A lot of ppl are incorrectly assuming that ASIC or Parliament...

A lot of ppl are incorrectly assuming that ASIC or Parliament has the last word on everything. They really don't of enough citizens use something. Uber was technically a multinational criminal cartel who openly flouted all local taxi laws and even paid people's fines and case costs. They became quasi legitimate because it was politically impossible to ban something that almost everyone used.

Then there is the fact that a lot of the compliance in credit is totally unclear and principle based. ASIC just lost a decision in Asic vs Westpac in federal court, because they Justice said that they couldn't approve agreed fine if $35m because the conduct alleged wasn't actually a contravention by itself - using benchmarks in assessments (paraphrasing).

So the law can't always regulate a viral thing and even when it does, the regulator or consumer advocate view is often legally wrong and too heavy handed.

So apt may be regulated but fly through the responsible lending obligations because they don't charge anything and would therefore only need to assess the ability to repay the price of the goods. It may also be that they are only lending 75% in many cases with the rest being a pass through, so the assessment isn't even on the full amount. I could go on but you get the idea. Regulation is actually a blessing, as it requires economies of scale to comply cheaply and fast, creating a giant barrier to entry for competition. They only need to be faster and easier than the next best zero interest product...

And after all that, the USA/UK is all that matters. Australia will be a footnote when USA is doing 10% of all online fashion etc.