DIAN Resolution 000240: crypto reporting in Colombia

A company running payroll, paying contractors, or settling invoices with counterparties in Colombia used to have near-total control over what Colombia's tax authority, DIAN, knew about that crypto activity. If nobody filed it, DIAN needed a targeted audit to find out. DIAN Resolution 000240, issued December 24, 2025, breaks that pattern.

In Soulbit Academy we already covered how a company in Colombia should declare its crypto assets to DIAN in an earlier guide. This piece covers something different: what a crypto asset service provider now reports on its own, without the company submitting anything, and what it means for DIAN to receive that data from a third party before the company ever files.

What changes with DIAN Resolution 000240 on crypto reporting

DIAN Resolution 000240 moves the source of the data from company self-reporting to mandatory provider reporting. Issued December 24, 2025 and available in the official text of Resolution 000240, it adds Chapter 11, on information exchange by crypto asset service providers, to Title 6, Part 1 of DIAN's unified tax, customs, and exchange resolution.

Before this resolution, DIAN's picture of a foreign company's Colombia-linked crypto activity depended mostly on what that company chose to disclose, either directly or through a local entity. Under Resolution 000240, the crypto asset service provider handling the exchange, custody, or transfer reports directly to DIAN, without the company involved in that submission.

Aspect	Before Resolution 000240	Under Resolution 000240
Who reports to DIAN	The company, only if it chooses to disclose its crypto activity	The crypto asset service provider, on a mandatory basis
What DIAN receives	Whatever the company includes in its own filing	User data, type of crypto asset, fair value, and number of transactions
Source of the data	Taxpayer self-reporting	Direct provider report, without company involvement
When the data gets cross-checked	Only during a targeted audit of that company	Systematically, every year, starting with tax year 2026

Why does this matter for a finance team managing Colombian payroll or vendors from abroad?

Resolution 000240 matters because it shifts the risk from "DIAN might never find out" to "DIAN likely already knows." A company that previously understated Colombia-linked crypto activity in its own filings, betting nobody would verify it, now faces an independent report the provider sends on its own schedule. Any gap between the two numbers surfaces the moment DIAN runs its first cross-check.

Who counts as a crypto asset service provider and what it must report

A crypto asset service provider, under Resolution 000240, is any natural or legal person offering exchange, trading, or transfer services for crypto assets on behalf of its users, including platforms and intermediaries involved in those operations. The resolution does not regulate the company that simply uses those services as a client.

What the provider must report to DIAN includes user identification data, the type of crypto asset involved in each transaction, its fair value, and the number of transactions carried out during the period. This is the exact data block that triggers an automatic comparison against whatever a company or individual already declared on their own.

Can a company confirm whether its crypto asset service provider already reports under Resolution 000240?

A company can and should ask its provider directly, because the resolution does not publish an open list of reporting entities. Whether a given provider counts as an obligated party depends on where it operates, under what legal structure it provides the service, and whether it falls under the Multilateral Agreement behind the resolution. Confirming this now avoids surprises once DIAN starts running cross-checks in the years ahead.

When Resolution 000240 takes effect and the deadlines a foreign finance team should track

Resolution 000240 applies starting with tax year 2026, and a crypto asset service provider must file its annual report with DIAN by the last business day of May of the year following the reported period. Although the resolution was issued in December 2025, it does not require retroactive data from years before 2026.

That May filing deadline lines up with DIAN's existing calendar for third-party information from other economic agents, which suggests the agency will fold this new data flow into processes it already runs rather than building a separate channel. For a foreign finance team, that means any mismatch between what a Colombian entity or counterparty declared and what the provider reported is likely to surface in DIAN's routine cross-checks, not in some exceptional review.

Milestone	Date
Resolution 000240 issued	December 24, 2025
First reportable tax year	2026
Provider's filing deadline with DIAN	Last business day of May of the following year
OECD CARF framework takes effect	January 1, 2026
First international automatic exchange under CARF	2027

The OECD's CARF: the international framework behind the resolution

The Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework, known as CARF, is the OECD standard for automatic exchange of crypto-related tax information between countries. Colombia signed the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement under this framework on October 31, 2024, a commitment that Resolution 000240 implements at the domestic level.

CARF takes effect on January 1, 2026, with data collection running through that year and the first automatic exchange between signatory tax authorities scheduled for 2027. That means crypto data tied to Colombian counterparties could eventually be matched against data received by other signatory jurisdictions, and the same holds in reverse for a foreign company's own tax authority receiving Colombia-sourced data.

This international push is not unique to Colombia. Dozens of jurisdictions have signed the same multilateral agreement around the same period, which signals that automatic crypto reporting between countries is not an isolated DIAN initiative but the local rollout of a standard other tax authorities are adopting too. It is the same logic of cross-border traceability we cover in our piece on the FATF travel rule for companies handling crypto payments: different bodies, the same goal of data traveling with the transaction.

The Article 651 penalty when a provider misreports or fails to report

Article 651 of Colombia's Tax Code sets a penalty of between 0.5% and 1% of the value of information not supplied, supplied with errors, or filed late. That penalty applies to the crypto asset service provider that fails to comply with Resolution 000240, not directly to the company or individual whose activity it covers.

That does not make the issue irrelevant for a foreign finance team. If a provider reports incomplete or inaccurate data about a Colombian entity's or contractor's crypto activity, and that entity declared a different figure on its own, the mismatch still lands on the company to explain to DIAN, even when the error originated with the third-party provider. Keeping an internal record of transactions, with dates, counterparties, and amounts, remains the strongest defense against a cross-check that does not line up.

What this means for a company that already declares its Colombian crypto activity

A company that already declares its Colombian crypto activity correctly does not face a new risk under Resolution 000240; it faces an additional layer of verification for something it was already doing right. In that case, the provider's report acts as an external confirmation that matches the filing.

For a foreign company that does not yet have a clear process for documenting and reporting crypto activity tied to Colombia, we cover that process in detail in our guide on DIAN and crypto for a company in Colombia. That guide covers what to document and how DIAN treats crypto assets on the balance sheet; this article covers the missing piece, the report that arrives from outside the company. Reading both together gives the fuller picture.

Does this resolution change which crypto operations are taxable in Colombia?

This resolution does not change which operations trigger tax effects, nor does it alter the foreign exchange regime that applies to companies operating in Colombia or the withholding tax on payments abroad, topics we cover separately. Resolution 000240 is an information-reporting rule, not a substantive rule about what must be paid or declared. That underlying regime stays the same; what changes is who tells DIAN what happened.

What Soulbit delivers around Resolution 000240 and what it does not

Soulbit currently offers institutional custody of stablecoin balances such as USDC and USDT, conversion to local currency, mass payroll disbursement, and local bank rails in Colombia, with KYB and anti-money-laundering checks on every transaction. Those checks generate, by design, a traceable record of the date, amount, and counterparty for each movement, which is useful for a company's own internal documentation.

What Soulbit does not do is determine whether it counts as a reporting crypto asset service provider under Resolution 000240 in any given jurisdiction, or prepare and file a client's tax return with DIAN. It also does not replace the reconciliation between stablecoin payments and a company's books, or accounting for USDC under IFRS. Confirming any provider's reporting status, Soulbit included, and a company's specific tax obligations, is a matter for a qualified tax advisor.