Tokenization in Dubai: Opening Real Estate to Everyone
Tokenization in Dubai: Opening Real Estate to Everyone is the process of converting ownership rights in an asset—such as a villa, apartment, or commercial space—into digital tokens stored on a blockchain. Each token represents a share of the asset, and investors can buy as many tokens as they can afford. Instead of needing millions to buy a Dubai property, an investor could purchase tokens worth a few hundred or thousand dollars, gaining proportional rights to income and value appreciation.
In real estate, tokenization can be structured to represent: Equity ownership in the property.
in the property. Income rights , such as rental yields.
, such as rental yields. Debt claims secured by the property.
This fractional model is making it possible for everyday investors to tap into Dubai's lucrative property market.
Several factors make Dubai an ideal hub for tokenized real estate: Supportive Regulation
Dubai has established the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), which oversees digital asset activities, including tokenized property platforms. Within the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) has its own framework for investment and crypto tokens, providing legal clarity for issuers and investors.
Proactive Land Department Initiatives
The Dubai Land Department (DLD) has already tested tokenization through pilot projects that enable fractional ownership. In some cases, tokenized offerings have sold out in minutes, attracting investors from multiple countries.
Global Appeal
Dubai's position as a cosmopolitan, tax-friendly business hub makes it attractive for both local and international participants. Tokenization allows cross-border investors to participate without complicated legal structures.
Asset Preparation – The property is placed in a legal entity such as a special purpose vehicle (SPV) or trust. Token Creation – Digital tokens are minted on a blockchain, each representing a fractional share. Investor Onboarding – Buyers complete KYC (Know Your Customer) checks to comply with AML (Anti-Money Laundering) laws. Trading & Ownership – Tokens can be bought, sold, or transferred through regulated platforms, sometimes enabling secondary market liquidity. Income Distribution – Rental income or profits are distributed proportionally to token holders, often via smart contracts.
For Investors: Lower Entry Barriers – Affordable minimum investments open the market to more participants.
– Affordable minimum investments open the market to more participants. Diversification – Investors can own small stakes in multiple properties instead of tying capital to one asset.
– Investors can own small stakes in multiple properties instead of tying capital to one asset. Transparency – Blockchain records transactions, reducing disputes over ownership.
– Blockchain records transactions, reducing disputes over ownership. Potential Liquidity – Tokenized assets can be traded on regulated platforms.
For Developers and Asset Owners: Access to a Larger Investor Pool – Global retail and accredited investors can participate.
– Global retail and accredited investors can participate. Faster Fundraising – Digital offerings can be completed in days, not months.
– Digital offerings can be completed in days, not months. Reduced Administrative Costs – Smart contracts automate record-keeping and payments.
Despite its promise, tokenization isn't without challenges: Regulatory Compliance – Only platforms licensed under VARA or DFSA can operate legally in Dubai.
– Only platforms licensed under VARA or DFSA can operate legally in Dubai. Market Liquidity – While tokenized assets can trade, there is no guarantee of an active secondary market.
– While tokenized assets can trade, there is no guarantee of an active secondary market. Technical Risks – Cybersecurity threats or smart contract vulnerabilities can cause losses.
– Cybersecurity threats or smart contract vulnerabilities can cause losses. Asset Quality – Tokenization does not improve the underlying property's performance; due diligence is still essential.
As more developers and platforms adopt this model, tokenization could become a mainstream way to invest in Dubai real estate. With regulatory support, secure blockchain infrastructure, and strong demand from international investors, Dubai has the potential to lead the global market in this space.
The vision is clear: anyone, anywhere can own a share of Dubai's most sought-after properties, participate in rental income, and trade their holdings with a few clicks—all while enjoying the transparency and efficiency of blockchain.
Conclusion
Tokenization in Dubai is not just a tech trend; it's a financial innovation reshaping the way people invest in property. By breaking down traditional barriers, it opens the door for small investors, diversifies funding sources for developers, and injects liquidity into an asset class that has historically been difficult to trade. If done responsibly, it could make Dubai's real estate market one of the most inclusive in the world.
TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Police seize £180,000 Aston Martin deposit from Andrew Tate
Police have seized £180,000 from Andrew Tate after a court heard he paid the money for a special edition Aston Martin through tax evasion and money laundering. Devon and Cornwall Police obtained account freezing and forfeiture orders at Westminster Magistrates' Court for the Valhalla supercar deposit. The funds add to almost £2.7m of criminal assets seized from Mr Tate and his brother Tristan, since December 2024. The police action was submitted to the court on the same basis as previous applications made by the force last year. At that time, Judge Goldspring said in his judgment that he was satisfied of the "overall criminality of deliberate and dishonest cheat of the revenue". He added that the Tate brothers had "engaged in long-standing conduct to evade their tax". The pair had not opposed the latest account freezing and forfeiture orders, the police statement said. Sarah Clarke KC, representing Devon and Cornwall Police, told the court the funds deposited with Aston Martin originally came from a Coinbase cryptocurrency account. The account held multiple cryptocurrencies purchased with funds derived from the Tate brothers' business activities. No tax or VAT had been paid on the funds, which had been laundered through the bank accounts that were the subject of the previous applications, the court heard. Detective Superintendent Jon Bancroft said: 'This latest judgement follows on from our applications made against the Tate brothers, which resulted in a successful ruling in December 2024 and the forfeiture of nearly £2.7 million of criminal funds. 'From the outset, we aimed to demonstrate that Andrew and Tristan Tate evaded their tax obligations and laundered money. We succeeded in doing exactly that and we have succeeded again this week. 'This further successful outcome shows how we will relentlessly pursue all criminal funds without fear or favour. In a statement, the force said the money would be distributed in line with the Proceeds of Crime Act and would benefit communities, victims of crime and vulnerable people, while the Treasury would receive 50 per cent to be spent on public services. Mr Tate, a former professional kickboxer, faces a civil trial at the High Court next summer over claims of rape and sexual violence brought by four women. He and his brother are also facing prosecution in Romania over allegations of trafficking minors, sexual intercourse with a minor and money laundering. Solve the daily Crossword
The Hill
14 hours ago
- The Hill
CEO of paid protest company says it works with both sides of the aisle
(NewsNation) — President Trump alleged Friday that Democrats are paying protesters to fight his Washington, D.C., crime policies. But how do paid protests actually work? NewsNation spoke with Adam Swart, the CEO of Crowds on Demand, about his company that provides services 'for impactful advocacy campaigns, demonstrations, PR stunts, crowds for hire and corporate events,' according to its website. 'All of our protesters are sincere advocates for the cause at hand. We've been in business 13 years, so we have a large roster of people we know and have networks of others we can call upon to be compensated for expressing their sincere points of view,' Swart said. Swart said compensation for protests is typically in the low hundreds of dollars, depending on the assignment. He said organizing a protest 'is like buying an ad.' He said his company receives requests for both conservative and liberal causes. 'We have been clear that we work with both liberals and conservatives on causes that align with common-sense values. Democrats are hiring our company, and so are Republicans,' he said. He did not disclose what protests his company has been asked to be a part of. Swart previously told NewsNation that he turned down $20 million to provide protesters for ' Good Trouble Lives On ' protests in July. 'I'm rejecting it not because I don't want to take the business, but because frankly, this is going to be ineffective; it's going to make us all look bad,' Swart said of the anti-Trump protests at the time.
Forbes
21 hours ago
- Forbes
As Scammers Up Their Fraud Game, Consumers, Banks, And Law Enforcement Must Respond
Technology may make fraud easier—thanks to social media—but it may also be the way to stop it. getty Fraud schemes and scammers are increasingly making headlines, with some scratching their heads to figure out why—and how to stop it. A recent study conducted by BioCatch, a global company focused on solving next-generation digital identity challenges through examining behavioral biometrics, might offer some clarity. The survey found that 81% of Americans cited artificial intelligence (AI) as contributing to more sophisticated financial crimes, with social media (75%) and the dark web (73%) playing key roles in the equation. That data was pulled from a BioCatch survey of 800 senior fraud, anti-money laundering (AML), and risk and compliance professionals across 17 countries on five continents. The survey was an attempt to better understand how financial institutions are fighting fraud and financial crime, the impact of emerging technologies on the dark economy, and the level of collaboration among competing institutions, law enforcement, and governments. The impact on consumer wallets is significant. Nasdaq's Global Financial Crime Report estimates that $3.1 trillion in illicit funds moved through the world's financial system in 2023. Scams and fraud added up to $485.6 billion in projected losses. Of those moves, U.S. victims have taken a beating: the U.S. ranks second globally for major fraud losses. That likely explains why, in the U.S., almost all of those surveyed agree that combating activities that encompass the dark economy is important. So what can be done to stop it? Many professionals aren't quite sure. Most of those surveyed (83%) believe that their financial institutions are winning the fight against fraudsters, while only 56% believe their individual efforts have an impact on combating financial crime. That may not tell the whole story. Matt O'Neill, a former Secret Service agent, says there's a real disconnect between losses and what banks are prioritizing. Fraud losses hit individuals in the pocketbook, not banks. The banks aren't materially affected, and there hasn't been a real push to pivot from the status quo. While U.S. banks may trust technology, they don't trust each other, O'Neill explains. That means there's no meaningful sharing of information. That's a break from behaviors other countries where statistics suggest that when other countries share at scale, their losses are decreasing. (Part of the reluctance to share information may come from consumers. While 32% of those surveyed in the U.S. consider data privacy regulation as one of the main inhibitors to sharing data with other banks, 30% worry about the potential for misuse. These numbers are higher than global averages.) Nearly all (93%) of those surveyed consider their organization to be effective in fighting financial crime, and four in five of those surveyed say their banks have incorporated behavioral analysis into their technology stack to detect financial crime. Those numbers may sound impressive, but O'Neill says that criminal networks are actually outpacing banks while banks are still playing catch-up. The Role Of Law Enforcement Despite an increase in reports of fraud, law enforcement agencies are reaching out to banks less often. That means there may not be a unified effort to stop scammers. And, tellingly, it makes a real difference where the fraud happens—even when banks do contact local law enforcement, not all law enforcement have the means, ability, and time to respond to sophisticated scams and attacks. The majority of Americans working in financial crime prevention believe that law enforcement should do more when a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) is filed. By law, national banks are required to report known or suspected criminal offenses, transactions over $5,000 suspected to involve money laundering or violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), and transactions of $25,000 or more involving a criminal violation, even if no suspect is identified. The level of follow-up from those SARs may be inconsistent across banks and across demographics. Banks also report that they don't receive regular contact from law enforcement about their investigations into criminal activity. When it does happen, the contact tends to be less frequent than on a monthly basis. Customer-Focused Communications On the consumer side, banks and other financial institutions have tried to boost awareness about the potential for fraud, often by creating awareness campaigns. But Seth Ruden, Senior Director of Global Advisory at BioCatch, notes that can only go so far. 'Social engineering is so compelling,' he says, and efforts to combat it are not as effective as the tactics exercised by bad actors. Social engineering is a form of manipulation which relies on human psychology to direct behaviors. In this context, scammers may spend significant resources to convince potential victims to take certain steps like revealing personally identifiable information or transferring assets to a third party. To combat that manipulation, institutions need new controls to fight scammers, including those to alert potential victims. Oftentimes, banks may notice the potential fraud before the victim does, or before third parties do. But it may be too difficult to break the spell. Creating some friction at the consumer level could delay funds from being released. That, combined with the sharing of information between financial institutions, could be a difference maker. When funds leave an account, there's a narrow window of time before they're captured at the receiver bank. 'What if,' Ruden asks, 'we could connect in real time?' That could present an opportunity to stop or mitigate the damage. O'Neill agrees, suggesting that while precision analytics can be a real game-changer for banks, additional resources—including a human touch—can also make a difference. For example, when a potential victim is determined to send funds to a new payee, like a new romantic interest, asking the right questions could result in a pause in activity. Asking a question as simple as, 'Why would send money to someone you have never met before?' could trigger a conversation that could result in enough information to reveal that the payment is very suspicious. The key, of course, is to create friction without making it a competitive disadvantage. That, says Ruden, requires resources. Those on the other side of the equation—the fraudsters—are sophisticated actors and are willing to dedicate time and money to see a scam through. Fighting will require the same dedication from financial institutions. But it may well be the case that those spends are welcome since nearly two-thirds of those surveyed say they'd like to increase their investment in technology (those in the U.S. said so at a much higher rate than the global average). What Can Consumers Do? So much of fighting fraud still rests with the consumer. So, what can consumers do to protect themselves? O'Neill is quick to offer his advice, emphasizing, 'Never ever send money to anyone that you've never seen or touched before.' If you make a mistake, 'The cavalry isn't coming,' he says, noting that the likelihood is slim to recover the funds. 'There isn't a magic button to recover those funds,' so it's important to think it through. 'If it's going to hurt you to lose it, don't send it,' he warns. Ruden says that it's going to take a technology revolution to protect consumers. He thinks such a move should be welcomed, noting that it's in the interest of financial institutions and fiduciaries to help protect their customers. Some do a better job than others—and those are the organizations that consumers should seek out. 'Look for a culture of protection,' he advises, saying that consumers should keep an eye out for institutions that place an emphasis on fraud-fighting. This can mean existing trained fraud prevention teams or otherwise demonstrating a commitment to protect consumers through their business practices. Tax Rules For Losses If you are a victim of a scam, while you may not be able to recover your losses, you may be entitled to tax relief. Earlier this year, the IRS Office of Chief Counsel released a memo providing clarification on the deductibility of theft losses for scam victims. The memo was welcome for taxpayers who were confused about limits resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) made another tweak. Under the TCJA, for the tax years 2018 to 2025, personal casualty and theft losses are deductible only to the extent that the losses are attributable to a federally declared disaster. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act made the limits to losses permanent, with one exception: it has been expanded to include state-declared disasters. That means the theft loss deduction is still available for businesses and individuals who incur losses in transactions entered into for profit. There is no statutory definition of "a transaction entered into for profit." However, courts have determined that to meet the criteria, a primary profit motive is required. Next Steps As scammers develop new schemes to steal money and information from consumers (you can read about a new one here), the commitment to fraud prevention must evolve even faster. Understanding what kinds of scams exist and how they operate, as well as the roles that consumers, law enforcement, and financial institutions can play in mitigation and prevention, are all key. That means that education will continue to be a big part in stopping scammers. You can read the Biocatch global survey here. Forbes FBI Warns Scam Victims To Be On The Lookout For Fake Law Firms Offering To Help Recover Losses By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes IRS Issues Warnings On Tax Scams Driven By Bad Advice Often Found On Social Media By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes Some Scam Victims May Be Able To Deduct Related Losses On Their Tax Returns By Kelly Phillips Erb
