Coins.ph Faces BSP Action Over Offshore Gambling Links

The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) is pursuing punitive regulatory action against Coins.ph, the Philippines' largest cryptocurrency exchange, over alleged dealings with restricted offshore gambling and gaming companies. Two people with direct knowledge of the situation told CoinDesk that the infractions are serious enough that the 12-year-old firm could lose its licence to operate entirely. For accounting firms, auditors, and CFOs with any exposure to the Philippine digital asset market, the implications are immediate and wide-ranging.

What the BSP Is Said to Have Found

According to people familiar with the matter, Coins.ph processed business transactions on behalf of offshore gambling platforms that are restricted under Philippine financial regulation. This is not a technical or procedural breach. Serving entities that a regulator has explicitly barred from accessing the payment system is treated as a substantive compliance failure, the kind that can justify licence revocation rather than a simple fine.

The context matters here. In 2025, the BSP issued a directive prohibiting e-wallet applications from providing in-app access to gambling sites. The intent was to cut off a payments channel that regulators considered high-risk. One consequence, according to people familiar with central bank regulatory processes, was that several gambling entities migrated to Coins.ph. The platform's access to crypto and stablecoins gave those operators a route to pay offshore partners, which made the migration commercially attractive and, from a regulatory standpoint, highly problematic.

Deposit Restrictions Already in Effect

The BSP did not wait for a full enforcement ruling before acting. At the start of October, the central bank imposed restrictions on deposits made to the exchange through DCPay Philippines, Coins.ph's main wallet entity. Crucially, the restriction was not time-bound. Most temporary suspensions in the Philippine payment system carry a defined end date and are tied to specific operational failures such as throughput or latency breaches. This one did not. No reason was publicly stated, which signals to experienced compliance practitioners that the issue is substantially more serious than a routine operational deficiency.

Senior Compliance Officers Have Left

Separately, a number of high-profile compliance professionals departed Coins.ph earlier this year. Those departures included the chief compliance officer, the head of AML transaction monitoring, and the money laundering reporting officer. The simultaneous loss of those three roles, each sitting at the centre of a virtual asset service provider's (VASP) regulatory obligations, is a significant signal. Auditors and counterparties assessing a firm's control environment look at the stability of its three lines of defence. A hollowed-out compliance function, whatever the reason, is a material risk factor.

Why This Matters for the Philippine Crypto Ecosystem

Coins.ph is not a peripheral player. The exchange has more than 18 million registered customers and a 24-hour spot trading volume of around $50 million. More consequentially for the broader market, it is estimated to control somewhere between 75% and 80% of peso-to-stablecoin liquidity in the country. That single figure explains why one source described a potential licence revocation as an "earthquake" for the Philippine crypto ecosystem.

Remittance Corridors Are Directly at Risk

The Philippines is the world's fourth-largest remittance recipient, with overseas Filipino workers sending approximately $43 billion home each year. More than 10.8 million Filipinos live abroad, according to the Commission on Filipinos Overseas. The majority still use banks and traditional money transfer operators, but a growing segment uses crypto rails, and peso-to-stablecoin conversions sit at the heart of those flows. If Coins.ph's ability to operate is curtailed or revoked, the immediate effect is a sharp reduction in available liquidity for that conversion pair. Firms that route remittance-linked settlements through the Philippine crypto market need to model that scenario now.

Accounting and Audit Implications

For accounting firms and internal audit teams, the BSP action triggers several concurrent obligations that need to be addressed in sequence.

Counterparty Exposure Assessment

Any client or portfolio entity that holds balances, liquidity positions, or settlement arrangements with Coins.ph or DCPay Philippines is carrying counterparty risk that has materially changed. Under IFRS 9, a significant change in a counterparty's regulatory standing is a trigger for reassessing expected credit loss provisions. Where balances are material, auditors should request written confirmation of their recoverability and document the basis for any going-concern assumption made about the counterparty.

Crypto Bookkeeping Software and Transaction Record Integrity

Firms using digital asset accounting software to track positions held on or settled through Coins.ph should pull a full transaction history immediately. If the BSP ultimately revokes the licence, exchanges of this size can face rapid operational wind-down, which creates data-access risk. Exporting and independently archiving transaction records now, rather than relying on continued platform access, is standard prudent practice in any enforcement situation. The same applies to any firm using crypto bookkeeping software that aggregates exchange feeds automatically: verify that the Coins.ph feed is clean, timestamped, and complete before access becomes uncertain.

AML and SAR Obligations

For financial institutions and VASPs that have processed transactions involving Coins.ph as a counterparty exchange, the disclosed facts create a potential suspicious transaction reporting obligation in multiple jurisdictions. The allegation is that Coins.ph processed funds for entities operating in contravention of Philippine financial regulation. Any institution that received or sent funds to or from Coins.ph during the relevant period, and that has reason to believe some portion of those flows may be linked to the restricted gambling entities, should conduct a focused transaction review. If that review uncovers reasonable grounds for suspicion, a suspicious activity report (SAR) must follow. Our guidance on building a high-quality crypto SAR in 2026 sets out what regulators currently expect in terms of narrative depth, chain analysis support, and timely filing.

The stablecoin dimension adds a further layer. Coins.ph's dominance in peso-to-stablecoin liquidity means that stablecoin flows linked to Philippine remittance or settlement activity may be routed through infrastructure that is now under regulatory scrutiny. Firms should review their stablecoin AML compliance obligations for financial institutions, particularly around correspondent-style relationships with foreign VASPs.

What CFOs and Risk Functions Should Do Now

The situation is still developing. Neither Coins.ph nor the BSP has made a public statement, and no formal enforcement order has been published at the time of writing. That uncertainty is itself the risk. Acting only once a licence is formally revoked means acting too late on several of the obligations above.

Immediate Steps

The following actions are appropriate for any firm with Philippine crypto market exposure, regardless of whether a formal BSP order has been issued yet.

• Identify and quantify all balances held on Coins.ph or settled through DCPay Philippines across funds, client accounts, and treasury positions.
• Export and independently archive complete transaction histories from any crypto accounting software connected to Coins.ph via API or manual import.
• Assess whether any of those transactions involved counterparties that could be linked to the offshore gambling entities described in the reporting.
• Consult with legal counsel on SAR filing obligations in your primary jurisdiction, given the disclosed facts.
• Notify audit committees and boards where Coins.ph exposure is material, even if no formal enforcement order has yet been issued.
• Model the liquidity impact of a Coins.ph licence revocation on any Philippine peso-denominated or remittance-linked settlement activity.

Medium-Term Governance Considerations

The departure of three senior compliance professionals from Coins.ph within a single year is a pattern that counterparty due diligence frameworks should be designed to catch. Most VASP onboarding checklists ask for the name of the compliance officer and the AML officer at the time of onboarding. Fewer have automated triggers to re-assess a counterparty when key personnel change. That gap is worth closing, not just for Coins.ph but as a general policy. Regulators in the FATF network increasingly expect firms to monitor their VASP counterparties on an ongoing basis, not just at point of onboarding.

The BSP's approach here, using deposit restrictions as an interim measure before any formal hearing or public announcement, is also a reminder that regulatory action does not always arrive with advance notice. Firms that rely on a formal enforcement order as their trigger for action will consistently be behind the curve. Real-time monitoring of regulatory announcements, combined with a counterparty watch-list process, is the standard that compliance functions in this space are expected to meet.

Frequently Asked Questions

What has the BSP actually done so far?

The central bank has imposed restrictions on deposits made through DCPay Philippines, Coins.ph's main wallet entity. Those restrictions are not time-bound. A full licence revocation has not been publicly confirmed, but sources with knowledge of the situation describe the potential for that outcome.

What is the alleged compliance breach?

Coins.ph is said to have processed transactions for offshore gambling and gaming companies that are restricted under Philippine financial regulation. The BSP issued a directive in 2025 requiring e-wallet platforms under its supervision to cut in-app access to gambling sites; the allegation is that some of those entities subsequently used Coins.ph as an alternative route.

Why does the peso-to-stablecoin market matter so much?

Coins.ph is estimated to control 75% to 80% of peso-to-stablecoin liquidity in the Philippines. For remittance flows and crypto settlement in one of the world's largest remittance-receiving countries, that concentration means a licence revocation would significantly disrupt available liquidity for that currency pair.

What AML obligations does this create for firms that transacted with Coins.ph?

Firms that sent or received funds involving Coins.ph as a counterparty exchange should conduct a focused transaction review. If that review produces reasonable grounds to suspect that any portion of those flows was linked to the restricted gambling entities, a suspicious activity report must be filed with the relevant authority in the firm's home jurisdiction. The obligation arises from the disclosed facts, not from a formal conviction or enforcement order.

How should auditors treat Coins.ph balances in current-period financial statements?

Auditors should treat the BSP regulatory action as a significant change in the counterparty's risk profile. Under IFRS 9, that warrants a reassessment of expected credit loss provisions on any material balances. Where going-concern assumptions about the counterparty are embedded in valuations, those assumptions should be explicitly documented and, if necessary, revisited in light of the current facts.

Source: CoinDesk Policy