Keisuke Kimura Japan went nearly four years without a new entrant receiving cryptoasset exchange registration.
Laser Digital Japan finally broke that sequence when it completed its registration in August 2026.
But treating the years between 2022 and 2026 as a period when Japan’s digital asset market was simply closed would be misleading.
During the same period, global exchanges exited and re-entered through different structures, Japan created a new regulatory framework for fiat-linked stablecoins, USDC reached retail users through a locally registered operator, a new intermediary regime was launched, and lawmakers approved a major redesign of the country’s cryptoasset regulatory framework.
The four-year gap was therefore not four years of inactivity.
It was a period in which the architecture for entering Japan changed substantially.
Was Japan’s crypto market actually frozen for four years?
No. What can be observed is a gap in new entrants obtaining cryptoasset exchange registration.
That is different from an official suspension of licensing. There is no basis for describing the period as a formal four-year licensing freeze by the Financial Services Agency.
The distinction is important because looking only at the number of newly registered cryptoasset exchanges misses several other ways in which Japan’s market continued to develop.
Some companies exited.
One major global exchange entered through an acquisition.
New regulatory categories were created.
And the legal framework governing cryptoassets itself began to change.
By the time Laser Digital Japan completed its registration in August 2026, the regulatory map looked very different from the one a new entrant would have seen in 2022.
2022–2023: Kraken and Coinbase exit while Binance takes another route
Late 2022 and early 2023 marked a difficult period for global crypto markets.
Japan was no exception.
Kraken announced in December 2022 that it would cease operations in Japan and deregister as a cryptoasset exchange service provider effective January 31, 2023. The company cited the conditions surrounding the Japanese market and the broader downturn in the global crypto market when explaining its decision.
Coinbase announced the following month that it would halt operations in Japan and conduct a complete review of its business in the country.
It would have been easy at that point to conclude that Japan was becoming inaccessible to large international exchanges.
Binance demonstrated another possibility.
In November 2022, Binance acquired 100% of Sakura Exchange BitCoin, or SEBC, a Japanese company that already held cryptoasset exchange registration.
SEBC was subsequently renamed Binance Japan.
In August 2023, Binance launched its dedicated Japanese platform through that locally regulated entity.
No brand-new cryptoasset exchange registration was required for Binance to execute that particular market-entry strategy.
Binance shows how acquisition became a route into Japan
The Binance case is one of the most important developments from the four-year gap.
A foreign digital asset group seeking access to Japan essentially had another strategic option: acquire an existing regulated business rather than build a new regulated entity entirely from scratch.
That route is not necessarily easier.
An acquisition creates its own regulatory, governance, integration, technology and commercial challenges. The existing company cannot simply be treated as a licence shell disconnected from the business actually being operated.
But it demonstrates why the number of new registrations alone is a poor measure of whether foreign companies were able to enter Japan.
The more useful question is what corporate and regulatory structure they used to enter.
For companies assessing Japan today, the same distinction still matters.
A greenfield licence, an acquisition and a partnership with an existing operator have different implications for timing, cost, control and regulatory responsibility.
2023–2025: Stablecoins create a separate regulated lane
The next major structural change came on June 1, 2023.
Japan introduced a new framework covering electronic payment instruments, a category that includes certain fiat-linked stablecoins.
This mattered because regulated distribution of qualifying stablecoins no longer had to be treated as simply another form of traditional cryptoasset exchange activity.
Japan had created a distinct legal lane.
However, creating the law did not immediately create a commercial market.
It took until March 4, 2025 for SBI VC Trade to become the first registered Electronic Payment Instruments Exchange Service Provider.
On March 26, SBI VC Trade began offering USDC to retail customers in Japan.
That sequence is important.
The legal framework came first.
Registration of the first distributor came almost two years later.
Commercial retail distribution followed after that.
The distinction between regulation being available on paper and a product actually reaching Japanese users is one of the recurring themes in Japan’s digital asset market.
By August 2026, as discussed in Episode 95, Coincheck had also obtained this separate registration as it prepared to expand into stablecoins and on-chain finance.
2026: Japan adds an intermediary model
Another structural change arrived on June 1, 2026.
Japan launched the Electronic Payment Instruments and Cryptoassets Service Intermediary framework.
The formal name is long, but the direction of travel is more important.
Under the framework, a registered intermediary can, within the limits established by the law, mediate certain purchases, sales and exchanges on behalf of an existing cryptoasset exchange or electronic payment instruments operator.
This creates another distinction between performing the full regulated service and acting as an intermediary for a company that already holds the relevant underlying registration.
It does not eliminate regulation.
Nor does it mean every consumer application can simply use an intermediary registration instead of a full licence.
The applicability depends on what functions the company actually performs.
But it is another example of Japan moving toward a more layered regulatory structure.
Crypto regulation itself is being rebuilt
While these new routes were being created, the Financial Services Agency was also reviewing the foundation of cryptoasset regulation.
Japan originally regulated cryptoassets primarily under the Payment Services Act, reflecting their treatment from a payment and settlement perspective.
By 2025, the FSA was pointing to the increasing use of cryptoassets as investment assets.
Its review concluded that issues such as investor information, improper investment solicitation, unregistered operators, fair price formation and market integrity were increasingly relevant.
These are areas traditionally associated with securities and investment regulation.
The resulting legislation, passed on July 15, 2026, provides for the main cryptoasset regulatory framework to move from the Payment Services Act to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.
Cryptoassets will not simply become traditional securities. The legislation treats them as a separate category of financial product reflecting their particular characteristics.
Stablecoins are outside this specific migration and continue to be treated separately.
The reform has been enacted, but the transition should not be confused with the entire new crypto framework already being fully operational.
Why “licensing freeze” is the wrong description
This brings us back to the four-year gap.
The observable fact is that Japan went roughly four years without a new entrant being registered as a cryptoasset exchange service provider.
It would be a mistake to turn that observation into a stronger claim that the regulator officially froze licensing.
The period included major market exits and a difficult global crypto environment.
But it also included the Binance acquisition, the creation of the stablecoin framework, the first regulated USDC distribution, a new intermediary regime and a fundamental redesign of crypto regulation.
The market did not stop.
The available routes into it changed.
What the four-year gap means for global firms
For a global digital asset company evaluating Japan today, the initial strategic question should not simply be:
“How do we obtain a Japanese crypto exchange licence?”
The better starting point is:
“What exactly do we need to do in Japan, and which regulated functions do we need to control ourselves?”
Depending on the business model, the options may include establishing and registering a local regulated entity.
An acquisition of an existing regulated company may be relevant.
A product may be distributed through a locally registered operator.
For certain activities, the newer intermediary structure may also be relevant.
These approaches are not interchangeable, and none should be assumed to provide an easy regulatory shortcut.
They differ in cost, time, ownership, customer control, compliance responsibility and strategic flexibility.
But together they show that Japan market entry is now a question of regulatory architecture, not simply licence availability.
What to watch next
The next major variable is implementation of the 2026 regulatory overhaul.
The legislation moving the main cryptoasset framework into the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act has passed, but companies still need to track the detailed implementation and transition of the new system.
That will affect how the current cryptoasset exchange and intermediary structures evolve.
For companies considering Japan over the next several years, this makes early structural analysis particularly important.
The four-year gap did not return Japan to where it was in 2022.
It produced a different market.
Evaluating Japan?
Wakyodo helps global digital asset firms understand the regulatory landscape, identify potential local partners and determine an appropriate market-entry approach. Contact us through our existing website inquiry channel to discuss your plans.