Australia’s financial intelligence regulator AUSTRAC canceled the registration of virtual asset service provider GetCoins on June 4, 2026, after customer complaints linked the business to cryptocurrency investment scams and prompted a review with the National Anti-Scam Centre.

AUSTRAC said businesses whose registrations are canceled can no longer operate. In GetCoins’ case, the regulator said the decision followed collaboration with the National Anti-Scam Centre after customer complaints raised concerns about the company’s exposure to crypto investment scams.

According to AUSTRAC, the review examined whether GetCoins could properly manage money-laundering risks. The regulator said the provider had been linked to organized scam activity, but it did not say GetCoins itself organized those scams. No customer recovery amounts were disclosed, and no criminal finding against GetCoins was reported in the announcement.

The action was part of a broader AUSTRAC enforcement push. The agency said it had canceled, suspended, or refused to renew 45 remittance and virtual asset provider registrations over the past year. That places the GetCoins case within a wider compliance campaign rather than as a standalone action.

Under AUSTRAC guidance, businesses offering digital currency exchange or other virtual asset services in Australia must be registered to operate. The regulator can refuse, suspend, or cancel that registration if it considers a business to pose a money-laundering or terrorism-financing risk.

Why It Matters

The case highlights how anti-scam enforcement and AML supervision are increasingly overlapping in crypto. Even without alleging that a service provider directly ran a fraud, regulators can still remove operating permissions if they conclude the business is not adequately controlling financial-crime risks.

For the Australian crypto sector, that raises the significance of registration status beyond a basic licensing formality. It affects whether exchanges and service providers can maintain access to the local market at all, and it suggests regulators are willing to use registration powers more aggressively where scam-related complaints and weak controls intersect.