Seychelles

Confidentiality is workable so long as the regulated firm can identify the parties and disclose on demand. Encrypted amounts are not the thing being restricted.

What Seychelles actually says

Seychelles matters here because of how many crypto entities are domiciled in it rather than because of anything it says about confidentiality, and it says nothing. No located instrument restricts anonymity-enhancing assets. What changed is the plumbing around that silence. The 2024 Act arrived with an unusually complete set of regulations, and the regulator paired them with substance requirements and guidance on what counts as operating in or from Seychelles. That combination closes the structure anonymity-tolerant venues have historically relied on: registering in a jurisdiction with no privacy rules while serving users everywhere else. The absence of a prohibition is becoming less useful than it looks.

What this means for confidential transactions

Bubble is built for exactly this shape of obligation: amounts and balances live on chain as ciphertexts, computation happens without decryption, and the only disclosure path is an on-chain access list through which an authorized party - an auditor, a supervisor, a counterparty - can request scoped decryption. That is confidentiality from the public, not from the regulator.