The approval of Law No. 15,265/2025, which established the Special Regime for Asset Updating and Regularization (REARP), marks a decisive point in Brazil’s fiscal policy toward digital assets.

In an environment where Brazil seeks to align itself with the international transparency standards set by the OECD and strengthen integration among the Central Bank, Federal Revenue Service, and both domestic and foreign exchanges, the window for keeping cryptoassets off the state’s radar is closing rapidly.

In this context, REARP emerges as a definitive regularization alternative for investors who — whether due to lack of knowledge, strategy, or informality — accumulated digital wealth without properly declaring it to the tax authorities.

The program covers both the updating of assets already declared and the regularization of assets never reported, expressly including cryptoassets — a category that has expanded in recent years, accompanied by increasing diversification of portfolios, decentralized exchanges, and self-custody mechanisms.

The law requires taxpayers to declare the market value of their assets as of December 31, 2024, with a definitive tax applied to that amount. This is precisely where the most sensitive point of the debate arises: the total cost of 30%, composed of 15% Income Tax on presumed gain and a 15% fine, equivalent to a full penalty on the tax owed.

The criticism of this rate is not trivial. Lawmakers involved in the cryptoasset regulatory framework, such as Congressman Áureo Ribeiro, have described the percentage as “horrible” and “detached from reality,” especially for taxpayers wishing to repatriate funds or regularize positions held abroad. Part of the industry believes such a high cost may discourage participation and undermine the program’s effectiveness.

However, it must be acknowledged that the structure adopted is not a departure from past practice, as previous regularization programs — such as the 2016 Special Regime for Foreign Exchange and Tax Regularization - RERCT and its subsequent phases — applied total fines between 30% and 35% on undeclared assets. In other words, while the rate is heavy, it remains aligned with Brazil’s historical pattern of conditional tax amnesty programs.

For cryptoasset holders, the debate over the rate, while relevant, does not end the analysis, because the regulatory landscape has changed significantly. The Central Bank has established consistent guidelines for virtual asset service providers, while international exchanges increasingly face reporting obligations that may expose data on Brazilian investors.

The CARF — Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework, adopted by the OECD — pressures all participating countries to increase the level of international information sharing and transparency. In this scenario, omission ceases to be merely a tax risk and becomes a choice with a high probability of future detection.

Another key point of REARP is the criminal-law protection it provides. The law establishes the extinction of criminal liability for tax-related offenses as long as the taxpayer proves the lawful origin of the assets and fully pays the amounts owed.

This guarantee becomes especially relevant given the historical difficulty of proving older crypto transactions, particularly on exchanges that have shut down or platforms that did not require strict identification in their early years. Regularization not only eliminates tax risks but also reduces legal uncertainties that could compromise estate or wealth-planning strategies.

The program also offers flexibility through instalment payments over up to 36 months, which may be crucial for taxpayers with significant positions but limited immediate liquidity. While the requirement of valuation by a specialized entity is bureaucratic, it provides greater security to the process and reduces future disputes over the accuracy of the declared value — especially for highly volatile assets.

In the end, REARP presents a complex equation: on one side, a high and politically sensitive cost; on the other, the opportunity for definitive regularization at a time when regulatory scrutiny of the crypto market is tightening rapidly.

For many investors — particularly those who operated heavily between 2016 and 2021 or hold assets abroad — the decision to participate will be less about the tax rate itself and more about eliminating risks that may materialize forcefully in the coming years.

In summary, the program is not perfect — and the debate over the 30% rate is legitimate — but it presents a major opportunity for compliance before the full implementation of the new global transparency mechanisms. The cost is high, but the alternative for those who remain on the sidelines may be considerably more burdensome.

https://tagdlaw.com.br/a-tributacao-de-30-e-o-desafio-juridico-dos-criptoativos/