The Australian Crypto Asset Reporting Framework (CARF)

For a deeper understanding of these topics, consider attending Environmental Asset Tokenisation: The Legal Implications where Steven Pettigrove shares his expertise.

What is CARF?

CARF is designed to deter tax evasion by ensuring the transparent reporting of crypto-asset transactions. In Australia, it would enable the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) to exchange data with other jurisdictions on transactions involving Australian residents. The framework covers:

• Crypto-assets: Digital assets secured by cryptographic technology and distributed ledgers, including bitcoin, ether, stablecoins, derivatives, and certain NFTs.
• Relevant transactions: Crypto-to-crypto transactions, as well as crypto-to-fiat or fiat-to-crypto exchanges.
• Reporting entities: Crypto-asset service providers facilitating such transactions.

Under the CARF, transactions exceeding USD $50,000 require customer-specific reporting, while smaller transactions are reported in aggregate without identifying individuals.

Implementation Options

Option 1: Adopt the OECD CARF Model

Under this approach, Australia would implement the OECD’s CARF Model Rules with only minor modifications to align them with domestic law. Key features include:

• Alignment with global standards: Ensuring consistency with international norms to support efficient reporting and information exchange.
• Comprehensive reporting obligations: Crypto-asset service providers must report user data, transaction details, and controlling persons.
• De minimis thresholds: Customer-specific reporting applies only to transactions exceeding USD $50,000, with smaller transactions reported in aggregate.

Benefits:

• Facilitates global data exchange, improving tax compliance.
• Reduces duplication and compliance costs for entities operating across multiple jurisdictions.

Option 2: Develop a Bespoke CARF Framework

Alternatively, Australia could design its own reporting framework tailored to the specific needs of the ATO. This would maintain CARF’s policy objectives while allowing for greater flexibility, such as:

• Custom thresholds and scope: Australia could adjust reporting thresholds, exclude certain information fields, or introduce additional requirements.
• Selective targeting: A focus on entities and transactions that offer the most value for tax compliance efforts.

Drawbacks:

• Potential misalignment with global CARF standards.
• Higher compliance costs for entities with cross-jurisdictional operations.
• Reduced efficiency in international data-sharing.

Entities and Reporting Obligations

CARF applies to ‘Reporting Crypto-Asset Service Providers’, which currently include crypto exchanges, wallet providers, brokers, dealers, and ATM operators facilitating exchanges between crypto-assets and fiat currencies or between different crypto-assets.

Entities would fall under Australia’s CARF framework if they have a ‘nexus’ to Australia based on:

• Tax residency
• Incorporation in Australia
• Central management and control
• A regular place of business (e.g., a permanent establishment)

Reporting requirements include:

• User and transaction data: Details on crypto users, taxpayer identification numbers, jurisdictions of residence, and reportable transactions.
• Transaction types: Exchanges involving relevant crypto-assets, payments for goods and services over USD $50,000, and transfers to external wallets.
• Provider details: Information about the reporting service provider, including name, address, and identifying numbers.

Consultation Period

The government’s consultation period for CARF implementation ran from 21 November 2024 to 24 January 2025, with a report on the submissions expected sometime this year.

It is crucial that CARF implementation prioritises clarity, efficiency, and consistency. Industry members generally favour an approach that minimises compliance costs—particularly for smaller crypto service providers—while aligning closely with the OECD standard to prevent redundant reporting obligations across jurisdictions.

Key concerns include data security and confidentiality, given the sensitive nature of personal and transactional information collected and shared under CARF. Robust data protection measures will be critical to maintaining trust and compliance within the crypto ecosystem.

Stakeholders would likely have advocated for de minimis thresholds, streamlined reporting processes, and flexibility in reporting deadlines to accommodate the dynamic nature of blockchain technology. Avoiding overly burdensome requirements will also be essential to ensuring innovation and preventing businesses from moving offshore.

Conclusion

Notably, CARF is being introduced before any significant reforms to Australia’s broader crypto tax regime or regulatory framework—a case of putting the CARF before the horse, perhaps. This raises questions about the sequencing of regulatory priorities, as market participants will need to navigate new reporting obligations within an already complex tax landscape. It is also likely that CARF implementation will need to be revisited in the future.

Australia’s adoption of CARF aims to align with global efforts to combat tax evasion in the crypto-asset space. By participating in the consultation process, stakeholders can help shape a framework that supports tax compliance while fostering growth, innovation, and participation in the Australian crypto industry.

Disclaimer: The statements, analyses, opinions and conclusions in Legalwise Insights are those of the respective authors and not of Legalwise Seminars Pty Ltd which acts only in the capacity as editorial co- ordinator of the content in Legalwise Insights. No part of any article can be regarded as legal or financial advice. Although all care has been taken in the preparation of all articles, readers must not alter their position or refrain from doing so in reliance on any information contained therein. Neither the respective authors nor Legalwise Seminars Pty Ltd accept or undertake any duty of care relating to any part of Legalwise Insights

Liability limited by a scheme approved under the Professional Standards Legislation