How Chile will build Bitcoin adoption through regulated infrastructure, not presidential decrees

The recent electoral victory of José Antonio Kast has fueled speculation about a possible Chilean “Bukele moment.” However, those who closely observe the local financial system discover a much more powerful signal than political proclamations: $229.6 billion in assets managed by the pension system. This number tells a completely different story from El Salvador’s legal Bitcoin.

Why Chile follows a system logic, not political will

Kast won with 58% of the votes promising deregulation and public order. He invoked Nayib Bukele and Argentine President Javier Milei as models of “hard” governance. The markets reacted positively: the peso strengthened in anticipation of fiscal and labor reforms.

But there is a crucial detail that political rhetoric ignores.

In 2021, El Salvador made Bitcoin legal tender with a presidential decree. An top-down, symbolic, and immediate decision. Chile does not operate this way. Its path will be bottom-up, technocratic, constrained by legal and institutional frameworks that slowly absorb new classes of assets.

Three structural factors determine this.

First: the Chilean central bank chooses prudence

The BCCh has published sober analyses on CBDCs (2022 and 2024) and implemented the open finance regime provided by the Fintech Act together with the CMF. These are not moves of an authority about to launch radical monetary experiments. This attitude reflects institutional mathematics: modernized central banks prefer architecture over press releases.

Second: the mathematical radials of the pension system

By the end of 2024, Chilean pension funds managed $186.4 billion. In 2025, that figure rose above $207 billion. By October, it reached $229.6 billion. These $229.6 billion only move when governance, custody, valuation, and risk management requirements are met. It is not a system that adopts new assets for tweets; it is a mechanism that slowly integrates new classes through regulated vehicles.

Third: tax compliance already regulates crypto

Chile treats cryptocurrencies as assets subject to income tax. This is not an obstacle: it is a foundation. Adoption will occur through formal intermediaries—brokers, banks, funds—not through retail mandates.

Mauricio Di Bartolomeo, co-founder and chief strategy officer of Ledn (, a Bitcoin-focused lender), clearly states: “It is unlikely that the Chilean central bank and the new government will attempt to make Bitcoin legal tender. The best solution is an incremental policy that normalizes its use.”

The real path: ETFs, bank custody, then pensions

If politics does not steer change, what will? The logical sequence is almost mechanical.

First stage: local ETF products

U.S. markets have already written the manual. BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust, launched in January 2024, has transformed Bitcoin into a bank-level institutional exposure. Chile does not need to reinvent; it needs to localize. Spot ETFs and ETNs on Bitcoin managed locally would allow regulated entities to gain exposure through familiar channels.

Second stage: banking infrastructure

If the central bank and the CMF establish a clear framework for custody at the banking level, the rest naturally follows. Banks could offer basic services: buying, selling, custody, collateralization on loans, corporate treasury programs. Chile has already built the foundation through the Fintech Act (Law 21.521) and the Open Finance System (regulation 2024). This allows banks to add services without compromising risk controls.

Third stage: opening to pensions

Here comes the elephant in the room. AFPs (pension management) are bound by strict rules: they cannot directly purchase international funds, or are limited in how they hold non-domiciled assets in Chile.

The bridge is simple: if international ETFs remain prohibited, domestic ETFs or ETNs could open the way. Initially, shares would be minimal—subject to custody, valuation, and risk category standards. But the potential is enormous. Even a 25-50 bps (basis point) share via local vehicles would represent billions of dollars over time.

The mathematics of pensions is radical for Chile. A system managing $229.6 billion does not need to move much to generate a significant impact. But precisely for this reason, regulators will demand custody segregation, price source integrity, and testable liquidity before moving the first basis point.

What accelerates, what blocks

Di Bartolomeo identifies three critical obstacles:

1. Restrictions on domestic BTC trading: if the central bank bans it, activity would move abroad
2. Punitive taxation: would discourage local investments
3. Prohibitions on dollar-pegged stablecoins: would deepen the shadow market

Each would push toward informality, exactly the opposite of Chile’s decade-long strategy to formalize markets.

On the other side, operational catalysts are in place:

• Guidelines on bank custody
• CMF approval for local ETFs/ETNs
• Clear compliance pathways for distributors

On the policy front, movement is already underway. The CMF is implementing the 2025-26 regulatory plan. The BCCh continues to build the framework for open finance.

Stablecoins and fiscal policies: the next signals

A often overlooked element is the role of stablecoins. In 2025, legal analyses highlighted how the Fintech Act framework could recognize and channel the use of dollar-pegged stablecoins (like Tether) in the formal system. It is a cautious approach that reduces informal dollarization risks while preserving monetary control.

For retail and commerce, targeted tax incentives—similar to minimal exemptions for small payments already discussed in the U.S.—could encourage the use and receipt of Bitcoin in payments.

Di Bartolomeo concludes: “I would see stablecoin policies pegged to the dollar as an active signal, since usage is growing in the region and could steer users toward Bitcoin over time.”

The true catalyst: what to watch in the coming weeks

For those investing in the future of Chilean cryptocurrencies, the manual is operational and verifiable.

The first real signals will come from requests for local ETFs or ETNs on Bitcoin. Soon after, banks will show intentions to offer custody and basic trading.

Di Bartolomeo is explicit: “A strong signal would be banks offering services or products related to Bitcoin, or policy addressing updates to banking rules to enable it.”

This is not spectacle. It is the normalization of ordinary access channels.

From there, attention will shift to pensions. Any circular expanding the menu of eligible assets, or clarifying valuation and custody standards for digital assets, would open the door to small exposure shares within Chile’s larger capital pools.

Conclusion: not a public square, but term sheets and audits

Chile’s crypto future will not be decided on a podium. It will be decided in custody term sheets, technical regulations, and intermediary audit controls.

It is not viral like El Salvador’s legal tender. But it is a path that scales. As Di Bartolomeo concludes: “I do not see an immediate case for Bitcoin as legal currency in Chile.”

The signal will come from banks. If it happens, pensions could follow. And only a few basis points—perhaps 25-50 bps from the $229.6 billion managed by AFPs—would be enough to make a significant difference in the local market.