Crypto & Fintech
Does trading USDT with your own capital require a Brazilian license? How PIX, spreads and a professional OTC operation affect BCB authorization.
Marinho de Gusmão Team
·
Does buying USDT with your own funds and reselling it directly to buyers, receiving payment through Brazil's PIX system and earning a spread, require Central Bank authorization? The answer depends on how the operation actually works.
Selling an asset held in one's own portfolio is not necessarily the same as professionally offering virtual asset trading services. BCB Resolutions No. 519, 520 and 521, effective since 2 February 2026, make that distinction material for OTC operators, investors and foreign groups active in Brazil.
Using your own capital does not, by itself, establish either an authorization requirement or an exemption. An occasional disposal of assets held for one's own account may fall outside the service provider perimeter. A structured OTC operation that continuously offers quotes and liquidity to clients requires a specific regulatory assessment, even without custody of third-party funds or an explicit commission.
When does USDT trading become a virtual asset service?
Article 2 of Law No. 14,478/2022 requires virtual asset service providers to obtain authorization from the competent authority before operating in Brazil. Decree No. 11,563/2023 designated the Central Bank of Brazil, or BCB, while preserving the jurisdiction of the Brazilian Securities and Exchange Commission, or CVM, over assets classified as securities.
Article 5 of the law defines a provider by reference to activities such as exchange, transfer, custody and administration performed on behalf of third parties. That wording matters when distinguishing the disposal of one's own property from providing services to other people. BCB Resolution No. 520/2025 further defines the regulated categories, including intermediation and custody.
A person who buys USDT for investment and later sells part of the position does not necessarily perform the same economic function as a business that continuously offers USDT transactions to clients. The activity actually carried out is decisive.
Can a transaction funded with the seller's own money fall outside authorization?
Consider a person who buys BRL 50,000 worth of USDT through an exchange, takes ownership of the assets, then agrees a sale with a buyer, receives reais by PIX and transfers the USDT to the buyer's wallet. The seller has used its own funds, acquired the assets for itself and assumed the market risk.
If the seller neither receives funds to invest for the buyer nor administers or continuously holds third-party assets, there is a defensible basis for treating the transaction as a disposal of its own property rather than a regulated service. That position is stronger for occasional transactions than for a commercial structure designed to trade continuously.
Acting in one's own name does not, however, automatically place an activity outside the regulated perimeter. A company may trade from its own inventory and still provide a professional trading service to clients.
Do PIX payments or a spread make the seller an intermediary?
Neither factor is conclusive on its own. PIX is a means of transferring reais; using it does not change the legal character of the underlying transaction. A spread is the difference between the acquisition and sale prices. If USDT bought for BRL 20,000 is sold for BRL 20,600, the BRL 600 difference is gross proceeds before costs and taxes.
That difference may arise from a portfolio sale. It may also be the recurring revenue of an operator that regularly quotes prices, maintains USDT inventory and supplies liquidity to buyers. The absence of a separately stated commission does not establish the absence of a service.
What changes when an OTC operation becomes professional?
Frequency, commercial organization and the relationship with buyers can alter the regulatory assessment. Occasional portfolio sales differ from a business that advertises permanently, provides regular bid and ask quotes, maintains inventory for client demand and processes repeated transactions.
BCB Resolution No. 520/2025 contemplates trading activities and certain own-account transactions by regulated institutions. Ownership of the asset therefore does not exclude supervision by itself. Equally, a single advertisement or more than one sale does not automatically make a person a regulated provider.
Occasional portfolio sale versus professional OTC operation
Purpose: selling property held in one's own portfolio versus running a business that sells assets to clients.
Frequency and buyers: occasional transactions with identified counterparties versus repeated transactions serving many clients.
Quotes and inventory: a price agreed for a specific sale versus ongoing quotes and inventory reserved for commercial demand.
Marketing and revenue: an incidental gain versus active buyer acquisition and a spread forming recurring business income.
Operations: management of one's own portfolio versus systems and processes organized around trading.
These are indicators, not automatic thresholds. Brazilian law does not set a universal number of transactions, clients or revenue that alone determines whether authorization is required.
How do the stablecoin rules affect this analysis?
USDT is a stablecoin, a virtual asset designed to track a reference such as the US dollar. BCB Resolution No. 521/2025 amended the foreign exchange rules in BCB Resolution No. 277/2022. Article 76-A, item IV, includes the provision of services involving the purchase, sale or exchange of virtual assets referenced to fiat currency.
Article 76-A, paragraph 1, item I, expressly recognizes that a virtual asset service provider may itself buy or sell the asset when transacting with a client. This limits any argument that using one's own inventory always removes the authorization requirement.
The provision addresses regulated virtual asset services within the foreign exchange framework. It does not say that every private USDT sale is a regulated foreign exchange service, or that every domestic USDT transaction is an international transfer. The underlying question remains whether the facts show a professional service or a disposal of property.
Can an operator that missed the transition deadline continue?
The first question is whether its activity requires authorization at all. BCB Resolution No. 520/2025 established a transition for companies already performing covered activities on 2 February 2026. Under article 88 and BCB Normative Instruction No. 704/2026, the phase 1 authorization filing deadline was 30 October 2026.
A company that filed on time may continue covered services while the application is assessed, subject to the applicable conditions. A covered provider that failed to file must cease those services within 30 days after the deadline. A genuinely private portfolio sale outside the regulated perimeter is a different case; merely using own funds does not make a regulated business exempt.
What changed on 6 November 2026?
BCB Resolution No. 589/2026 amended article 91 of Resolution No. 520/2025. From 6 November 2026, BCB-authorized financial and payment institutions are restricted from conducting or enabling virtual asset transactions with unauthorized service providers, subject to expressly permitted exceptions.
The revised wording no longer expressly mentions entities with applications under review. Article 88, paragraph 6, still provides for continued operation by eligible providers that filed on time. These provisions must be read together; a timely application does not guarantee unrestricted access to bank or payment services, and the article 91 restriction should not be applied automatically to a person merely selling their own assets outside the service provider perimeter.
For USDT transactions settled through PIX, the consequences depend on the operator's actual activity, the status of any authorization application, the payment services involved and the restrictions applicable to the institutions providing them.
Can other obligations apply even without BCB authorization?
Yes. A transaction outside the BCB authorization perimeter can still have tax and reporting consequences. RFB Normative Instruction No. 2,291/2025 introduced DeCripto, a reporting framework for covered cryptoasset transactions from July 2026. Whether a specific person must report depends on the tax rules and should not be confused with authorization as a virtual asset service provider.
Anti-money laundering rules and financial crime legislation may also be relevant to a professional operation. Law No. 9,613/1998 imposes specific duties on covered virtual asset service providers. Law No. 7,492/1986 contains provisions concerning entities offering virtual asset services and certain natural persons. Criminal consequences require the legal elements of the relevant offence; selling one's own USDT does not establish an offence by itself.
What should be checked before concluding that authorization is unnecessary?
The source of funds and who bears the economic risk of acquiring the USDT.
Whether the assets enter the seller's portfolio before resale or are acquired to fulfil a client request.
Whether the operator continuously advertises, serves buyers, quotes prices or offers liquidity.
Whether the buyer purchases an asset or engages a service involving conversion, order execution or another regulated activity.
The evidence: acquisition records, wallet movements, PIX receipts, transaction history and contracts.
Documentation helps establish the facts but cannot replace an authorization that the activity requires. A contract labelled a bilateral sale can still be assessed by reference to the activity actually performed.
Conclusion: the activity determines the answer
Brazilian law provides a basis for distinguishing an occasional sale from a professional virtual asset service. A person who buys USDT with own funds, holds it as property and later sells it without offering trading services may have a defensible position outside the authorization regime.
The conclusion may change where the same structure operates as a professional OTC desk serving buyers continuously, providing quotes and maintaining liquidity. The fact that the seller owns the USDT matters, but does not guarantee an exemption. Nor does every P2P transaction settled through PIX automatically require SPSAV authorization.
The practical question for operators and investors is whether the arrangement is a disposal of assets held for own account or the professional provision of virtual asset services. The answer depends on the actual economic activity, its organization and the obligations undertaken toward buyers.
Marinho de Gusmão advises on business models, virtual asset operations and financial regulation in Brazil.
Related practice area: Crypto & Fintech.
Related reading: Brazil VASP authorization deadline and SPSAV licensing.
This article is for general information only and does not replace legal advice on a specific matter.
Official sources
Does buying and selling USDT with your own capital require BCB authorization?
It depends on the actual activity. An occasional sale from one's own portfolio may fall outside the provider regime. A professional, recurring OTC business serving clients requires a specific regulatory assessment, even if it uses its own funds.
Do PIX payments or a spread change the classification?
Neither factor is decisive alone. The business structure, frequency, regular quotes, liquidity and obligations to buyers must be assessed together.
Can an OTC desk be regulated without holding third-party assets?
Yes. The absence of custody matters, but it does not resolve whether another regulated service, such as recurring professional trading, is being provided.
What changes under the 6 November 2026 restriction?
Article 91 of BCB Resolution No. 520/2025, as amended by Resolution No. 589/2026, restricts certain transactions conducted or enabled by authorized institutions with unauthorized providers. The result depends on the actual service, exceptions and the counterparty's regulatory status.
Can tax reporting apply without an SPSAV license?
Yes. A transaction outside the BCB authorization perimeter may still trigger taxes or cryptoasset reporting under DeCripto, where the relevant conditions are met.
Share this article