The Securities and Exchange Commission will lift its nearly five-year freeze on new online lending platforms starting August 1, 2026, ending a moratorium that had been in place since November 5, 2021 under SEC Memorandum Circular No. 10, Series of 2021. The replacement rules, issued July 7 as SEC Memorandum Circular No. 20, Series of 2026, open the market back up to new entrants but attach a materially heavier compliance burden than existed before the freeze went into effect.
The original moratorium was a blunt-instrument response to a real problem. In the early 2020s, a wave of predatory digital lenders had proliferated with minimal oversight, harvesting borrowers’ phone contacts without meaningful consent and using them for harassment-style collection tactics against family, friends, and employers when a borrower fell behind. The SEC’s response was simply to stop licensing new online lending platforms and financing loan companies entirely while it worked out a more durable framework, a freeze that ran far longer than most emergency measures typically do.
That framework has now arrived, and it’s built around capital and disclosure rather than an outright ban. Financing companies operating without an online lending platform still need a minimum of 15 million pesos in paid-up capital; lending companies without a platform need 5 million pesos. But the requirement scales sharply for companies that actually operate digital lending apps, climbing as high as 100 million pesos for a financing company running five platforms and 50 million pesos for a lending company doing the same, with five platforms set as the hard cap per company under a single certificate of authority.
The consumer-protection layer is where the new rules diverge most clearly from the pre-2021 environment. Lenders can no longer harvest a borrower’s phone contacts without explicit consent, and third parties, family, friends, employers, cannot be contacted for collection or shaming purposes without separate written legal consent from those specific individuals, closing off the exact tactic that triggered the original crackdown. Borrowers must be shown the full loan terms, principal, interest rate, service fees, penalties, and repayment schedule, before approval, and must actively confirm they understand and accept those terms rather than simply clicking through a disclosure buried in an app’s terms of service. Registered lenders must also report to the Credit Information Corporation under the Credit Information System Act, giving regulators and other lenders a shared view of a borrower’s existing debt exposure that didn’t reliably exist during the pre-moratorium free-for-all.
SEC Chairperson Francis Lim framed the new rules in exactly those terms: “The SEC welcomes financial innovation but will not tolerate predatory lending practices,” he said, describing the goal as fostering “a safe, transparent, and competitive online lending environment.” Violations, deceptive app interfaces, unregistered apps, or breaches of the new disclosure and collection rules, can trigger immediate suspension, substantial fines, or outright revocation of a company’s certificate of authority.
The five-year gap between the freeze and its replacement is itself worth dwelling on. Few regulatory moratoriums intended as stopgap measures run anywhere close to five years, and the length of the pause reflects how genuinely difficult it was for the SEC to design a framework that could reopen the market without simply recreating the harassment and hidden-fee problems the freeze was meant to stop. In the interim, demand for the kind of short-tenor, small-ticket consumer credit these platforms provide didn’t pause at all, it migrated toward the SEC-registered incumbents that survived the freeze, toward BSP-licensed digital banks like Tonik and GoTyme building out their own lending books, and toward buy-now-pay-later providers operating in a comparatively lighter regulatory lane. The reopening doesn’t just add competitors to that market, it formally acknowledges that five years of pent-up demand and pent-up capital are both looking for a way back in at the same time.
For the existing Philippine fintech lending sector, Tala, Cashalo, Digido, BillEase and the rest, this is less a threat than a validation exercise. Every incumbent that has spent the moratorium years building a compliant, SEC-registered lending operation now gets a regulatory framework that formally codifies the practices some of them were already following voluntarily, while raising the capital bar high enough to keep out the kind of undercapitalized, fly-by-night operators that gave the whole category a bad name in the early 2020s. The five-platform cap per company also blocks a specific abuse pattern regulators had flagged: operators spinning up multiple lightly-branded apps to route around a single bad reputation or a single platform’s regulatory history.
The real test starts August 1, when the SEC actually begins accepting and approving new applications rather than just publishing the rules that will govern them. Five years is a long time for capital to sit on the sidelines waiting for a market to reopen, and the Philippines’ underbanked lending demand, the same demand fueling BNPL growth and digital bank consumer lending elsewhere in the sector, hasn’t gone anywhere in the interim. Whether the new entrants that show up are better-capitalized, better-behaved versions of the platforms the moratorium was built to stop, or find new ways around rules written for the last generation of predatory lending tactics, will depend largely on how aggressively the SEC actually enforces the framework it has just published rather than how well-designed the framework reads on paper.
Share this article