MANILA — Dec. 25, 2025 — Philippine regulators have moved from warnings to technical enforcement in the country’s fast-growing online trading and crypto market, after internet service providers (ISPs) began restricting access to platforms flagged as operating without authorization. The National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) confirmed it issued a memorandum directing ISPs to remove access to 50 online entities identified by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) as unlicensed or unregistered Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs). [1]
By Dec. 25, 2025, users and multiple reports said large global exchanges — including Coinbase and Gemini — were among platforms that had become unavailable on Philippine networks, a sign that the takedown order is being implemented at the ISP level, not just through app-store actions or advisories. [2]
The late-December crackdown is the clearest signal yet that the Philippines is tightening market access rules: “license first” is becoming the practical requirement for reaching Filipino users, whether the service is crypto, FX/CFD-style trading, or other online investment products. [3]
What happened: The NTC ordered ISPs to block 50 platforms at the BSP’s request
Philippine authorities say the action is anchored on a BSP-driven enforcement request, with the NTC using its powers to implement a coordinated takedown in the telecom space. In its public explanation, the NTC said it issued a memorandum to all ISPs directing the immediate removal of access to a list of 50 entities classified as unlicensed/unregistered VASPs operating in the Philippines without proper authorization. [4]
The BSP request, as described by Philippine outlets, was tied to Section 902‑N of the BSP’s regulatory framework for non-bank financial institutions, updated via BSP Circular No. 1206 (Series of 2024), which consolidated and updated rules for money service businesses including VASPs. [5]
Key point: regulators framed the blocking as a consumer protection and market integrity step — designed to stop unauthorized services from reaching the public — rather than as a prohibition on crypto or online trading overall. [6]
Why this is happening now: A shift from advisories to “hard” enforcement
The NTC emphasized that the order was not arbitrary and was carried out to support the BSP’s supervisory and enforcement mandate. It also linked the timing to public controversy after reports that even a well-known global brokerage platform experienced access issues — an episode that increased scrutiny on how blocks are issued and implemented. [7]
Local reporting noted that the NTC’s clarification referenced an article that triggered concern among investors about sudden access disruptions, pushing regulators to explain the legal basis and process for takedown directives. [8]
In short, the policy direction is becoming clearer: if a platform is serving Filipinos but is not registered/authorized under the relevant Philippine licensing regime, regulators are increasingly willing to restrict access at the network level. [9]
Coinbase and Gemini access issues: What was reported as of Dec. 25, 2025
While the NTC’s memorandum referenced a list of 50 entities, the full list was not widely published in the initial government communication described by multiple reports. [10]
Still, by Christmas week, multiple outlets reported that Coinbase and Gemini were inaccessible in the Philippines through major ISPs — with user reports placing the disruption around Tuesday, Dec. 24, 2025, and follow-up coverage indicating the inaccessibility remained a live issue into Dec. 25. [11]
A key nuance in the reporting: the mechanism is not a voluntary “exit” by the exchanges, but an ISP-level restriction tied to the NTC directive supporting the BSP’s enforcement posture. [12]
The legal backbone: BSP Circular 1206 and the VASP regime
Philippine crypto oversight is heavily centered on the BSP’s VASP framework.
- BSP Circular No. 1108 (Series of 2021) laid down guidelines for Virtual Asset Service Providers and amended the relevant section (902‑N) of the BSP’s Manual of Regulations for Non-Bank Financial Institutions. [13]
- BSP Circular No. 1206 (Series of 2024) later consolidated and updated rules for money service businesses, explicitly including VASPs and the BSP’s approach to supervision in a changing risk environment. [14]
In reporting on the takedown order, Philippine outlets pointed directly to Section 902‑N and Circular 1206 as the cited regulatory basis for disabling access to unregistered/unlicensed VASPs. [15]
Regulators also referenced the BSP’s authority under the New Central Bank Act framework (as amended), emphasizing its mandate over money service businesses including VASPs. [16]
How the SEC fits in: Separate (but overlapping) crypto-market rules
The BSP is not the only regulator shaping market access. In 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) also rolled out a separate framework for crypto-asset market activity.
A Baker McKenzie advisory summary notes that the SEC issued SEC Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 2025 on May 30, 2025, setting rules for Crypto‑Asset Service Providers (CASPs), framed around consumer protection, financial stability, and market integrity. [17]
BusinessWorld reporting from mid‑2025 highlights one of the most-discussed elements of the SEC framework: a minimum paid‑up capital requirement of ₱100 million (cash or property, excluding crypto-assets) for firms seeking to operate as CASPs, a threshold that could discourage smaller players. [18]
Why this matters to the December blocking story: even if the NTC order is described as a BSP-led action in multiple reports, the broader regulatory environment in 2025 has been moving toward stricter registration and licensing expectations across agencies, making network-level enforcement more likely when platforms serve local users without formal authorization. [19]
“Where do I trade now?” BSP publishes a directory of registered VASPs
One immediate implication of ISP blocks is that Filipino users are being pushed toward services that are clearly recognized under Philippine regulatory oversight.
The BSP maintains a directory titled “List of Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASP)”, which includes registered entities and contact details. The directory (published as a BSP document) lists, among others, Coins.ph (Betur Inc.) and Philippine Digital Asset Exchange (PDAX), alongside other registered firms. [20]
For users, this directory is likely to become the key reference point for determining which providers are operating with BSP-recognized status — especially if blocks expand beyond the most recognizable global names. [21]
What users and investors should watch next
1) Whether the full list of 50 blocked entities is published
While the NTC memorandum is described as covering 50 entities, reporting indicated the list was not immediately released in full in early communications, leaving users to discover access changes in real time. [22]
2) Whether more “mainstream” financial services get swept into blocks
The NTC’s public clarification referenced broader investor concerns after reports of sudden access disruption affecting a globally known brokerage service, underscoring the risk of spillover (or confusion) when enforcement is implemented through ISP-level tools. [23]
3) How foreign exchanges respond: licensing, partnerships, or exit
Some international platforms may pursue local licensing pathways or partnerships; others may scale back. The enforcement trend suggests that “serving Filipino users without authorization” is increasingly incompatible with uninterrupted access. [24]
Practical guidance for Filipinos affected by exchange blocks
This is not financial advice, but based on what regulators and reporting have emphasized, affected users typically focus on a few immediate steps:
- Verify whether the platform you use is authorized/registered under BSP/SEC frameworks (start with the BSP VASP directory for VASP status). [25]
- Be cautious of impersonators and “recovery” scams. Enforcement events often trigger phishing and fake customer-support outreach, especially on social media. (Regulators’ repeated emphasis on consumer protection is partly because unlicensed platforms can lack safeguards.) [26]
- Monitor official advisories and clarifications from regulators and reputable local outlets, because access changes can roll out unevenly across ISPs. [27]
The bottom line: The Philippines is enforcing crypto and online trading rules through internet access controls
As of Dec. 25, 2025, the Philippines’ year-end crackdown shows how regulation is being applied in practice: not only through licensing requirements and advisories, but via ISP-level restrictions implemented by the NTC following a BSP-backed request targeting 50 unregistered/unlicensed platforms. [28]
For the market, it’s a turning point. For users, it’s a reminder that in the Philippines, platform access is now increasingly tied to local authorization — and that the safest route is to rely on providers that appear in official registries and meet Philippine regulatory standards. [29]
References
1. www.gmanetwork.com, 2. cryptorank.io, 3. www.gmanetwork.com, 4. www.gmanetwork.com, 5. www.gmanetwork.com, 6. www.gmanetwork.com, 7. businessmirror.com.ph, 8. businessmirror.com.ph, 9. www.gmanetwork.com, 10. bitpinas.com, 11. coinpaper.com, 12. www.gmanetwork.com, 13. www.bsp.gov.ph, 14. www.bsp.gov.ph, 15. www.gmanetwork.com, 16. businessmirror.com.ph, 17. insightplus.bakermckenzie.com, 18. www.bworldonline.com, 19. www.gmanetwork.com, 20. www.bsp.gov.ph, 21. www.bsp.gov.ph, 22. bitpinas.com, 23. businessmirror.com.ph, 24. www.gmanetwork.com, 25. www.bsp.gov.ph, 26. www.gmanetwork.com, 27. www.gmanetwork.com, 28. www.gmanetwork.com, 29. www.bsp.gov.ph
