{
 "jurisdiction_id": "UG",
 "jurisdiction": "Uganda",
 "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/",
 "generator": "render_jid v13.3.0",
 "date_modified": "2026-08-06",
 "schema_version": "crypto-v2.0.0",
 "counts": {
  "modules": 8,
  "sourced_findings": 8,
  "source_register": 5
 },
 "modules": [
  {
   "code": "crypto_licensing",
   "name": "Crypto Licensing",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#crypto-licensing-crypto-licensing",
   "standing_position": "Uganda has no comprehensive crypto-asset or virtual-asset-service-provider (VASP) licensing statute in force. The Bank of Uganda (BOU) has confined itself to cautionary public statements that virtual assets are not legal tender and that participation is at the user's own risk, while the BOU Governor confirmed in a November 2025 keynote that Uganda has licensed zero VASPs, contrasting this with Kenya's newly operational VASP Act. A proposed six-pillar framework (licensing, fit-and-proper standards, capital adequacy, client-asset segregation, inter-agency coordination) has been publicly outlined but not enacted.",
   "findings": [
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    },
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "code": "token_classification",
   "name": "Token Classification",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#token-classification-token-classification",
   "standing_position": "No statutory taxonomy exists in Uganda distinguishing security tokens, e-money tokens, asset-referenced tokens, stablecoins, utility tokens or NFTs. Classification questions remain open pending the proposed regulatory framework referenced by the BOU Governor.",
   "findings": [
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "code": "on_chain_activity_regime",
   "name": "On-Chain Activity Regime",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#on-chain-activity-regime-on-chain-activity-regime",
   "standing_position": "No Ugandan law or regulator currently addresses staking, DeFi lending, mining, node operation or validator activity specifically. The Financial Intelligence Authority's national risk assessment (cited by the BOU Governor, November 2025) found 84.5% of Ugandan virtual-asset activity occurs on decentralised platforms, well above the 63.8% Sub-Saharan average, operating in a supervisory blind spot. BOU and the Capital Markets Authority operate regulatory sandboxes that innovators may use, but these are not a substitute for a binding activity-specific regime.",
   "findings": [
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "code": "stablecoin_regime",
   "name": "Stablecoin Regime",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#stablecoin-regime-stablecoin-regime",
   "standing_position": "Stablecoins are widely used in Uganda for remittances and cross-border payments, per the BOU Governor's November 2025 remarks, but no stablecoin-specific issuance authorisation, reserve-requirement, redemption-right, disclosure, or systemic-designation regime exists. BOU has flagged foreign-exchange and monetary-substitution risk from unregulated stablecoin use eroding demand for the Uganda Shilling.",
   "findings": [
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "code": "consumer_protection",
   "name": "Consumer Protection",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#consumer-protection-consumer-protection",
   "standing_position": "BOU's primary consumer-protection posture to date has been a standing public warning: virtual assets are not legal tender and participation is at the user's own risk. The FIA's national risk assessment found limited customer due diligence and weak governance in Uganda's virtual-asset sector. The proposed six-pillar framework would introduce binding client-asset segregation and capital-adequacy requirements for providers, but this is not yet in force.",
   "findings": [
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    },
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "code": "tax_treatment",
   "name": "Tax Treatment",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#tax-treatment-tax-treatment",
   "standing_position": "No Uganda Revenue Authority guidance or Income Tax Act provision specific to crypto-asset capital gains, income tax, VAT/GST, withholding, or reporting obligations was identified in this research pass. General tax law may apply to crypto-derived income by analogy, but no confirmed primary-source treatment exists; this is a gap flagged for escalation rather than a fabricated obligation.",
   "findings": []
  },
  {
   "code": "cross_border_transfer",
   "name": "Cross-Border Transfer",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#cross-border-transfer-cross-border-transfer",
   "standing_position": "Uganda applies no crypto-specific outbound-transfer restriction, sanctions nexus, or reporting threshold distinct from general foreign-exchange and AML law. Cross-border stablecoin remittance flows, which BOU acknowledges are material, operate without a dedicated legal framework.",
   "findings": [
    {
     "finding": null,
     "instrument_type": null,
     "source": null,
     "source_url": null,
     "source_tier": null,
     "retrieved_at": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "code": "aml_cft_regime",
   "name": "AML/CFT Regime",
   "confidence": null,
   "moved_this_cycle": false,
   "url": "https://cryptoassets.gi/jurisdictions/uganda/#aml-cft-regime-aml-cft-regime",
   "standing_position": "Crypto subscribes to the FIM aml_ctf module; AML/CFT-scope material (Financial Intelligence Authority mandate, ESAAMLG/FATF mutual-evaluation ratings, Anti-Money Laundering Act 2013/2017) is captured there and is out of scope for this baseline. Disambiguation context only: Uganda was removed from the FATF increased-monitoring list in 2023 and remains subject to ESAAMLG follow-up reporting on AML/CFT technical compliance; no crypto/VASP-specific AML rule has been separately enacted.",
   "findings": []
  }
 ]
}