Macro Matters
A high-level look at three of the macro matters affecting Offshore right now: Digital Assets, Beneficial Ownership, and SPACs.
Digital Assets
Although many of us have no idea how a blockchain actually works, crypto as a term and a concept is something it’s hard to avoid, especially in the world of professional services and international finance. Bitcoin may have been around for almost 2 decades, but it is only in the last 5 years that it has entered mainstream consciousness, and the offshore financial centres have been a major part of that.
Bermuda, BVI, and Cayman all have digital assets specific legislation and both Jersey and Guernsey have incorporated digital assets regulations into their wider financial services framework.
Bermuda, BVI, and Cayman all have dedicated crypto conferences (in the case of Cayman, a whole week) and many of the major names in the digital assets space have been built around or involve offshore entities.
Why then has Digital Assets become so closely tied with Offshore and vice versa?
Because, in my opinion, Offshore was already the perfect place for it to go. Offshore didn’t go looking for Crypto, Crypto found Offshore. But, once it arrived, the offshore jurisdictions recognised its importance and have worked at making themselves the perfect place for the industry’s growth.
So why is Offshore the perfect home?
Digital assets are inherently international. Projects may involve founders from Uruguay, programmers in Ukraine, investors in the US, Singapore, and Europe, employees in Korea. Add to that “decentralisation” (in the crypto sense of the word) and offshore is the ideal fit.
It acts as a neutral ground for all those various jurisdictions. It has familiarity for investors and, most importantly, flexible corporate law – vital for creating the crypto structures that are now so common.
But it isn’t only about what was already there, it’s also about what Offshore has been willing to become. Rather than backing away from the newness and uncertainty around crypto, governments, legislators, and the professional services sector spotted the opportunity to embrace it, to their own benefit. Many jurisdictions are still unsure what to do, look at the US with Clarity and the EU with MiCA, but Offshore has had the appetite and the where withal to make it work.
This is not to say that others haven’t tried, both The Bahamas and Singapore have famously had their fingers burnt and Dubai and Switzerland have partially opened the door, but none have proven to be as sticky and successful as the key offshore financial centres.
Part of that has been down to a seemingly collaborative effort across the jurisdictions (intentional or not), with each playing to their strengths.
BVI has become the home of the token issuer and is building a strong regulatory regime – for those requiring a licence.
Cayman has lured in the DAOs (decentralised autonomous organisations), initially because of perfectly adaptable corporate structures but now because of the level of crypto expertise, in the form of directors, that they have on hand to advise the multitude of projects.
Bermuda, long a home for reinsurance, has focused on the regulated exchanges and custodians.
The Channel Islands work to integrate DeFi (decentralised finance) into TradFi (traditional finance).
In each case, the offshore jurisdictions have listened to the needs of crypto while looking at the global economy to create a framework that provides security and stability.
Of course, the expectation is that the rest of the world will eventually catchup (a form of Clarity will pass) but Offshore has first mover advantage and with that comes investor familiarity and loyalty that will help ensure they are major players for decades to come.
Beneficial Ownership
In case this isn’t a phrase you are familiar with; beneficial ownership is about who controls a company and not just who holds the shares or acts as a director. It has become an important topic not just in the offshore world but globally as part of a much broader transformation of how the international financial system deals with corporate ownership.
I’ve claimed it as an offshore matter because of the increasing pressure, from the FATF, OECD, and EU, to provide more transparency. Pressure that has led to, and continues to create, legislative change.
That change isn’t purely external. Internally the offshore jurisdictions understand the need to align with onshore. Although they may be islands geographically, their clients are international and operate with countries in every time zone. It’s therefore important that they can access global markets, banking, and finance and not be excluded from it because of where they are incorporated.
So, what does this mean on the ground?
Transparency, but controlled and proportionate. There is a delicate balancing act, privacy is still important. Everyone has a right to a level of privacy and the level that you may need depends on where you are in the world. For parts of the world there is still an ever-present fear of kidnap and ransom, but also regime change and political reprisals, which means that privacy becomes vital.
But, as I say, there is a balance between secrecy and privacy. The right people need to see the right information at the right time, and this has led to the development of the term “legitimate interest”.
The BVI is the jurisdiction to most recently make major changes to its legislation; to evolve the way it approaches beneficial ownership. Under its recent changes, it introduced a definition of legitimate interest that covers: i) investigating, preventing or detecting financial crime; ii) those connected with a person involved in financial crime; and iii) obliged entities conducting due diligence. There is then a process to be followed, with evidential requirements and safeguards, before information is made available. Providing privacy from those “digging for dirt” and bad actors, while giving those that need it, for legitimate purposes, a route of access.
In terms of the other jurisdictions.
The Channel Islands have had a long-standing beneficial ownership regime but continue to review the breadth of legitimate interest access.
Cayman is arguably the furthest along the journey but still in a process of refinement.
Bermuda has been going through a substantial overhaul which is still ongoing.
For all the jurisdictions, beneficial ownership is playing a big part in legislative development and so expect to hear more on this in the years to come.
SPACs (Special Purpose Acquisition Companies)
Rather than this being an offshore macro matter, it is a Cayman/BVI macro matter and, more than that, it’s a Cayman matter. I’ve included it, partly through self interest (it’s something I have experience with) but also because it’s worth watching right now.
As of June 2026, 103 Cayman domiciled SPACs had already listed on US exchanges, representing 61% of all US IPOs for 2026 (this number being ahead of 2022 and 2024’s full year totals).
Why such impressive numbers?
A SPAC is fundamentally an international corporate investment vehicle in need of a home. At times the US had been that home, and still is for many, but for various reasons SPACs have needed somewhere else and Offshore has proven to be the perfect place.
Why?
For many of the reasons that digital assets have ended up offshore:
- Flexible corporate law.
- Sophisticated courts.
- Familiar governance concepts for institutional investors.
- Neutral ground for a global investor base.
- Tax neutrality.
- Longstanding relationships with US capital markets.
- US exchanges are familiar with them.
All in all, a substantial list of reasons.
Whether Offshore remains the home for SPACs is to be seen. The US will want to move them onto their soil and a lot of DeSPACs (i.e. target acquisitions) involve redomiciling the ultimate entity into the US. But, for now, SPACs are thriving and SPACs Offshore are thriving so it’s definitely a matter worth monitoring.
