Australian Crypto Courtroom Shocker: ASIC Outfoxed by Wallet Ventures—What Happened?

by

Dash it all, on the 24th of July, 2025 (in the balmy heart of the Antipodes, where legal drama flows like cocktails at a Riviera soirée 🍸), the Full Federal Court of Australia dropped its pearls—sorry, judgment—in

ASIC v Wallet Ventures Pty Ltd [2025] FCAFC 93
, breezily showing the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC for those on intimate terms, and who isn’t these days?) the door. In this much-gossiped-about kerfuffle, ASIC’s appeal fizzled faster than last season’s aperitif. The upshot? Finder Wallet’s “Finder Earn” product is emphatically not a “debenture,” at least not under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). No financial product license required. Cue collective shrugs from crypto barons and a faint, dignified sob from the regulators.

The following opinion editorial was penned (presumably atop a gleaming mahogany desk by a window catching the Sydney sun) by Alex Forehand and Michael Handelsman for the distinguished Kelman.Law.

Background: A Whiff of Scandal and a Scent of Stablecoin

Some background for those just tuning in—Finder Wallet (a name that would suit a Bond villain or a lapdog) enticed users to turn their humdrum Aussie dollars into the beguiling stablecoin, TrueAUD, hand it over, and (voilà!) receive a fixed return, presumably to fund a few extra martinis. The twist? Finder kept their mitts on the digital loot, but promised (cross their dapper hearts) to let users reclaim their principal and whatever earnings had accrued, assuming no game of baccarat went awry.

ASIC, acting as regulatory scold and wet blanket, declared this little arrangement a “debenture” (imagine an old man wafting financial statutes at your face), requiring a license—quelle horreur! Lawsuits ensued. ASIC lost in 2024, developed a taste for courtroom disappointment, and appealed, brandishing arguments about what constitutes a loan or a deposit. Because nothing spices up a legal drama like definitions, darling.

Full Federal Court Decision: Justice Served (With a Side of Sarcasm)

The trio of judicial luminaries—Stewart, Cheeseman (real name; delicious), and Meagher—were unanimously underwhelmed by ASIC’s appeals. They pointed out, one imagines with a quizzical eyebrow, that customers actually gained a property interest in TrueAUD, not simply dumped dollars into Finder’s lap. A digital asset affair, not a tryst with a “debt.”

The kicker: Finder’s promise was to return equivalent digital assets, not cold hard cash—very much a matter of property, not a Dickensian IOU. Thus, the whole show skated gracefully past the legal definition of “debenture,” leaving ASIC clutching its pearls and statutory references like a debutante denied the last dance.

ASIC, not satisfied, tried to persuade the Court to treat the whole business as a “single scheme” under section 761B of the Act. The Court, perhaps suppressing yawns, demurred. Apparently, the structure was too straightforward—no elaborate subterfuge; just earnest, well-dressed fintech dreariness.

Regulatory and Industry Impact: ASIC’s Chocolate Box of Losses

This wasn’t ASIC’s first pratfall on the ballroom floor. Recall the Block Earner affair—another tumble for the ages. The upshot? No clear rules just yet on when stablecoins and crypto products strut into regulatory territory. The specter of “debt” looms, but actual property-based arrangements seem safe… for now. So: crypto operators may exhale, but not too deeply. Nobody wants to attract ASIC’s attention at the buffet table twice.

ASIC, in classic bureaucratic form, offered a press release less illuminating than a flickering candle in a blackout, promising to “review implications” and perhaps update Info Sheet 225 (INFO 225). Scintillating reading for insomniacs and lawyers with time to kill.

The verdict underscored (underline this in your moleskine—everyone else will be): How you structure your shiny digital asset product, who “owns” what, and what you promise, genuinely matter. Crypto cowboys may feel momentarily emboldened, but beware: one misstep, and you may find yourself holding a regulatory hand grenade rather than a golden ticket.

Conclusion: To License or Not To License?

The Full Federal Court’s word is now the law of the antipodean land: if your stablecoin escapade is draped in property rights rather than debt, ASIC may just have to sit out the next dance. Disclaimer: structure, paperwork, and clarity are your friends—treat them as you would a reliable butler: invaluable, discreet, and ready to bail you out should the soirée go sideways.

Aspiring crypto impresarios: before rolling out your financial delights, have your legal boffins give everything a thorough inspection. If you crave more regulatory gossip, grumbling, or bespoke advice, Kelman PLLC stands ready—martinis chilled and quills sharpened. Book a tête-à-tête here; we promise not to mention the debenture thing (much).

Originally published, in all its glory, at Kelman.law. 🍾

Read More

2025-07-29 10:20