Summary: The Asset Tokenisation (Regulation) Bill, 2026, introduced in the Rajya Sabha on March 14, 2026, is India’s first dedicated legislative proposal for regulating and licensing tokenised real-world assets. Significantly, it proposes a novel multi-regulator model in light of global standards and provides a pathway for regulating tokenised assets, including stablecoins.
Whether it is digital rupee (Central Bank Digital Currency), record keeping, or otherwise, India has not shied away from adopting blockchain technology. While the use of such technology has expanded exponentially, formulation of regulations / policy towards such use has been scarce. In the context of real-world asset tokenisation, the consultation paper by International Financial Services Centre Authority (IFSCA) is the only Indian policy document on the subject. Therefore, the Asset Tokenisation (Regulation) Bill, 2026 (the “Bill”), introduced as a Private Member’s Bill in the Rajya Sabha on March 14, 2026, is important as it marks the first dedicated legislative proposal for tokenised real-world assets. This FIG Paper examines the Bill’s contents, implications for business, and global context.
Why This Matters
Although a Private Member’s Bill without the same legislative weight as a government-sponsored Bill, it is India’s first dedicated attempt at bringing legal clarity to the tokenised assets space and signals policymaking intent.
The Bill has three core objectives: (i) legal recognition of asset tokenisation; (ii) establishing a licensing framework for the issuance, trading, custody, and settlement of tokenised assets; and (iii) ensuring market integrity and investor protection.
The Legislative Architecture
Meaning of Asset Token: An “asset token” is defined as a cryptographically secured digital representation of any right, title, interest, or economic benefit in an asset recorded on distributed ledger technology. Tokens gain formal legal status. The issuance of a token does not, by itself, transfer ownership of the underlying asset. This critical distinction gives tokens legal standing without disturbing India’s existing property law framework.
Lifecycle Regulation: The Bill proposes oversight across the entire tokenised asset chain from origination and custody to trading and investor holding. Issuers, custodians, and trading platforms all face specific obligations.
Grievance Redressal: The Bill proposes tasking regulatory authorities with establishing grievance redressal mechanisms to prevent fraud, mis-selling, and unfair trade practices.
Enforcement: The Bill lays down criminal consequences for violations, including imprisonment of up to 10 (ten) years or fines of up to INR 25 crore (~USD 2.7 million) or three times the gains made (whichever is higher). These are independent of civil consequences the relevant regulator may impose, including cease-and-desist orders, civil penalties, asset freeze, and cancellation of registration.
Transitional Provisions: Existing tokenisation projects and regulatory sandbox arrangements are granted a compliance runway to migrate into the new framework within prescribed timelines.
A Multi-Regulator Model
The Bill does not create a new regulator. Instead, it empowers the Central Government to designate existing financial sector regulators as the relevant authorities. Jurisdiction of the relevant regulator follows the underlying asset. Each designated authority is granted broad powers, including registration, disclosure standards, prudential norms, and oversight of issuance, trading, custody, and settlement.
Tokens involving securities fall under SEBI; tokens touching payments, stable value arrangements, or banking fall under the RBI; and sector-specific tokens (insurance, pension, etc.) go to the relevant statutory sectoral regulator. To prevent jurisdictional conflicts, regulators must consult and coordinate, with joint directions permitted, where necessary.
Implications for Business
Broader Asset Access:By extending coverage to real estate, infrastructure, carbon credits, and intellectual property alongside traditional securities, the Bill enables fractional ownership of asset classes historically out of reach for retail investors, creating new product and distribution opportunities.
Regulatory Clarity Across Sectors:The multi-regulator model, backed by a formal coordination mechanism, reduces the risk of regulatory overlap. Businesses operating across asset classes, especially platforms listing multiple token types, will have clearer lines of accountability.
Continuity for Early Movers:The transitional provisions give existing operators and sandbox participants a structured migration path. This rewards early investment in the space and reduces the risk of business disruptions and abrupt shutdowns, the real money online gaming prohibition in India being a cautionary tale.
The Global Picture
United States: The United States has adopted a fragmented approach. The Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) asserts jurisdiction over tokens that qualify as securities, while the Commodities & Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) claims oversight over commodity-linked tokens. Proposed legislation such as the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act (“FIT21”) seeks to clarify the boundary between the two. While a unified framework may not be forthcoming, recent signals from the US administration suggest a more accommodative stance toward digital assets, including tokenised real-world assets.
Singapore: The Monetary Authority of Singapore (“MAS”) has emerged as a front-runner of tokenisation regulation through its Project Guardian initiative, piloting tokenised bonds, foreign exchange, and asset management products through major partner financial institutions. MAS regulates digital token offerings under the Securities and Futures Act and the Payment Services Act, providing a clear dual-track framework widely regarded as a global benchmark.
European Union: The Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (“MiCA”), fully effective since 2024, provides comprehensive EU-wide standards for the issuance, trading, and custody of crypto-assets, including certain tokenised instruments such as Asset Referenced Tokens (“ARTs”).
Together, these regulatory developments in global jurisdictions are setting standards for the regulation of asset tokenisation by moving towards frameworks tailored to the utility, characteristics, and nature of investor interests.
Conclusion
The Bill draws much-needed policymaking attention to the regulation of tokenised assets. As a Private Member’s Bill, while its passage into law remains uncertain, it does represent a positive step for India’s rapidly growing digital assets ecosystem. The Bill also opens up the broader conversation around the formal recognition of stablecoins in India. As both these assets operate on the same underlying technology, a legislative framework for tokenised assets naturally sets the stage for the regulation of stablecoins as well.