tax; tax treatment did not license providers |
| 13 December 2024 | High Court delivered the Yellow Card judgment | The Court found the contract valid despite the unregulated cryptocurrency subject matter; the ruling was case-specific |
| 2025–2026 | BoT reports described crypto as not legally prohibited but unregulated | BoT continued restricting payment-system providers and monitoring virtual-asset risks |
| July 2026 | BoT said a regulatory concept had gone to the Ministry of Finance | Laws and regulations were still being prepared, with no implementation date announced |
Quoting only one step produces a misleading answer.
What the Bank of Tanzania said in 2019
In its Public Notice on Cryptocurrencies, BoT advised against trading, marketing and using virtual currency, saying this was contrary to foreign-exchange regulations. It stressed that the Tanzanian shilling was the country’s legal tender.
“Not legal tender” means cryptocurrency lacks the status of money issued and recognised by the central bank. It does not decide every question about private contracts, tax or related services.
BoT later clarified the distinction. Its National Payment System Annual Report for 2024 says cryptocurrencies are not legally prohibited, but applicable foreign-exchange regulations did not provide for them. It also says BoT restricts payment-system providers from issuing, distributing or settling virtual assets.
So “crypto is legal” is too broad. “All crypto is illegal” is also too broad. The activity, the parties involved and the law being applied all matter.
What the 3% digital-asset tax means
The Finance Act 2024, effective 1 July 2024, amended the Income Tax Act. Section 83C requires a resident or non-resident platform owner or facilitator to withhold tax when paying a resident person for a digital-asset exchange or transfer. The rate is 3%.
The Act’s definition of a digital asset expressly includes cryptocurrencies and other electronically transferable representations of value. This is clear statutory recognition for tax purposes.
It does not mean that:
- the payer or platform has a Tanzanian financial-services licence;
- BoT or another regulator has approved the asset;
- customer money is protected;
- the transaction complies with every other applicable law; or
- 3% is necessarily the person’s entire tax liability.
Tax depends on the facts. A Tanzanian tax professional should confirm how section 83C applies to a particular payment.
What the December 2024 High Court decision changed
On 13 December 2024, the High Court’s Commercial Division delivered Yellow Card (T) Ltd v Nyamwero Michael Nyamwero, Commercial Case No. 12171 of 2024, [2024] TZHCComD 310. It concerned a settlement deed and alleged failure to repay money—not permission to operate a crypto service.
The defendant argued that the agreement was connected to an illegal cryptocurrency business. The Court held that a contract did not become invalid simply because its subject matter was unregulated, and enforced the agreement. Read the judgment on TanzLII and Bowmans’ case note.
The judgment supports the view that cryptocurrency transactions are not inherently illegal merely because dedicated regulation is absent. It does not create legal tender, a provider licence or guaranteed contract enforceability. A lawyer must check its scope and any later proceedings.
What “unregulated” means for a customer
On the review date, BoT’s regulations index showed no enacted dedicated virtual-asset-provider regime. Its 2025 National Payment Systems report said virtual assets remained outside legal-tender status and identified consumer-protection, fraud, cyber and financial-integrity risks.
For someone dealing with a service that holds money or assets, the regulatory gap means you should not assume there is:
- a Tanzanian crypto licence whose status can be checked;
- a regulator continuously testing the provider’s custody, capital or governance;
- a dedicated BoT complaint route for a dispute with an unlicensed crypto business; or
- a sector-specific compensation fund if the service fails.
Contracts, courts, law enforcement, general consumer rules or a foreign regulator may offer remedies depending on the facts. That is not equivalent to local sector supervision. BoT’s complaints mechanism serves customers of institutions under its mandate.
Read who regulates financial services in Tanzania and how to check a company’s licence. If no relevant licence exists for an activity, company registration or a tax number should not be presented as a substitute.
Why rising complaints are the important 2026 signal
On 30 July 2026, The Citizen reported that BoT had completed an assessment and sent a regulatory concept to the Ministry of Finance. Governor Emmanuel Tutuba said virtual-asset laws and regulations were being finalised, without an implementation date.
The announcement linked the work to growing participation, loss complaints and consumer protection. Complaints do not decide legality. They show the cost of a gap before rules establish who may operate, required safeguards and complaint routes.
The legal position is therefore expected to change. Check current BoT, Ministry of Finance, Parliament and Gazette sources, because this page can go out of date once enacted rules take effect. General warning signs remain covered separately in our investment-scam guide.
Frequently asked questions
Is cryptocurrency illegal in Tanzania?
BoT’s 2024 report says cryptocurrencies are not legally prohibited. However, they are not legal tender, BoT has warned against their use, payment-system providers face restrictions and no dedicated provider regime was identified as in force on 14 September 2026.
Is cryptocurrency legal tender in Tanzania?
No. BoT states that the Tanzanian shilling is the country’s legal tender. A private digital asset does not have the same status.
Does the 3% tax mean a crypto service is licensed?
No. The withholding rule recognises digital-asset transfers for tax purposes. Tax registration or collection does not equal financial regulatory approval.
Can I complain to the Bank of Tanzania about a crypto service?
Do not assume so. BoT’s complaints route concerns financial institutions under its mandate. With no dedicated crypto licensing regime, the correct route depends on the provider, conduct and jurisdiction; obtain legal advice for a real dispute.
When will Tanzania’s crypto regulations start?
BoT said in July 2026 that a regulatory concept had been submitted and laws and regulations were being finalised, but no commencement date was announced. Check current official sources.
The accurate answer is a status, not a slogan
Crypto in Tanzania is not legal tender and remains subject to a serious BoT warning. It is also recognised in tax law, and BoT and the High Court have stated in different contexts that cryptocurrencies are not simply prohibited. The missing piece is a dedicated framework supervising providers and protecting customers. Until enacted rules fill that gap, “taxed” must not be confused with “licensed,” and “not prohibited” must not be confused with “protected.”
Last updated: August 2026.