National Bank of Cambodia Crypto Ban: What’s Really Happening in 2025

Patricia Amarante

Finally someone gets it. Bakong is the real win here-not crypto, not blockchain hype, just a simple, fast, cheap way for people to move money. No drama, no volatility. Just works.

Tom Joyner

It’s fascinating how Cambodia didn’t panic. Most countries either ban crypto outright or let it run wild like a toddler with a flamethrower. This is governance with teeth and a roadmap. The fact they’re using a CBDC as the backbone? Brilliant. Most Western central banks are still arguing over whether to print QR codes.

Group 1 assets are essentially regulated securities dressed in blockchain pajamas. Smart. Lets them keep the financial system intact while still letting innovation breathe. Group 2? High-risk, sure-but not illegal. That’s the difference between authoritarianism and smart regulation.

And the two licensed exchanges? That’s not a restriction, it’s a filter. You don’t let every unregulated shell company handle your citizens’ money. The U.S. should take notes. We let Binance operate like a casino with a license to print money until the DOJ finally showed up.

Also, the dollarization angle is critical. Cambodia’s economy runs on USD because trust in the riel collapsed decades ago. Bakong isn’t trying to kill the dollar-it’s trying to make the riel useful again. That’s long-term thinking. Most governments want to ban crypto because they can’t control it. Cambodia wants to control it so they can use it.

This isn’t a ban. It’s a surgical strike on chaos.

Amy Copeland

Oh please. You’re acting like this is some genius masterstroke. It’s just a power grab wrapped in blockchain glitter. They’re not protecting the riel-they’re protecting their cronies who run RGX and CNX. And let’s be real: if Bakong was so great, why did they need to block Binance? Because people were using it to send money abroad without paying their ‘taxes’ to the regime.

‘Control through crypto’? More like ‘control instead of crypto.’

Craig Nikonov

They’re not banning crypto-they’re just making sure the Chinese and Russian oligarchs can’t launder cash through Phnom Penh anymore. And yeah, the DOJ already nailed those fraud rings. This was inevitable. You think the U.S. lets foreign exchanges operate without KYC? Please. This is just the rest of the world catching up.

Also, Bakong? That’s the future. You can send money to your cousin in Battambang using just a phone number. No bank account needed. That’s not crypto-that’s justice.

Sally Valdez

Why is everyone acting like Cambodia is some beacon of wisdom? They’re just scared of their own people having financial freedom. You think they want the youth to invest in Bitcoin? Nah. They want them stuck on Bakong so the government can track every damn cent. This isn’t innovation-it’s surveillance with a smiley face.

Sammy Tam

Love how this is turning into a crypto cold war. One side says ‘ban everything,’ the other says ‘let it all burn.’ Cambodia? They said ‘let’s build a bridge.’ Bakong’s the foundation. Approved stablecoins are the planks. And yeah, Binance users are still on VPNs-but that’s not a failure, it’s a transition period.

People forget: Cambodia’s not trying to stop crypto. It’s trying to make crypto useful. That’s the difference between fear and foresight.

Timothy Slazyk

There’s a philosophical depth here that most people miss. The National Bank of Cambodia isn’t regulating technology-they’re regulating *trust*. Cryptocurrencies, in their unregulated form, are trustless systems. But Cambodia’s economy is built on *social* trust, not algorithmic trust. Bakong works because it’s embedded in existing institutions: banks, phone networks, government IDs. Crypto without that? Chaos.

The real genius is the two-tier system. Group 1 assets are trust-anchored: stablecoins backed by reserves, tokenized securities with legal ownership. Group 2? Pure speculation. And the state says: fine, trade it if you want-but don’t drag our banking system into your gamble.

This isn’t anti-innovation. It’s anti-fragility. They’re saying: innovation must serve stability, not replace it. That’s the core of any mature financial system. The U.S. could learn this. We let hedge funds trade meme stocks like lottery tickets and call it ‘freedom.’ Then we wonder why people lose everything.

And the two exchanges? That’s not monopolistic-it’s accountable. Every transaction is visible. Every user is verified. That’s not control. That’s responsibility.

What Cambodia’s doing isn’t just policy. It’s a new model for post-dollarized economies. They’re not rejecting global finance-they’re re-engineering it for their context. That’s not ban. That’s evolution.

Samantha West

It is a fact that the National Bank of Cambodia has implemented a regulatory framework that is both legally rigorous and economically pragmatic. The distinction between Group 1 and Group 2 assets is not arbitrary but grounded in risk assessment methodologies developed by the Basel Committee and adapted to local macroeconomic conditions. The use of private blockchain infrastructure for Bakong, while not public, ensures data integrity without compromising sovereignty. This is not censorship. It is institutional maturity.

Furthermore, the fact that 65% of the population uses Bakong demonstrates a rare alignment between technological adoption and public policy. In most jurisdictions, this level of penetration is achieved only after decades of forced compliance. Here, it was voluntary. Why? Because it worked.

The notion that this is a ‘power grab’ is not only inaccurate-it is an insult to the intelligence of Cambodian citizens who have clearly chosen utility over ideology.

Heather Turnbow

I’ve been following this closely. What’s impressive is how they avoided the usual extremes. No crackdown. No free-for-all. Just clear boundaries. Banks can help you buy stablecoins? Good. Banks can’t hold Bitcoin? Also good. That’s not restriction-that’s responsibility.

And Bakong? That’s the quiet revolution. No one talks about it because it’s not flashy. But it’s helping farmers, street vendors, students-all of them-move money without fees or middlemen. That’s financial inclusion, not crypto theater.

Let people use VPNs if they want. The goal isn’t to stop them. It’s to make the legal option so good they don’t need to.

Jesse Messiah

yo this is actually one of the coolest things i’ve seen in fintech this year. bakong is like the little engine that could. no one thought it’d take off, but now half the country uses it to pay for street food. and the crypto thing? smart. let the good stuff in, keep the wild stuff out. no need to be a villain, just be the better option.

also, if rgx and cnx start offering 0 fees and instant withdrawals, people will switch. not because they’re scared. because it’s easier. that’s how change works.

Jack Daniels

I’ve been watching this for months. The fact that they didn’t shut down Bakong while blocking Binance tells me they’ve been planning this for years. This isn’t about crypto. It’s about control. And honestly? I’m not mad. If I lived there, I’d want my government to protect me from scammers.

Terrance Alan

Let me be clear. This is not financial innovation. This is authoritarianism with a tech veneer. They’re not building a bridge-they’re building a cage. Bakong tracks every transaction. Every transfer. Every penny. And now they’re saying, ‘You can trade crypto, but only through our approved channels where we see everything.’ That’s not freedom. That’s digital serfdom.

And don’t pretend they care about the youth. They care about control. The moment someone starts using crypto to send money outside the system, they’ll come for them. The DOJ indictments? Convenient timing. They used that to justify what they wanted to do all along.

This isn’t a model for the world. It’s a warning.

Donna Goines

They’re not banning crypto they’re banning freedom. The fact that they blocked Binance but let two local companies run the show? That’s not regulation. That’s collusion. And Bakong? It’s a government spy tool disguised as a payment app. They know where you spend your money. Who you send it to. When. Why. And they’re calling it progress. I’m not impressed.

Wait till they start freezing accounts because you bought too much ETH. Then you’ll see what ‘control through crypto’ really means.

Cheyenne Cotter

Look, I get why people are skeptical. Crypto’s been a wild west for years. But Cambodia’s approach is actually one of the most thoughtful I’ve seen. They didn’t go full China. They didn’t go full El Salvador. They took the middle path: let the useful stuff in, keep the dangerous stuff out, and build infrastructure that actually helps people. Bakong isn’t just a payment system-it’s a public utility. And the fact that 65% of the population uses it? That’s not propaganda. That’s proof.

And yeah, RGX and CNX are slow now. But they’re getting better. The NBC is clearly working on more licenses. This isn’t a closed system. It’s a controlled rollout. That’s how you avoid chaos.

Also, the dollarization thing is huge. Most people don’t realize how fragile economies like Cambodia’s are. If you just let crypto flood in without any anchor, you risk destabilizing the entire currency system. They’re not anti-crypto. They’re pro-stability. And that’s not a bad thing.

People keep saying ‘they’re controlling it.’ But control isn’t always bad. You control your car’s brakes. You control your water supply. You control your internet provider. Why is it so hard to accept that a central bank might want to control financial access? Especially when the alternative is fraud rings and forced labor camps?

This isn’t a ban. It’s a blueprint.

Greg Knapp

They blocked Binance because people were sending money out of the country and the government couldn’t tax it. That’s it. Bakong is just a way to keep all the cash inside the system. No magic. No genius. Just greed wrapped in blockchain.

Sammy Tam

And here’s the kicker: if RGX and CNX start offering lower fees, faster withdrawals, and better UX, people won’t need VPNs. They’ll switch because it’s easier. That’s how markets work. Not by force. By value.

That’s the real win here. They didn’t try to outlaw tech. They tried to out-innovate it.