简体 繁體 日本語 한국어 English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português Русский Українська

The trust as Singapore's answer to custody risk

Read the PDF edition (1 page)

Singapore has no statutory segregation rule for crypto assets in insolvency. Where Swiss law gives the customer of a bankrupt custodian a direct right to the return of tokens under Art. 242a DEBA (Part D, Chapter IV), Singapore law asks a different question. Did the custodian hold the tokens on trust for the customer? If it did, the tokens never formed part of the custodian's estate and the liquidator must hand them back. If it did not, the customer is an unsecured creditor with a claim for the value of what was deposited. Every Singapore platform insolvency since 2022 has turned on that question. The regulator's response in 2024 was to make the trust compulsory for licensed custodians. This chapter explains the law of trusts as it applies to digital assets, the pitfalls that have defeated customers in the cases, and what a trustee or custodian in Singapore should do.

The starting point is that a trust over crypto assets is possible. After ByBit there is no doubt that a token is a thing in action and therefore capable of being trust property.1 The difficulty lies elsewhere, in the three certainties that every express trust requires. There must be certainty of intention to create a trust, certainty of the subject matter and certainty of the objects. Each has a specific crypto problem. Intention founders on terms of service drafted to preserve the platform's flexibility. Subject matter founders on omnibus wallets in which the coins of thousands of customers are pooled. Objects are rarely a problem for a custody trust, since the beneficiaries are the customers on the platform's books, but become one in protocol treasuries and DAO structures where the class of beneficiaries is open.

Notes

  1. ByBit Fintech Ltd v Ho Kai Xin [2023] SGHC 199 at [36] and [42]–[44]. ↩

For general information only. This article does not constitute legal or tax advice, does not replace advice on an individual case and creates no lawyer-client relationship. It reflects the legal position as of October 2026.

Setting up or expanding in Singapore?

SingaporeIQ is edited by Dr Alexander Ressos, an international business lawyer with more than 15 years of local experience in Singapore as a permanent resident, a Singapore registered foreign lawyer and managing partner of a Singapore foreign law practice. In addition to significant experience in cross-border investments and transactions, UHNWI private client work and sanctions/export controls, Dr Ressos has extensive experience in cross-border business and in crypto and digital-asset projects in Singapore, drawn from more than 700 projects since 2017.

If you are planning a company incorporation, an investment, a holding structure or a market entry through Singapore, you can reach Dr Ressos directly at [email protected]. Singapore law advice is provided by KGP Legal LLC, a licensed firm of Singapore advocates and solicitors. As a Singapore law practice, KGP Legal LLC is authorised under the Legal Profession Act 1966 to advise on Singapore law and to represent clients before the Singapore courts; foreign law practices with an office in Singapore are, as a rule, not permitted to do either. Dr Ressos and his team facilitate the full range of Singapore legal, compliance and company administration services, including company incorporation, corporate transactions, commercial contracts, crypto and digital assets, financial regulatory work and dispute resolution, including litigation in the Singapore courts. For legal, tax and fiduciary services in Switzerland, see helveticaregister.com.