The FCA has finally drawn the cryptoasset perimeter, and it does not run around your tokenised shares, it runs straight through them
On 16 September 2026 the FCA published PS26/18, the final cryptoasset perimeter guidance that becomes PERG 18. It is being read as housekeeping. It is not. The line does not separate tokenised shares from ordinary ones. It cuts between the register and the safekeeping of what the register records, and only one of those sits outside.
The short answer on the cryptoasset perimeter
FCA PS26/18, published 16 September 2026, finalises CP26/13 and becomes PERG 18. Using distributed ledger technology as a register does not, on its own, make an asset a relevant specified investment cryptoasset. But safeguarding an RSIC is a regulated cryptoasset activity, and the FCA confirmed it cannot remove the variation-of-permission requirement. Applications opened 30 September 2026 and close 28 February 2027. The regime commences 25 October 2027.
There is a kind of line you can only see once the water has gone out.
Walk a beach at low tide and the sand tells you where the sea reached: a dark seam of shell and weed, perfectly definite, and wrong by tomorrow morning.
Regulatory perimeters are drawn the same way. We talk about them as though someone ruled a line. What the FCA published in September is closer to a waterline, and the useful question is not which side of it you are standing on, but which part of you it crosses.
What is PS26/18, the FCA's cryptoasset perimeter guidance?
PS26/18, Cryptoasset perimeter guidance, is the final form of CP26/13, which opened on 15 April 2026 and closed on 3 June 2026. The FCA received 78 responses and records that "most respondents supported our approach".
It sits under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Cryptoassets) Regulations 2026, with a further government statutory instrument expected in late 2026 that will need its own consultation.
The guidance does not stand alone as a new rulebook. It becomes PERG 18, folded into the existing Perimeter Guidance manual, the place firms already go to ask whether what they do is regulated. Respondents, the FCA notes, "particularly welcomed the integration of cryptoasset perimeter guidance into the existing PERG framework".
That choice is easy to skip past and worth sitting with. The FCA did not build a separate crypto annex. It put cryptoassets inside the same book, answered by the same questions, as every other activity.
Does a blockchain share register sit inside the cryptoasset perimeter?
This was the question the industry actually asked, and the FCA answered it.
Respondents sought "confirmation that using DLT as a register or record-keeping mechanism would not, in itself, result in an asset being treated as an RSIC", a relevant specified investment cryptoasset. The FCA agreed to clarify that "no additional safeguarding requirements would arise where ownership and entitlement continue to be determined through a legal register or similar record".
Read that slowly, because it is the load-bearing sentence for anyone tokenising equity.
The technology is not the trigger. What matters is where ownership is actually determined. If your shareholders' entitlement is still settled by a legal register, then moving that register onto a distributed ledger has not, by itself, moved your shares inside the cryptoasset perimeter.
A share recorded on a chain is still a share. The ledger is a filing cabinet with better locks. Which is roughly what we argued when we set out what a tokenised cap table actually gives you, the FCA has now put it in a Handbook chapter.
The cryptoasset perimeter runs through the tokenised share, not around it
Here is what the coverage has missed.
Everyone has been asking a binary question, are tokenised securities inside the new regime or outside it? PS26/18 declines the question. It does not sort assets into two bins. It sorts activities.
So the same tokenised share can sit on both sides at once. The register that records it: outside. The safekeeping of it, if it is an RSIC: inside, because safeguarding is one of the new regulated cryptoasset activities.
And the FCA closed the obvious escape route. On whether firms already authorised to safeguard investments could simply carry on, it wrote: "We are not able to remove the need for a variation of permission as a consequence of the legislative changes to Article 40 of the RAO regarding RSICs."
Two respondents pushed back on that requirement. The FCA kept it.
The thing | Which side of the perimeter | What follows |
A share register kept on a distributed ledger | Outside, DLT alone does not make it an RSIC | No additional safeguarding requirements where a legal register still determines entitlement |
Safeguarding a relevant specified investment cryptoasset | Inside, a regulated cryptoasset activity | Authorisation required; an already-authorised firm needs a variation of permission |
When a tokenised security or fund is an RSIC | Not fully answered | 35% of respondents asked; further PERG consultation early Q4 2026, final guidance early 2027 |
That last row is not a gap in the reporting. It is the FCA's own position. PS26/18 records that "35% of respondents sought greater clarity on when tokenised securities and funds would be considered RSICs (a subset of SICs which are securities or contractually based investments)", and defers. "We plan to consult in early Q4 2026 on further amendments to PERG to clarify the new provisions in that new SI. We aim to publish our final amended guidance in early 2027."
The single question most relevant to tokenised equity is the one still open.
Which client asset rules apply inside the cryptoasset perimeter, CASS 6 or CASS 17?
There is a second half to this, and it runs the other way.
Having pulled RSIC safekeeping inside the new cryptoasset regime, the FCA did not then apply the new client asset rules to it. A&O Shearman, writing on 23 July 2026, put it plainly: "firms seeking to become authorised to provide RSIC custody will need to do so as a cryptoasset custodian, but will then apply the CASS 6 requirements (which apply to specified investments today) rather than the CASS 17 rules."
So a firm holding your tokenised shares walks in through the crypto door and is handed the securities rulebook.
That is not a contradiction. It is the same instinct as putting the guidance in PERG: treat the thing by what it economically is, not by the technology carrying it. It is also the instinct the US regulator showed in September when it defined a tokenized share as one carrying identical rights to the underlying stock. But it has a practical edge here. A custodian's crypto authorisation tells you less than you might assume about which rules govern your shareholders' assets, you have to ask which CASS chapter applies, a question that belongs in the Legal View file rather than the news file.
What does the cryptoasset perimeter cost a UK founder?
Three things, and the first is a date.
The application window opened on 30 September 2026 and closes on 28 February 2027 for firms relying on the transitional arrangements. The regime itself commences 25 October 2027. That thirteen-month gap is not dead time; it is when every custodian, platform and venue you might use decides whether to apply, and when.
Which makes your provider's application date a dependency in your own plan. If the firm holding your cap table's tokenised register also safeguards RSICs and files late, that is not their problem alone.
The second is a question worth putting in writing to any platform you are considering: is my company's register the thing that determines entitlement? If the answer is yes, PS26/18 says the perimeter does not close around it. If the answer is hedged, you are in the 35% the FCA has not answered yet. Our list of platforms is worth rereading with that one question in hand.
The third is timing your own decisions against an open question. If you are choosing an equity structure now, the honest position is that the treatment of tokenised securities as RSICs is due to be clarified in a consultation that has not opened and guidance that arrives in early 2027. That is a reason to keep the legal register clearly load-bearing, which is also, conveniently, the thing that keeps you outside.
Date | What happens | Why it matters to a founder |
16 Sep 2026 | PS26/18 published; becomes PERG 18 | The perimeter is drawn by activity, not by asset type |
30 Sep 2026 | Authorisation applications open | Your custody and platform providers start filing |
Early Q4 2026 | Further PERG consultation planned | The tokenised-securities-as-RSICs question reopens |
28 Feb 2027 | Application window closes for transitional relief | A late provider is a risk you inherit |
Early 2027 | Final amended guidance expected | The answer arrives, after most structuring decisions |
25 Oct 2027 | Regime commences | The rules bite |
What should a founder do before 28 February 2027?
Ask every platform and custodian one question in writing: what determines entitlement? If it is a legal register or similar record, PS26/18 keeps that record outside the cryptoasset perimeter. Get the answer in a document you can keep, not a sales call.
Ask your custody provider when it is filing. The window closes 28 February 2027. A provider that intends to apply later, or has not decided, is a dependency you should know about before you sign.
Find out which CASS chapter applies to your assets. RSIC custody sits under CASS 6, not CASS 17. "We're a regulated cryptoasset firm" is not an answer to that question.
Diarise early Q4 2026 and respond. The consultation that reopens the tokenised-securities question is the first real chance founders have had to put the private-company case on the record. The 35% who asked were mostly institutions.
Keep the legal register the thing that decides. Whatever you build on top, if a court would look to the register to settle who owns what, you stay on the outside of the line, and you keep the option to move later.
The tide line is honest about one thing: it tells you where the water reached, not where it will reach.
The FCA has marked this season's high-water mark carefully, in the same book it uses for everything else, and has said plainly which question it has not answered yet.
For once the uncertainty is not a failure of reporting. It is written into the document, with a date attached.
FAQ
Does putting my share register on a blockchain make it a cryptoasset?
No. PS26/18 confirms that using distributed ledger technology as a register or record-keeping mechanism does not, in itself, make an asset a relevant specified investment cryptoasset, where ownership and entitlement continue to be determined through a legal register or similar record.
What is PS26/18?
The FCA's final cryptoasset perimeter guidance, published on 16 September 2026. It finalises consultation CP26/13, which ran from 15 April to 3 June 2026 and drew 78 responses, and becomes chapter PERG 18 of the Perimeter Guidance manual.
When do cryptoasset firms have to apply for authorisation?
The application window opened on 30 September 2026 and closes on 28 February 2027 for firms relying on the transitional arrangements. The regime itself commences on 25 October 2027.
Does an already-authorised firm need new permissions to safeguard tokenised securities?
Yes. The FCA stated it is "not able to remove the need for a variation of permission" as a result of the legislative changes to Article 40 of the RAO regarding RSICs. Existing safeguarding permissions do not carry over automatically.
Which client asset rules apply to tokenised securities custody?
CASS 6, the chapter that applies to specified investments today, not the CASS 17 cryptoasset rules. A firm becomes authorised as a cryptoasset custodian but then applies the securities rulebook.
Has the FCA said when a tokenised security counts as an RSIC?
Not fully. 35% of respondents to CP26/13 asked for greater clarity on this. The FCA plans a further PERG consultation in early Q4 2026 and aims to publish final amended guidance in early 2027.
What is PERG 18?
The new chapter of the FCA's Perimeter Guidance manual carrying the cryptoasset perimeter guidance. Respondents welcomed the integration into the existing PERG framework rather than a standalone crypto annex.
Is tokenised equity regulated in the UK?
Partly. The shares themselves remain specified investments, and a share register kept on a distributed ledger stays outside the cryptoasset perimeter where a legal register still determines entitlement. Safeguarding a relevant specified investment cryptoasset is regulated and needs FCA authorisation before the regime commences on 25 October 2027.
What is a relevant specified investment cryptoasset?
An RSIC is a subset of specified investment cryptoassets which are securities or contractually based investments. Safeguarding one is a regulated cryptoasset activity, so a firm holding tokenised securities for clients needs permission to do it.
Do I need FCA authorisation to put my cap table on a blockchain?
Not because of the technology. PS26/18 confirms that using DLT as a register does not, in itself, bring an asset inside the cryptoasset perimeter where a legal register still determines entitlement. Authorisation questions attach to safeguarding, not to record-keeping.
This is journalism, not legal or financial advice. Speak to a qualified adviser before acting on anything here.
A note on sources. The dates, response figures and quoted passages come from PS26/18 and its FCA publication page, read directly. Paragraph numbers are deliberately not cited: the policy statement is a long PDF and repeated reads of it returned inconsistent paragraph numbering, so this piece cites the document and its chapters instead. The CASS 6 point is attributed to A&O Shearman's analysis of 23 July 2026 rather than to the FCA's own text.
Sources
PS26/18: Cryptoasset perimeter guidance, Financial Conduct Authority, 16 September 2026
Policy Statement PS26/18, full text, Financial Conduct Authority, September 2026
CP26/13: Cryptoasset perimeter guidance, Financial Conduct Authority, April 2026
Final rules for new UK crypto regime: regulated cryptoasset activities, A&O Shearman, 23 July 2026
Overview of our cryptoassets regime policy statements, Financial Conduct Authority
Comments