Representation of the People Bill: Report Stage briefing on the crypto moratorium
Tuesday 1 September 2026
This briefing highlights key considerations and background on recently tabled amendments to the Representation of the People Bill to restrict donations via cryptoassets.
We have issued briefings on several amendments tabled ahead of Report Stage.
Please get in touch if you have questions for the Commission about the content of this briefing, or the Bill in general: [email protected]
Amendments covered in this briefing
NC72, NC115 and NS6 – Donations etc in cryptoassets
NC72, NC115 and NS6 (Secretary Angela Rayner) would amend the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 to prevent donations to registered political parties being made in cryptoassets and would amend the meaning of donation to include property transferred to pay expenses of registered parties, candidates and other persons.
Currently, donations via cryptoassets to political parties are permissible under electoral law. NC72 would make any donations via cryptoassets impermissible, regardless of the permissibility of the donor making the donation and outlines how they must be returned. NC115 and NS6 would mean that cryptoassets cannot be used to pay for the expenses of a regulated entity. Without this change, donors could circumvent the moratorium by paying for expenses, effectively undermining the intention the measure.
These amendments would implement the Rycroft Review recommendation that a moratorium on political donations made in cryptoassets should be introduced through the Bill.
We welcome these amendments. We note, however, that they do not include a mechanism for lifting the moratorium, once it is determined that effective regulation is in place (recommended by the Rycroft Review).
We have identified a number of increased risks associated with cryptoasset donations. These include the challenge of establishing the true identity of a donor, identifying the true source of funds through a cryptoasset’s transaction history and limits to transparency if cryptoassets are converted into fiat currency and then reported as ‘monetary’ political donations. These challenges have the potential to limit transparency for voters, restrict effective oversight and could undermine existing safeguards in the political finance system. Not addressing these challenges risks undermining already low levels of voter confidence and trust in the political finance system.
We agree with the Rycroft Review recommendation that legislation to introduce a moratorium should include a power to end the moratorium once relevant regulation is effective. These amendments would not provide any such mechanism, which means that further primary legislation would be required to end the moratorium.
We believe that statutory guidance, produced by the Commission and approved by Parliament, could serve as a precursor for ending the moratorium, alongside the introduction of further changes to support the transparency of cryptoasset donations (for example, requiring crypto exchanges to provide parties and the Commission with identifying details of the cryptoasset donor). These additional changes could help both regulated entities and the regulator to identify the donor’s identity and the true source of funds.
We have also identified some additional risks that the Government should consider in order to ensure that this proposal is workable and clear for regulated entities.
For example, in relation to when impermissible donations via cryptoassets must be returned, that the volatility of crypto could mean that the value of what is sent back varies widely, especially given the 30 day window to return them. Throughout the return there is nothing which ties the return to the value of the donation and with a volatile currency this could mean that the disparity between the value of the initial donation to the value when returned could be large.
Additionally, the Rycroft Review highlighted the risk of ‘off ramping’ whereby cryptoassets are converted into fiat currency and then donated to political parties. We welcome the Government’s announcement in their response to the Rycroft Review that this is an area that they will be considering. We will work with the Government to aid this policy development in order to ensure the transparency and security of our elections.
NS1 and NS2 – Transitional arrangements
Gov NS1 and NS2 (Secretary Angela Rayner) prevent the security for loans etc to registered parties taking the form of cryptoassets and makes transitional provisions in relation to cryptoasset donations between the date of the announcement of the moratorium and the commencement day of the Bill.
This amendment makes provisions for cryptoasset donations received between 25 March 2026, the “pre-commencement date” and the commencement day of NC72. When the Bill is commenced parties will then have 30 days to return any donations received between 25 March 2026 and the commencement day.
We have already published advice to regulated entities on how best to prepare for these transitional arrangements. However, we are unable to provide further guidance until these measures are in legislation.
This amendment makes further provisions for cryptoasset donations given after 25 March 2026. If a party has accepted these types of donations after the pre-commencement date, then the treasurer has to prepare a report detailing these donations and submit it to the Commission.
The clauses do not specify what they expect the Commission to do with this supplementary report. In our view, publishing it would help to improve transparency and confidence for voters and other campaigners