Morocco Crypto & Digital Asset Regulation

Token Classification

No statutory token-classification taxonomy currently applies inside Morocco; crypto-assets are not divided by law into distinct regulatory categories today. The only classification framework on the table is the one Draft Law 42.25 would introduce if enacted. According to secondary legal commentary, the bill defines crypto-assets broadly as digital representations of value or rights that are transferable and storable electronically using distributed ledger technology, and within that broad category it distinguishes utility tokens from asset-referenced tokens (CLM-MA-004). This is explicitly modelled, per the same commentary, on the European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) taxonomy.

This module's evidence base is thin and rests on a single T3 legal-commentary source rather than the bill's primary text, which was not independently re-opened this research pass. The classification detail should be read as a reasonably reliable secondary account of the bill's intended structure rather than a verified reading of its operative definitions.

Outlook

Because no classification regime is currently in force, this module's red traffic-light assessment reflects an absence rather than a prohibition: there is no statutory basis today for distinguishing token types for regulatory purposes in Morocco. That would change immediately upon Draft Law 42.25's enactment, at which point the utility-token / asset-referenced-token distinction would become operative and would likely drive differentiated treatment across the licensing and stablecoin modules simultaneously, given how closely the three are structurally linked in the bill as reported. Primary-text verification of the classification provisions remains an open item for the next research cycle.

On-Chain Activity Regime

This is the thinnest-evidenced module in the Morocco coverage. A single secondary source reports that Draft Law 42.25 explicitly excludes decentralised finance (DeFi) activity from its scope (CLM-MA-006), but this claim has not been checked against the bill's primary text, and no other on-chain activity category — staking, mining, or otherwise — carries any sourced finding. The claim is carried as uncertain rather than discarded, since a single T4 source reporting a specific scope carve-out is a meaningful signal even unverified, but it should not be treated as settled.

Outlook

Primary-text verification of the reported DeFi exclusion is the single most consequential open item in this module, since a confirmed carve-out would materially narrow the eventual reach of Morocco's prospective crypto-licensing regime relative to frameworks, such as MiCA, that have grappled directly with DeFi's treatment. Until that verification occurs, on-chain activity regulation in Morocco should be treated as an open question rather than a settled gap or a settled inclusion.

On-Chain Activity Regime

This is the thinnest-evidenced module in this cycle's Morocco coverage. A single secondary source reports that Draft Law 42.25 explicitly excludes decentralised finance (DeFi) activity from its scope (CLM-MA-006), but this claim has not been checked against the bill's primary text, and no other on-chain activity category — staking, mining, or otherwise — carries any sourced finding this cycle. The claim is carried as uncertain rather than discarded, since a single T4 source reporting a specific scope carve-out is a meaningful signal even unverified, but it should not be treated as settled.

Outlook

Primary-text verification of the reported DeFi exclusion is the single most consequential open item in this module, since a confirmed carve-out would materially narrow the eventual reach of Morocco's prospective crypto-licensing regime relative to frameworks, such as MiCA, that have grappled directly with DeFi's treatment. Until that verification occurs, on-chain activity regulation in Morocco should be treated as an open question rather than a settled gap or a settled inclusion.

Stablecoin Regime

Morocco has no stablecoin-specific regime in force. The only development bearing on this module is secondary legal commentary, dated October 2026, reporting that draft law 42-25 would impose a bank monopoly on stablecoin issuance, placing issuance authority exclusively with licensed banks operating under Bank Al-Maghrib supervision. This claim has not been independently verified against the bill's primary legislative text, and the specific article proposing the monopoly has not been confirmed. The confidence attached to this development is accordingly limited: it rests on a single secondary legal-commentary source rather than on the avant-projet text itself.

If accurate as reported, a bank monopoly on stablecoin issuance would represent a significant structural choice within Morocco's broader crypto-asset framework, placing stablecoin issuance within the regulated banking perimeter rather than permitting non-bank issuers, a model that differs from frameworks adopted in some other jurisdictions that permit licensed non-bank electronic-money or payment institutions to issue stablecoins under separate prudential regimes. The reported approach would concentrate stablecoin-issuance risk and oversight within institutions already subject to Bank Al-Maghrib's prudential supervision, which is a materially different design choice from an open-issuer model.

This development cannot currently be read independently of the broader draft law 42-25 process described under Morocco's crypto-licensing position: the stablecoin provision, as reported, is one component of the same unenacted bill, and its pinpoint status depends on confirmation of the bill's primary text, which was not opened this cycle. No regulatory authority has issued a standalone communication on stablecoin treatment separate from this reported provision within the draft law.

Outlook

Confirmation of the reported bank-monopoly provision against the primary text of draft law 42-25, once that text becomes available for direct review, is the next concrete step for this module. Until the bill advances beyond consultation, Morocco has no stablecoin-specific rule in force, and the reported monopoly provision remains an unconfirmed secondary-source description of a proposed, not enacted, legislative design choice.

Stablecoin Regime

Morocco has no stablecoin-specific regulatory regime in force. The operative legal position for any stablecoin-related activity remains the 2017 exchange-control-based prohibition applicable to virtual-currency transactions generally; there is no separate or more specific stablecoin rule currently in effect.

Secondary legal commentary on the pending draft crypto-asset bill, no. 42.25, reports that the bill would impose a bank monopoly on stablecoin issuance, restricting that activity to banks operating under Bank Al-Maghrib supervision. This is, at present, a finding: it has not been corroborated by additional independent commentary, and the pinpoint article of the bill said to establish the monopoly has not been confirmed against the primary consolidated text. The finding should accordingly be read as a reported design feature of the consultation draft rather than a verified provision, pending either confirmation from the primary bill text or corroboration from a second independent source.

If the reported design holds through to any eventual enactment, its structural implication would be significant: it would foreclose non-bank stablecoin issuance within Morocco's jurisdiction entirely, in contrast to jurisdictions that permit licensed non-bank issuers to operate stablecoins under separate reserve and redemption requirements. A bank-monopoly design places the entirety of stablecoin issuance risk inside the prudentially supervised banking perimeter, which is a materially different architecture from a dedicated e-money or payment-institution issuance channel.

Separately, secondary commentary on the bill's broader token-classification approach describes it as distinguishing utility tokens from asset-referenced tokens — a category that would include stablecoins — while excluding central-bank digital currencies and certain non-fungible tokens from scope. This classification detail, like the stablecoin-monopoly finding, has not been verified against the primary text and is held at a correspondingly lower confidence.

No primary bill text, consultation response, or regulator statement specific to stablecoin issuance has been independently located. The finding rests entirely on secondary legal commentary, and the absence of corroboration from a second independent source is a material gap in the current evidence base for this specific provision.

Outlook

Confirmation of the reported bank-monopoly design against the primary bill text, or corroboration from a second independent commentary source, is the immediate gap to close. Until then, and until any enactment, the only binding rule affecting stablecoin-related activity in Morocco remains the general exchange-control-based prohibition applicable to virtual-currency transactions as a whole.

Stablecoin Regime

Morocco has no stablecoin-specific regime in force: there is no statutory basis today for reserve, redemption or issuance requirements attaching to asset-referenced or otherwise value-stabilised tokens. The only prospective framework is, again, Draft Law 42.25. Secondary legal commentary reports that the bill would require issuers of crypto-assets — including issuers of asset-referenced tokens, the category closest to a stablecoin concept in the bill's own taxonomy — to comply with disclosure obligations resembling those applied to securities offerings, including the publication of a white paper (CLM-MA-005). This would be a meaningful departure from the current absence of any issuance gate, bringing stablecoin-like instruments inside a disclosure-based supervisory perimeter for the first time if enacted as described.

As with the token-classification detail, this finding rests on a single T3 source and has not been checked against the bill's primary text.

Outlook

The disclosure-based approach reported for asset-referenced token issuers mirrors the MiCA-inspired structure running through the rest of Draft Law 42.25, reinforcing the read that the bill is intended as a single coherent framework rather than a set of disconnected provisions. Until enactment, no stablecoin issuance occurring in or targeting Morocco is subject to any domestic disclosure or reserve requirement. Confirming the precise disclosure and reserve mechanics against the bill's primary text remains an open item, and the module is flagged as resting on limited secondary evidence pending that verification.

Stablecoin Regime

Morocco has no stablecoin-specific regime in force: there is no statutory basis today for reserve, redemption or issuance requirements attaching to asset-referenced or otherwise value-stabilised tokens. The only prospective framework is, again, Draft Law 42.25. Secondary legal commentary reports that the bill would require issuers of crypto-assets — including issuers of asset-referenced tokens, the category closest to a stablecoin concept in the bill's own taxonomy — to comply with disclosure obligations resembling those applied to securities offerings, including the publication of a white paper (CLM-MA-005). This would be a meaningful departure from the current absence of any issuance gate, bringing stablecoin-like instruments inside a disclosure-based supervisory perimeter for the first time if enacted as described.

As with the token-classification detail, this finding rests on a single T3 source and has not been checked against the bill's primary text this cycle.

Outlook

The disclosure-based approach reported for asset-referenced token issuers mirrors the MiCA-inspired structure running through the rest of Draft Law 42.25, reinforcing the read that the bill is intended as a single coherent framework rather than a set of disconnected provisions. Until enactment, no stablecoin issuance occurring in or targeting Morocco is subject to any domestic disclosure or reserve requirement. Confirming the precise disclosure and reserve mechanics against the bill's primary text remains an open item, and the module is flagged as resting on limited, single-source secondary evidence pending that verification.

Tax Treatment

Secondary commentary reports that individual crypto-asset capital gains are taxed in Morocco at a flat rate of 15% under the current Finance Law (CLM-MA-007). This is the only tax-treatment finding sourced, and it rests entirely on a single T4 vendor source; no primary Direction Générale des Impôts (DGI) circular or statutory text was retrieved to corroborate the rate, the base to which it applies, or its treatment of related questions such as mining income or token-to-token exchanges. The finding is carried as uncertain accordingly.

Outlook

Tax treatment is a structurally thin-coverage area across the wider monitor estate, and Morocco is no exception: without a retrieved primary DGI text, the reported 15% rate cannot be distinguished from an approximation, a superseded figure, or an accurate restatement of current law. Retrieving and verifying the underlying DGI circular remains an open item, and no new tax-treatment development is recorded beyond the restatement of this single, unverified figure.

Cross-Border Transfer

Cross-border crypto-asset transfer in Morocco is governed not by a crypto-specific rule but by the general exchange-control regime administered by the Office des Changes. The legal basis for this constraint is the same November 2017 joint communiqué from Bank Al-Maghrib, the AMMC and the Ministry of Economy and Finance that underpins the licensing module: the communiqué cites the exchange-control regime as its basis for treating virtual-currency transactions as a breach of exchange regulations (CLM-MA-008). In practice, moving value into or out of Morocco via crypto-assets carries the same exchange-control exposure as any other unauthorised foreign-exchange transaction, rather than facing a bespoke crypto border-control rule.

This module's primary source — the 2017 communiqué itself — is Tier 1, the strongest evidentiary grade available, though the underlying document could not be freshly retrieved: an attempted fetch of the Bank Al-Maghrib host returned an HTTP 403 block, consistent with the document being treated as established background rather than freshly re-verified text this pass.

Outlook

Cross-border transfer treatment will move in lockstep with the licensing module rather than independently: Draft Law 42.25, if enacted, would be the instrument that displaces exchange-control treatment of crypto transfers with a crypto-specific cross-border regime, and no separate cross-border provision has been reported outside that bill. Until enactment, the Office des Changes' exchange-control framework remains the operative constraint, and this module's assessment should be read as stable rather than as awaiting a distinct development of its own.

Cross-Border Transfer

Cross-border crypto-asset transfer in Morocco is governed not by a crypto-specific rule but by the general exchange-control regime administered by the Office des Changes. The legal basis for this constraint is the same November 2017 joint communiqué from Bank Al-Maghrib, the AMMC and the Ministry of Economy and Finance that underpins the licensing module: the communiqué cites the exchange-control regime as its basis for treating virtual-currency transactions as a breach of exchange regulations (CLM-MA-008). In practice, moving value into or out of Morocco via crypto-assets carries the same exchange-control exposure as any other unauthorised foreign-exchange transaction, rather than facing a bespoke crypto border-control rule.

This module's primary source — the 2017 communiqué itself — is Tier 1, the strongest evidentiary grade available, though the underlying document could not be freshly retrieved this cycle: an attempted fetch of the Bank Al-Maghrib host returned an HTTP 403 block, consistent with the document being treated as established background rather than freshly re-verified text this pass.

Outlook

Cross-border transfer treatment will move in lockstep with the licensing module rather than independently: Draft Law 42.25, if enacted, would be the instrument that displaces exchange-control treatment of crypto transfers with a crypto-specific cross-border regime, and no separate cross-border provision has been reported outside that bill. Until enactment, the Office des Changes' exchange-control framework remains the operative constraint, and this module's assessment should be read as stable rather than as awaiting a distinct development of its own.