What Licences Do FinTechs Need in Australia12 min read

Australia has no single “FinTech licence”; regulation instead follows the products a business provides and the regulated activities it performs. A FinTech may need an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL), an Australian Credit Licence (ACL), Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) authorisation, Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) enrolment, or no licence at all, depending on its structure.

This article maps those regimes, so founders can identify which licences, authorisations, and registrations their FinTech should investigate before launching or expanding a product.

AFSL Requirements for FinTech Businesses

Financial Product Advice & Dealing

Under Section 766B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (‘Corporations Act’), financial product advice includes recommendations, opinions or reports intended, or reasonably regarded as intended, to influence a person’s decision about a financial product or class of financial products. This can apply to investment apps, comparison tools, portfolio services and automated recommendations. Technology does not remove the advice question; the substance of the communication remains relevant.

Section 766C of the Corporations Act separately addresses dealing, including:

• applying for, acquiring, issuing, varying or disposing of a financial product; and
• arranging for another person to engage in those activities.

Under Section 911A(1) of the Corporations Act, a person carrying on a financial services business in Australia generally needs an AFSL covering the relevant financial service, unless an exemption or authorised representative arrangement applies.

Payments & Non-Cash Payment Facilities

Section 763D of the Corporations Act addresses non-cash payments. A wallet, stored-value product, prepaid arrangement or payment account may constitute a financial product if it provides a facility for making non-cash payments. The relevant analysis concerns the legal facility, not only the customer-facing app.

A FinTech should assess:

• who issues the facility;
• who holds the underlying funds or value;
• whether the customer has a claim against the FinTech or an ADI;
• whether the FinTech provides or distributes the facility; and
• whether an exclusion or ASIC relief applies.

Two payment apps may therefore have different licensing requirements where one issues the facility and the other supplies technology for a facility issued by a licensed third party, so FinTech regulatory lawyers for payment and licensing issues can help assess the structure.

Investment, Trading & Digital Asset Platforms

An investment or trading platform may provide financial product advice, arrange transactions, deal in financial products, issue products, provide custody or make a market. Those activities may require AFSL authorisation under Section 911A(1), with the licence authorisations matching the relevant financial service and product class.

A separate question arises under Section 767A of the Corporations Act: whether the platform is a financial market. If the facility regularly allows offers to acquire or dispose of financial products to be made or accepted, Section 791A of the Corporations Act may require an Australian market licence. A platform may therefore need to assess both AFSL requirements and market licensing.

Digital assets must be assessed under current financial product definitions. A token, facility or associated arrangement may already be a financial product, depending on its rights and economic structure.

Clearing & Settlement Facilities

A trading platform may also operate infrastructure that provides a regular mechanism for parties to meet obligations arising from transactions involving financial products. Section 768A of the Corporations Act describes a clearing and settlement facility in this way.

Under Section 820A of the Corporations Act, a person must not operate, or represent that they operate, a CS facility in Australia unless they hold an Australian CS facility licence or an exemption applies. This requirement is separate from an AFSL and an Australian market licence.

A FinTech developing a trading venue should assess each function separately:

• advice, dealing, or custody may raise AFSL requirements;
• a regular trading venue may raise Australian market licensing; and
• transaction-clearing or settlement infrastructure may raise CS facility licensing.

ACL Requirements for Digital Lender & Credit Platform FinTechs

Digital & Consumer Lenders

A FinTech providing credit to consumers must assess whether the credit falls within the National Credit Code in Schedule 1 to the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth) (‘NCCP Act’). Under Section 5 of the National Credit Code, the regime can apply where:

• the borrower is a natural person or strata corporation;
• the credit is used mainly for personal, domestic, household or specified residential investment purposes;
• a charge may apply; and
• the provider conducts a business of providing credit in Australia.

The legal relationship between the borrower and the funding entity is central. A FinTech may need an ACL where it is the credit provider, enters the regulated credit contract, or performs regulated credit-provider activities. Under Section 29(1) of the NCCP Act, a person must not engage in a credit activity without an appropriate licence unless an exception or defence applies.

Credit Marketplaces & Intermediaries

A credit marketplace may require an ACL even if it does not provide the funds itself. Under Sections 6–9 of the NCCP Act, regulated credit activities include providing credit assistance and acting as an intermediary.

Section 7 of the NCCP Act identifies credit assistance and intermediary conduct. This can affect a range of platforms, including:

• loan comparison platforms;
• mortgage marketplaces;
• embedded-finance services;
• automated loan recommendation tools; and
• platforms that arrange regulated credit contracts.

Displaying factual information differs from recommending that a consumer apply for a particular credit contract with a particular lender.

Buy Now Pay Later Providers

Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) providers have been within the credit licensing regime since 10 June 2025. Following the Treasury Laws Amendment (Responsible Buy Now Pay Later and Other Measures) Act 2024 (Cth) (‘Responsible BNPL Act’), BNPL contracts were brought within the National Credit Code.

A provider engaging in credit activities involving BNPL contracts must assess whether it needs an ACL with the appropriate authorisations. The reforms also introduced the concept of a low cost credit contract and provisions dealing with those contracts in Part 3-2BA of the NCCP Act.

Business & Commercial Lending

A FinTech lending for genuine business purposes may fall outside the National Credit Code. As noted above, Section 5 of the National Credit Code focuses on credit provided wholly or predominantly for personal, domestic, household or specified residential investment purposes. Investment by a debtor is not, by itself, a personal, domestic or household purpose.

The label “business loan” does not decide the issue. The statutory purpose test must be assessed where an individual operates a small business, funds will be used for both business and private purposes, liabilities are being refinanced, or residential investment property is involved. A business outside ACL may still need to consider RFC registration under the Financial Sector (Collection of Data) Act 2001 (Cth) (‘Financial Sector (Collection of Data) Act’) or obligations under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) (‘AML/CTF Act’).

APRA & Payments Regulation for Payments & Wallet Providers

FinTechs Taking Deposits

Holding customer money does not automatically require a FinTech to obtain authorisation as an Authorised Deposit-taking Institution (ADI). The key question is whether the business carries on “banking business” under Section 5(1) of the Banking Act 1959 (Cth) (‘Banking Act’), which includes taking money on deposit and making advances of money.

Section 8 of the Banking Act prevents a body corporate from carrying on banking business in Australia unless it is an ADI or an applicable determination applies. A FinTech should examine several factors, including:

• who receives the money;
• whether the money constitutes a deposit;
• who provides the account; and
• whether another ADI is the legal account provider.

A business that only provides finance without taking deposits does not require an ADI authorisation on that basis alone.

Purchased Payment Facilities

A stored-value product may be a purchased payment facility (PPF) under Section 9 of the Payment Systems (Regulation) Act 1998 (Cth). The provision covers facilities that are purchased, can be used to make payments up to an available amount, and involve payments made by the provider or another person under an arrangement with the provider.

PPF providers may fall within regulatory requirements involving APRA, Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Reserve Bank of Australia. Regulation 6 of the Banking Regulation 2016 (Cth) allows APRA to determine that providing a PPF is banking business in specified circumstances.

APRA’s APS 610 — Prudential Requirements for Providers of Purchased Payment Facilities (‘APS 610’) addresses matters such as capital, liquidity and operational risk. A wallet may also require separate analysis as a non-cash payment facility under Chapter 7 of the Corporations Act.

Non-Bank Lenders & RFC Registration

A non-bank lender may need registration as a Registered Financial Corporation (RFC) without being an ADI. Section 7 of the Financial Sector (Collection of Data) Act concerns registrable corporations, while Section 32 of the Financial Sector (Collection of Data) Act defines “provision of finance” to include lending money and activities connected with funding or originating loans.

APRA identifies a registration threshold involving more than $50 million in assets and activities involving borrowing money and providing finance. RFC registration is mainly a registration and statistical reporting requirement, rather than prudential supervision equivalent to ADI regulation. The requirement is separate from an ACL and ADI authorisation.

Upcoming Payments Licensing Reforms

Treasury’s proposed Tranche 1 payments reforms are not current law as at September 2026. Treasury describes the package as draft legislation, with consultation on the latest draft running from 12 March to 14 April 2026.

The proposal includes:

• new payment-function definitions;
• AFSL requirements for specified payment service providers;
• safeguarding rules;
• exemptions;
• unclaimed-money provisions; and
• possible APRA powers for major stored-value facility providers.

Until legislation commences, FinTechs must assess their products under the existing non-cash payment facility, PPF, banking and AUSTRAC regimes. A business planning for future operations should assess the draft framework separately from its present licensing requirements.

AUSTRAC, AML/CTF & Virtual Asset Registration for Digital Asset Businesses

Financial & Payment Services

A FinTech that provides a designated service under Section 6 of the AML/CTF Act may become a reporting entity. Under Section 51B of the AML/CTF Act, a person that starts providing a designated service and is not already on the Reporting Entities Roll must apply for enrolment within 28 days.

Relevant services may involve:

• accounts;
• lending;
• transfers;
• securities;
• custody;
• foreign exchange; and
• other financial services.

Items 29 and 30 of Table 1 in Section 6 of the AML/CTF Act address specified ordering-institution and beneficiary-institution services, while item 31 addresses intermediary institutions. A payment FinTech should identify the entities acting as:

• the payer-facing institution;
• any intermediary; and
• the beneficiary-facing institution.

Remittance Service Providers

A remittance service provider must enrol with AUSTRAC and separately register before providing registrable remittance services. Registration is an additional requirement under the AML/CTF Act, not a substitute for enrolment.

The remittance framework in Part 6 of the AML/CTF Act covers categories including:

• remittance network providers;
• affiliates; and
• independent providers.

The requirements may affect international money-transfer platforms, digital remitters, cross-border payment apps and wallet providers that facilitate customer transfers.

Virtual Asset Service Providers

A Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) must enrol with AUSTRAC and register before providing registrable virtual asset services. Section 76A of the AML/CTF Act prohibits an unregistered person from providing relevant registrable virtual asset services.

These services include:

• virtual asset safekeeping under item 46A;
• exchanging virtual assets for money, or money for virtual assets, under item 50A;
• exchanging one virtual asset for another under item 50B; and
• specified services connected with offering or selling a virtual asset under item 50C.

The transitional application date for newly regulated services was 29 July 2026. That date has passed, so a new entrant must assess whether it can provide a proposed service under the provisions applying when operations begin.

Digital Assets & the Upcoming ASIC Regime

AUSTRAC registration and ASIC licensing address separate questions. Under current Chapter 7 of the Corporations Act, a digital asset, facility or associated arrangement may already be a financial product. Advice, issuing, arranging, dealing or custody may then require an AFSL, while trading infrastructure may raise Australian market or CS facility licensing issues.

The Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Act 2026 (Cth) introduces statutory concepts including digital asset platforms and tokenised custody platforms. Section 2 provides that it commences on 8 April 2027. FinTechs should assess:

• whether the asset is already a financial product;
• whether ASIC’s no-action transition applies until 30 September 2026; and
• whether the business will fall within the future digital asset framework.

Determining Which Licences Your FinTech Needs

Identify the Product or Service

Start with a complete inventory of what the FinTech business allows customers to do. The list may include:

• borrowing;
• investing;
• trading;
• receiving recommendations;
• opening an account;
• storing value;
• making payments;
• transferring money;
• exchanging currencies;
• holding digital assets; or
• using custody services.

Avoid relying only on labels such as “wallet”, “platform” or “marketplace”. The underlying product or service may engage different Australian regulatory frameworks, including:

• financial services;
• credit licensing;
• APRA authorisation; or
• AUSTRAC requirements.

Identify the Regulatory Activity

Next, identify the activity performed by each entity in the business structure. Relevant activities may include:

• issuing;
• advising;
• dealing;
• arranging;
• lending;
• providing credit assistance;
• acting as an intermediary;
• holding assets;
• taking deposits;
• transferring value;
• operating a market; or
• providing clearing and settlement infrastructure.

As discussed above, Sections 766B and 766C of the Corporations Act treat advice and dealing as separate financial services, and Section 911A(1) may require an AFSL where a person carries on a financial services business in Australia, unless an exemption or authorised representative arrangement applies.

Check Whether Multiple Regimes Apply

A single FinTech may need to consider more than one licence, authorisation, or registration. For example, a lending platform may need an ACL and AUSTRAC enrolment, while an investment platform may need an AFSL and may also raise Australian market or clearing and settlement facility issues.

The entity structure should be mapped carefully. Identify:

• the entity contracting with the customer;
• the entity issuing the product;
• the entity holding money or assets;
• the entity providing advice or arranging transactions;
• the entity funding credit; and
• any licensed third party supporting the model.

Check Current and Upcoming Reforms

Separate the rules applying today from reforms that will commence later. Treasury’s proposed Tranche 1 payments reforms remain draft legislation. As a result, existing requirements continue to apply, including:

• AFSL requirements;
• non-cash payment facility requirements;
• PPF requirements; and
• AUSTRAC requirements.

Digital asset businesses should also assess ASIC’s no-action transition, which runs until 30 September 2026, and the Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Act, which commences on 8 April 2027.

The future regime does not replace the need to assess whether a digital asset is already a financial product under current Chapter 7 of the Corporations Act.

Conclusion

Australian FinTech licensing is activity-based: the product, service and entity structure determine whether an AFSL, ACL, APRA authorisation, AUSTRAC enrolment, or additional market, payment, remittance or virtual asset registration must be considered. Founders should map each regulated activity, separate current requirements from enacted or proposed reforms, and check exemptions or third-party licensing arrangements before launching or expanding a FinTech business.

For a product-specific review, contact banking and FinTech lawyers at AFSL House. Our financial law specialists can help identify the regulatory frameworks relevant to your FinTech, clarify licensing requirements and plan your next steps with greater certainty.

Frequently Asked Questions