Who is the legitimate financial regulator for the Union of Comoros? Although a couple of island authorities claim their legitimacy, the answer is singular: it’s only The Banque Centrale des Comores (BCC).
If you thought about $20,000 and some tropical branding could buy regulatory legitimacy, think again.
Comoros: Islands at the Centre of CFD Regulation
The Union of Comoros is made up of three islands off East Africa: Ngazidja (Grande Comore), Mwali (Mohéli) and Ndzwani (Anjouan). It has enjoyed its fair share of political and legal oddities. But when it comes to financial regulation, the realities are far from what is being promoted.
Among the key players in this controversy are the Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority (AOFA) and the Mwali International Services Authority (MISA). Both sell “banking,” “forex,” and “insurance” licenses, but there are significant questions about their authority to issue them.
Read more:119 Brokerage Firms Registered in Mwali in 2024
It can be understood that regulatory heavyweights such as the Banque Centrale des Comores (BCC), IMF, World Bank, and FATF have all made one thing abundantly clear: AOFA and MISA have zero legal standing and exist solely to sell paper licenses, not to protect investors or oversee markets.
My argument below is made in good faith and is based on my understanding of the supporting evidence I included here.
Finance Magnates approached both AOFA and MISA to understand their arguments regarding the legitimacy claim, but did not receive any response.
The Official Position: Not Even Close to Legit
The promoters of these licenses argue that the autonomous islands of Anjouan and Mwali have the right to create their own financial laws. This claim, however, is verifiably false: Article 9 of the Union Constitution and Organic Law No. 05-003/AU establish that banking and financial legislation fall under the exclusive competence of the Union government, not the individual islands.
International bodies also concur. A detailed 2010 report from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) investigating the country’s anti-money laundering framework (Report No. 10/320) concluded that the offshore financial institutions created on the islands “were created in violation of the Union’s law” and “had no legal basis when they were created.”
This means the very laws AOFA and MISA are based on—such as the “Offshore Finance Authority Act 2005” —were enacted “without effect” and in violation of the nation’s constitution.
The June 2022 communiqué from BCC stated as plainly as possible: “The Central Bank of the Comoros informs the public about fictitious structures claiming to issue licenses to banks and financial institutions in the Union of the Comoros” (the document in French is attached below).
Among those listed as bogus in the same document are the Mwali International Services Authority, the Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority, Anjouan Corporate Services, and others.
The Central Bank of Comoros warns the public against several banks that claim to be licensed
The same communiqué was re-published as a reminder last December 2025 on the website of the Ministry of Finance here.
If you want to know which banks are actually legit, BCC publishes an official list, and neither AOFA nor MISA nor any bank “licensed” by either makes the cut.
The World Bank and IMF have also flagged the “offshore banking” schemes coming from Comoros as illegal, blatantly breaching the law that assigns financial regulation solely to the Union government, not individual islands. The US State Department and OECD have repeatedly warned about the impossibility of safely handling money via these “licensed” entities.
Recently, I have even seen circulating fake virtual asset licenses issued by the Ministry of Finance of Comoros, which is not in charge of or authorised to issue such licenses; and such certificates contained references to fake, made-up financial services Acts.
The Anatomy of a Controversial Regulator
Want to see how the scheme operates? A quick search leads to a network of websites presenting themselves as official regulators or registrars tied to the Comoros Islands. These sites promise “quick licenses,” display supposed government endorsements, and publish registers of banks and brokers that do not appear to exist. Several of them even mimic the branding of real public authorities or differ only slightly in spelling, giving the impression of legitimacy while promoting offshore licenses with minimal scrutiny.
Some sites even try to spin off the Comoros license as being “recognised by international banks”, a claim so unconvincing that it comes off as regulatory stand-up comedy.
Here’s a particularly revealing snippet: many SWIFT codes listed in these registers are fake, and even a cursory check with online databases or the actual BCC’s records will show the bank doesn’t actually exist.
Further investigation into MISA reveals more red flags. There are at least three conflicting websites, and comically, these fake authorities have even issued their own warnings about cloned websites, suggesting infighting or competing fraudulent operations.
The Governance Gambit: Featuring Mohamed Saïd Fazul
It gets even wilder. Some of these sites invoke Mohamed Saïd Fazul, the former governor of Mohéli, as if his endorsement means regulatory legitimacy. Fazul, however, left office in 2024 and was succeeded by Chamina Ben Mohamed; none of the MISA websites highlights any endorsement from him.
The screenshot of a Mwali regulator invoking the endorsement of Mohamed Saïd Fazul
This appears to be regulatory legitimacy based on a Wikipedia footnote, not on constitutional law.
The real Constitution of Comoros makes Union-level financial regulation exclusive, not delegable, not up for island spin, so any MISA or AOFA claims to have “government endorsement” are about as genuine as a three-dollar bill.
Let me clarify: even if Fazul were still in power (he is not) and was actually endorsing this practice (I don’t know that), that would have been irrelevant because, again, local islands cannot authorise or regulate financial services.
Why Brokers Really Buy Comoros Licenses
Some might attribute the rise of Comoros licenses solely to MetaQuotes’ licensing requirements for its MT4 and MT5 platforms.
When MetaQuotes tightened its policies, it limited white-labelling and required brokers to hold a financial services license before they could obtain that coveted software. That created a scramble, which further worsened in January 2023, when Saint Vincent, the most popular budget-friendly jurisdiction for our industry (where Forex/CFD providers can lawfully operate under an exemption rather than a license), introduced a rule under which only financial services providers holding a proper license abroad, at least at the group level, could stay.
This is where the Comoros “workaround” comes in.
Opportunistic agents began selling MISA and AOFA registrations as a quick-fix”. Just register here,” they say, “and you can satisfy the MetaQuotes documentation requirement”. And technically, this has worked for some: brokers get their company paper, send it to MetaQuotes, and get their platform license. The same is true with many technology, liquidity and payment providers who conveniently decided to believe in the Comoros mirage.
All this said, blaming these providers would be a gross oversimplification, since they are not in the business of forcing companies to get specific licenses.
Many smaller brokers, especially targeting less sophisticated retail traders, and irrespective of their electronic trading platform of choice, secure Comoros licenses simply to tick the “regulated” box, enhance perceived credibility to provide reassurance to clients who might not dig deeper.
Adding to the mess are broker-comparison and rating portals that amplify brokers’ desirability if they hold any license, including a Comoros license. A broker boasting a Comoros license can toy with rankings, attract more leads, and gain unfavourable trust without deserving it.
This creates a perverse incentive curve: brokers seek cheap licenses to play the trust game, portals reward those brokers with better visibility, and clients get misled, all while true regulatory compliance takes a backseat.
The Fallout: Why Comoros Licenses Are a Regulatory Disaster
Let’s break down the risks:
· Banking Access: International banks and payment processors turn cold or outright refuse onboarding for Comoros-licensed entities. SWIFT code checks routinely fail for “Comoros” banks, and payment systems flag them as high-risk.
· Reputation: Any client, regulator, or partner who googles the license story soon learns the truth: the license carries the credibility of a Monopoly money bill. Future licensing with FCA, CySEC, ASIC, SFC? It might become challenging because they might ask the applicant why they were offering financial services under a fake license, and “I did not know” is not going to sound like a professional answer.
· Operational Risk: Without real regulatory oversight, clients and firms face unenforceable contracts and financial loss.
· Marketing: Major ad platforms increasingly block unregulated operators, and even unsophisticated clients are getting wise to the ruse, thanks to public warnings.
If you hold one of these licenses, you might counter-argue that there are indeed brokers holding both a Comoros and other licenses under the same brand, which means they did pass due diligence from other regulators. Depending on your risk appetite, you can decide that my statements above are wrong, or you can realise that you might be sitting on a regulatory time bomb and are still on time to bow out. Once it blows, the reputational damage will be irreversible.
Do not do Comoros if you want to grow, create corporate value, and one day exit. And if you are looking at a small and quick buck there are better alternatives for that, too.
Finally, a disclaimer: With 23 years of experience in this industry, I advise CFD broker-dealers and virtual asset providers on acquisitions, regulatory strategy, and related matters. The statements expressed herein are based on my own research, understanding, and interpretation of the subject, conducted in good faith. Portions of the supporting documentation have been included in this article.
Any person or entity mentioned in this article, some of whom have already been contacted by Finance Magnates, has the right to respond. Should they believe that any statements made herein are inaccurate, incomplete, or outdated, they are invited to provide supporting evidence for their position.
Nothing contained in this article should be construed as legal advice.
Who is the legitimate financial regulator for the Union of Comoros? Although a couple of island authorities claim their legitimacy, the answer is singular: it’s only The Banque Centrale des Comores (BCC).
If you thought about $20,000 and some tropical branding could buy regulatory legitimacy, think again.
Comoros: Islands at the Centre of CFD Regulation
The Union of Comoros is made up of three islands off East Africa: Ngazidja (Grande Comore), Mwali (Mohéli) and Ndzwani (Anjouan). It has enjoyed its fair share of political and legal oddities. But when it comes to financial regulation, the realities are far from what is being promoted.
Among the key players in this controversy are the Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority (AOFA) and the Mwali International Services Authority (MISA). Both sell “banking,” “forex,” and “insurance” licenses, but there are significant questions about their authority to issue them.
Read more:119 Brokerage Firms Registered in Mwali in 2024
It can be understood that regulatory heavyweights such as the Banque Centrale des Comores (BCC), IMF, World Bank, and FATF have all made one thing abundantly clear: AOFA and MISA have zero legal standing and exist solely to sell paper licenses, not to protect investors or oversee markets.
My argument below is made in good faith and is based on my understanding of the supporting evidence I included here.
Finance Magnates approached both AOFA and MISA to understand their arguments regarding the legitimacy claim, but did not receive any response.
The Official Position: Not Even Close to Legit
The promoters of these licenses argue that the autonomous islands of Anjouan and Mwali have the right to create their own financial laws. This claim, however, is verifiably false: Article 9 of the Union Constitution and Organic Law No. 05-003/AU establish that banking and financial legislation fall under the exclusive competence of the Union government, not the individual islands.
International bodies also concur. A detailed 2010 report from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) investigating the country’s anti-money laundering framework (Report No. 10/320) concluded that the offshore financial institutions created on the islands “were created in violation of the Union’s law” and “had no legal basis when they were created.”
This means the very laws AOFA and MISA are based on—such as the “Offshore Finance Authority Act 2005” —were enacted “without effect” and in violation of the nation’s constitution.
The June 2022 communiqué from BCC stated as plainly as possible: “The Central Bank of the Comoros informs the public about fictitious structures claiming to issue licenses to banks and financial institutions in the Union of the Comoros” (the document in French is attached below).
Among those listed as bogus in the same document are the Mwali International Services Authority, the Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority, Anjouan Corporate Services, and others.
The Central Bank of Comoros warns the public against several banks that claim to be licensed
The same communiqué was re-published as a reminder last December 2025 on the website of the Ministry of Finance here.
If you want to know which banks are actually legit, BCC publishes an official list, and neither AOFA nor MISA nor any bank “licensed” by either makes the cut.
The World Bank and IMF have also flagged the “offshore banking” schemes coming from Comoros as illegal, blatantly breaching the law that assigns financial regulation solely to the Union government, not individual islands. The US State Department and OECD have repeatedly warned about the impossibility of safely handling money via these “licensed” entities.
Recently, I have even seen circulating fake virtual asset licenses issued by the Ministry of Finance of Comoros, which is not in charge of or authorised to issue such licenses; and such certificates contained references to fake, made-up financial services Acts.
The Anatomy of a Controversial Regulator
Want to see how the scheme operates? A quick search leads to a network of websites presenting themselves as official regulators or registrars tied to the Comoros Islands. These sites promise “quick licenses,” display supposed government endorsements, and publish registers of banks and brokers that do not appear to exist. Several of them even mimic the branding of real public authorities or differ only slightly in spelling, giving the impression of legitimacy while promoting offshore licenses with minimal scrutiny.
Some sites even try to spin off the Comoros license as being “recognised by international banks”, a claim so unconvincing that it comes off as regulatory stand-up comedy.
Here’s a particularly revealing snippet: many SWIFT codes listed in these registers are fake, and even a cursory check with online databases or the actual BCC’s records will show the bank doesn’t actually exist.
Further investigation into MISA reveals more red flags. There are at least three conflicting websites, and comically, these fake authorities have even issued their own warnings about cloned websites, suggesting infighting or competing fraudulent operations.
The Governance Gambit: Featuring Mohamed Saïd Fazul
It gets even wilder. Some of these sites invoke Mohamed Saïd Fazul, the former governor of Mohéli, as if his endorsement means regulatory legitimacy. Fazul, however, left office in 2024 and was succeeded by Chamina Ben Mohamed; none of the MISA websites highlights any endorsement from him.
The screenshot of a Mwali regulator invoking the endorsement of Mohamed Saïd Fazul
This appears to be regulatory legitimacy based on a Wikipedia footnote, not on constitutional law.
The real Constitution of Comoros makes Union-level financial regulation exclusive, not delegable, not up for island spin, so any MISA or AOFA claims to have “government endorsement” are about as genuine as a three-dollar bill.
Let me clarify: even if Fazul were still in power (he is not) and was actually endorsing this practice (I don’t know that), that would have been irrelevant because, again, local islands cannot authorise or regulate financial services.
Why Brokers Really Buy Comoros Licenses
Some might attribute the rise of Comoros licenses solely to MetaQuotes’ licensing requirements for its MT4 and MT5 platforms.
When MetaQuotes tightened its policies, it limited white-labelling and required brokers to hold a financial services license before they could obtain that coveted software. That created a scramble, which further worsened in January 2023, when Saint Vincent, the most popular budget-friendly jurisdiction for our industry (where Forex/CFD providers can lawfully operate under an exemption rather than a license), introduced a rule under which only financial services providers holding a proper license abroad, at least at the group level, could stay.
This is where the Comoros “workaround” comes in.
Opportunistic agents began selling MISA and AOFA registrations as a quick-fix”. Just register here,” they say, “and you can satisfy the MetaQuotes documentation requirement”. And technically, this has worked for some: brokers get their company paper, send it to MetaQuotes, and get their platform license. The same is true with many technology, liquidity and payment providers who conveniently decided to believe in the Comoros mirage.
All this said, blaming these providers would be a gross oversimplification, since they are not in the business of forcing companies to get specific licenses.
Many smaller brokers, especially targeting less sophisticated retail traders, and irrespective of their electronic trading platform of choice, secure Comoros licenses simply to tick the “regulated” box, enhance perceived credibility to provide reassurance to clients who might not dig deeper.
Adding to the mess are broker-comparison and rating portals that amplify brokers’ desirability if they hold any license, including a Comoros license. A broker boasting a Comoros license can toy with rankings, attract more leads, and gain unfavourable trust without deserving it.
This creates a perverse incentive curve: brokers seek cheap licenses to play the trust game, portals reward those brokers with better visibility, and clients get misled, all while true regulatory compliance takes a backseat.
The Fallout: Why Comoros Licenses Are a Regulatory Disaster
Let’s break down the risks:
· Banking Access: International banks and payment processors turn cold or outright refuse onboarding for Comoros-licensed entities. SWIFT code checks routinely fail for “Comoros” banks, and payment systems flag them as high-risk.
· Reputation: Any client, regulator, or partner who googles the license story soon learns the truth: the license carries the credibility of a Monopoly money bill. Future licensing with FCA, CySEC, ASIC, SFC? It might become challenging because they might ask the applicant why they were offering financial services under a fake license, and “I did not know” is not going to sound like a professional answer.
· Operational Risk: Without real regulatory oversight, clients and firms face unenforceable contracts and financial loss.
· Marketing: Major ad platforms increasingly block unregulated operators, and even unsophisticated clients are getting wise to the ruse, thanks to public warnings.
If you hold one of these licenses, you might counter-argue that there are indeed brokers holding both a Comoros and other licenses under the same brand, which means they did pass due diligence from other regulators. Depending on your risk appetite, you can decide that my statements above are wrong, or you can realise that you might be sitting on a regulatory time bomb and are still on time to bow out. Once it blows, the reputational damage will be irreversible.
Do not do Comoros if you want to grow, create corporate value, and one day exit. And if you are looking at a small and quick buck there are better alternatives for that, too.
Finally, a disclaimer: With 23 years of experience in this industry, I advise CFD broker-dealers and virtual asset providers on acquisitions, regulatory strategy, and related matters. The statements expressed herein are based on my own research, understanding, and interpretation of the subject, conducted in good faith. Portions of the supporting documentation have been included in this article.
Any person or entity mentioned in this article, some of whom have already been contacted by Finance Magnates, has the right to respond. Should they believe that any statements made herein are inaccurate, incomplete, or outdated, they are invited to provide supporting evidence for their position.
Nothing contained in this article should be construed as legal advice.
