<![CDATA[The development of fintech lending in Indonesia and Malaysia continues to grow rapidly, but its implementation still shows a gap between legal provisions and real-world conditions. Such cases include default cases due to alleged fraud on the TaniFund platform in Indonesia and the operation of the unlicensed Hap2Py platform in Malaysia. Consequently, legal protection for fintech lending service users remains uncertain. This study aims to analyze and compare the legal regulations governing fintech lending supervision in Indonesia and Malaysia based on current legal provisions, and to recommend future legal regulations for fintech lending supervision to ensure legal certainty and protect service users. This study uses a normative legal research method with a statutory and comparative approach. The data used are secondary data consisting of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials collected through literature review and analyzed using systematic, comparative, and argumentative interpretation techniques regarding the legal regulations governing fintech lending supervision in both countries. The research findings indicate that Indonesia, through POJK 40/2024, has an advantage in the specificity and comprehensiveness of fintech lending supervisory regulations, while Malaysia, through the CMSA, has an advantage in the strength of criminal sanctions as a deterrent to violations. Future regulatory recommendations for Indonesia include adjustments to percentage-based administrative fines, user protection reserve fund requirements, complaint resolution deadlines, technology-based supervision, periodic system resilience testing, and the right to algorithmic explanations. For Malaysia, recommendations include periodic reporting requirements, explicit minimum capital requirements, registration decision deadlines, specific governance guidelines, and accessible dispute resolution mechanisms.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
