Senator Ihenyen is a distinguished legal practitioner, technology policy strategist, and thought leader with deep expertise at the intersection of law, innovation, and emerging digital economies. He serves as the Lead Partner at Infusion Lawyers, Nigeria’s pioneering virtual law firm, where he champions legal solutions for innovators, startups, and established enterprises navigating intellectual property, technology, fintech, and regulatory compliance challenges.
Under his leadership, the firm has become a trusted legal partner for a wide spectrum of clients and was recognized with the Best Blockchain Legal Firm of the Year award at the Africa Crypto Giant Awards (ACGAwards) in 2023, a testament to its influence in Africa’s blockchain and crypto ecosystem.
Senator’s influence extends beyond legal practice into policy advocacy and industry development.
He is the executive chair of the Virtual Asset Service Providers Association (VASPA), an Africa‑focused advocacy organization dedicated to fostering trust, regulatory clarity, and sustainable growth in the continent’s virtual asset sector. Through VASPA, he helps mobilize stakeholders, including innovators, investors, and regulators, to build a trusted, transparent, and inclusive digital asset ecosystem.
A respected voice in technology law and digital finance, Senator is a frequent speaker, author, and contributor to global legal and policy guides (See more here).
In this interview, he looks at Nigeria’s $92.1 billion crypto volume (based on PwC report), especially how the country can turn the high activity into national prosperity
TE: PwC estimates that Nigeria processed $92.1 billion in crypto transactions within a year, positioning the country as Africa’s largest crypto market. What policy, regulatory, and industry steps are needed to convert this scale of activity into measurable economic benefits for Nigerians and the government?
Senator Ihenyen: To turn $92.1 billion in volume into prosperity, I think that there needs to be a paradigm shift. By this, I mean a shift from the government largely approaching crypto from the limiting point of view of national security risk and quick revenue generation to seeing crypto as a nascent sector that offers a great potential for economic growth if the enabling environment is there.
This way, rather than requiring huge minimum capital requirements from VASPs or immediately introducing crypto taxes after years of banning and restricting it for instance, we will be having conversations about incentives and infrastructures towards developing our local market for global competitiveness. This is how nations invest big in the future, and get their big rewards tomorrow.
If we treat Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) like the pioneers in an emerging financial technology sector with potential economic opportunities, they will become like the traditional fintechs, they hire locally, rent offices locally, pay local vendors, and pay taxes.
But if we largely treat them with suspicion, like a stranger with a bag of national security risks you would rather not bring into your home, we will only end up effectively risking the criminalization and discrimination of innovators who are the new drivers of the future of finance.
We need to on-ramp local innovation. Especially considering Nigeria’s big size in this market, we shouldn’t just be consumers of global protocols. For instance, by providing a clear legal pathway for local startups to build Naira-stablecoins or Tokenized Real World Assets (RWAs), we not only keep the value within our borders, but become globally competitive, attracting more investments.
TE: From an industry and policy standpoint, which sectors of Nigeria’s economy would see the greatest impact if crypto were fully integrated into the formal financial system, especially regarding revenue mobilisation, taxation, and public interest outcomes?
Senator Ihenyen: If by fully integrating crypto into the formal financial system, we mean enacting crypto tax laws and mandating high-capital VASPs licenses, Nigeria does not stand to benefit much. Why? Because the two-pronged formalization steps above do not necessarily develop or safeguard the nascent market, but actually stifle it, so much that it consequently gives back what you put in. No revenue or tax purse is about to blow up.
Market development is key, and should be prioritized, and not just for Nigeria’s maximum benefits, but also the Nigerian people, especially our teeming youth in the country and in the diaspora.
And if I were to identify the three sectors I see as the “low-hanging fruit” for Nigeria, they are payments & remittances, cross-border trade and commerce, and wealth creation. Regarding payments and remittances, we are already seeing costs drop, relative to traditional financial rails. Crypto has become a serious medium of exchange. And this will get increasingly bigger, and it does not have to be legal tender to grow.
Integrating crypto into the formal banking rails can reduce remittance fees from 8–10% to under 1%, putting more money directly into the pockets of Nigerian families. In the area of cross-border trade and commerce, crypto, by virtue of how it works, can bridge the current gap in that space.
Reports already show that Africans are not transacting with Africans enough; and for Nigerians with other Africans, it is even worse. This is because as already fragmented as the continent is, with 54 countries largely running on different currency rails, the fragmentation gets even worse. And here is where crypto as well as crypto-enabled, not necessarily cryptocurrency only but also blockchain-powered, settlements come in.
To enhance and deepen its cross-border infrastructure, the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) could enable this integration.
Crypto can enable wealth creation for millions of Nigerians leveraging opportunities in the emerging Web3 industry, from community management to content writing; from compliance roles to marketing roles; from blockchain development to blockchain and crypto education; and of course, crypto trading.
All that Nigeria needs is all-round, open, and genuine engagement with the nascent crypto sector.
TE: With the new Nigeria Tax Act coming into effect, how can government balance revenue generation from crypto without discouraging innovation or pushing activity back into informal channels?
Senator Ihenyen: The Nigeria Tax Act 2025 was a milestone, but implementation is where it gets tricky. Perhaps, first and foremost, the Nigeria government should not see crypto as a cashcow, as it appears to now do.
The stark reality is that current market and business data in the country tells a story of an industry that is struggling to breathe, especially locally, no thanks to years-long misunderstandings, misconceptions, and misgivings.
Also, Nigeria should be mindful of the applicable tax rates. For instance, if we set personal income tax on crypto gains too high (some suggest up to 25%), we will see a “brain drain” and a “capital flight”, possibly back to P2P shadow markets.
I think a capped Capital Gains Tax (CGT) of 10% is the sweet spot. The government should work with licensed exchanges to automate tax reporting. If a user has to fill out 20 forms to pay tax on a $50 profit, they simply won’t do it.
Also, I think innovators can benefit from special tax incentives at this early stage, especially considering that the Nigeria crypto industry has not only had a chequered and hostile history with the government, regulators, and law enforcement agencies but also because it is still a nascent industry. Nigeria could also offer tax rebates to VASPs that invest in blockchain literacy programs or “sandbox” innovations that solve local problems.
Today, Nigeria does not have enough big local players yet, if any. Where well applied, tax can be a creative tool of sowing seeds for the future trees that will sustainably bear the fruits of revenue. If otherwise, taxes can kill growth.
TE: Beyond taxation, what long-term economic benefits, such as jobs, skills, or investment, can crypto unlock for Nigeria: Regulation, Licensing & Market Structure?
Senator Ihenyen: While I understand that taxes on capital gains provide immediate revenue, there are long-term, ‘hidden’ benefits that are far more transformative for Nigeria’s macro-economy, such as job creation and skills acquisition. Beyond trading, a regulated ecosystem fosters a demand for blockchain developers, smart contract auditors, business development managers, senior marketers, compliance officers, legal experts, and more. This shifts Nigeria from being a consumer of technology to a hub for Web3 talent in Africa.
Also, crypto-related Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is a long-term benefit Nigeria should be positioning for. When rules are clear and certain for operators, they become green light for global venture capital. When Nigeria provides a predictable business and legal climate, it attracts foreign fintechs to set up local operations, bringing in capital and technical transfer. For the country to achieve this, it needs to invest in building trust more with the crypto industry, not merely policing it.
Essentially, my point is that the shift toward a regulated crypto climate in Nigeria can no longer be just about preventing illicit activity or enforcing taxes; it should, at this stage, be about building a sustainable digital economy. In 2026, the focus has to move toward creating what I call a virtuous cycle of innovation, trust, and growth.
TE: What concrete steps are currently being taken to license and regulate Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) in Nigeria, and how critical is this to market confidence?
Senator Ihenyen: From lack of legal recognition of crypto a few years ago, Nigeria has gradually transited to a legal formalization of registration and licensing processes. This has, at least comparatively, improved the level of market confidence, and only to some extent. The difficult journey started in 2022 with the recognition of VASPs as financial institutions for compliance purposes under the Money Laundering Act 2022.
A year later, the National Blockchain Policy, which was officially adopted by the Federal Government, was also a key milestone, providing a policy direction to the country.
Significantly, when by January 2024 the CBN rightly lifted what I still believe is a misguided crypto ban, some respite came to the industry. But the level of market confidence hardly changed, especially following the very unfortunate Binance episode in the country since 2024. This remains a matter I strongly believe Nigeria could resolve differently, by the way.
Commendably, the SEC introduced its Accelerated Regulatory Incubation Program (ARIP) in June 2024, following its VASPs framework for the capital market. Essentially, the ARIP has been a gateway for VASPs to operate under provisional licenses while the SEC monitors their compliance, ensuring innovation isn’t stifled by rigid, day-one requirements.
In 2025, the Investments and Securities Act (ISA) 2025 became the landmark legislation that provides the statutory backbone officially recognizing virtual assets as securities.
Though I think this blanket classification by our lawmakers overlooks key statutory nuances, potentially stifling the growth of crypto innovations that should really have no business with our security and investment laws.
Recently, the SEC further increased capital thresholds for VASPs, particularly Digital Asset Exchanges (DAXs) and Custodians. While the apparent reason is to ensure only financially resilient players enter the market and Nigeria gets to reduce the risk of fly-by-night operators, it’s also worth considering if there are no other prudential ways of ensuring market confidence that can help to reasonably minimize capital burdens in a nascent sector.
But Nigeria seriously needs to consider unblocking the crypto websites Nigeria authorities blocked in the country’s cyberspace since 2024. I believe this will demonstrate the country’s genuine readiness for business, especially with foreign direct investors in the sector.
All in all, I believe Nigeria can generally do better with improving market confidence.
The most common way is to premise market confidence on capital resilience and enforce compliance with sanctions. But taking the common route isn’t always the most effective one. For me, building market confidence, sustainably, requires a tougher but smarter approach: fostering genuine collaboration among industry players and engaging multiple stakeholders through mutual trust and respect. This drives Nigeria’s market development and global competitiveness.
TE: How will proper licensing help protect consumers while also attracting institutional and foreign investment into Nigeria’s crypto ecosystem?
Senator Ihenyen: Proper licensing acts as both a shield and a magnet. When licensing mandates segregation of assets (keeping customer funds separate from company funds) and regular independent audits, it is all about consumer protection and investor safety. When the rules requires a “No Objection” clearance from SEC for tokens listed on an exchange, it is primarily targeted at protecting retail investors from “rug pulls” and fraudulent schemes.
With a regulated crypto market, large-scale investors (banks, pension funds, and insurance companies) will not be necessarily legally barred from the market. A license provides the compliance stamp these potential investors need. It transforms crypto from a speculative retail hobby into a legitimate institutional asset class, potentially deepening the liquidity of the Nigerian market.
TE: What lessons can Nigeria learn from other jurisdictions that have successfully operationalised crypto through clear licensing frameworks?
Senator Ihenyen: Nigeria isn’t innovating in a vacuum. There are some key lessons the country can draw from other jurisdictions.
First, the European Union’s (EU) Markets in CryptoAssets (MiCA) demonstrates the importance of a unified “passporting” system where a license in one region is recognized across others. I see a similar model across Africa being vital for African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) alignment.
Second, in the United Kingdom, the effectiveness of a “Test-and-Learn” approach by way of sandboxes is worth our attention. While Nigeria’s Regulatory Incubation and ARIP are similar applications,
Third, one of the lessons we can take from the United States is the need for clear definitions, Security vs. Commodity, for instance, to avoid what is called regulation by enforcement, a plague that stifles innovation or drives it underground. Nigeria must avoid one-size-fits-all, blanket approaches. These only end up dwarfing ambitions or sending innovators on exile, and consequently producing stunted markets.
Lastly, particularly in a nascent sector powered by new and emerging technologies, Nigeria should formally leverage self-regulatory organizations (SROs) or industry associations and bodies more.
In jurisdictions like Singapore and Hong Kong for example, SROs operated by industry players themselves have become partners-in-progress to regulators, law enforcements, and governments.
Back in Nigeria for instance, the Virtual Asset Service Association (VASPA) with the Blockchain Industry Coordinating Committee of Nigeria (BiCCoN) collaborated with the EFCC on fighting crypto-related financial crimes in the country. Similarly, VASPA was one of the bodies invited by the Nigeria Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) as an SRO towards helping to safeguard the virtual asset industry and keeping Nigeria out of the FATF “grey list”.
Similarly, regulators like CBN and SEC, alongside crypto industry bodies, should collaborate more to balance innovation with regulation in the country. No man is an island, especially in a community-driven economy like crypto.
