BCAS reposted this
Something I've been saying for two years is now confirmed by ESMA in their latest MiCA Q&A update - a VASP registration under the 5AMLD does *not* count as a licence, and will be useless to seamlessly switch to a MiCA licence. Only Malta & (limitedly) France can use the simplified MiCA licensing process. Why limitedly for France? Because they only have SocGen licensed under the regime that is deemed to be MiCA-equivalent - all their DASP/5AMLD registrations are still not eligible for the simplified licensing process. Confident in predicting that come January 2025, only a small fraction of all the EU-based exchanges and other service providers will be anywhere near attaining their MiCA licence.
There have been some rather confusing communications coming out of Poland regarding their cryptocurrency register and a draft law on the sector which seems to mimic MiCA.
Brief note: In Germany, institutions that have authorisation for crypto custody business or other financial services relating to crypto assets and are not CRR credit institutions can also make use of the simplified procedure under Art. 143 (6) MiCAR. But of course this has nothing to do with a VASP license. We'll talk :)
I would not say useless in a way that some of the documents submitted to the competent authorities under the transposed 5AMLD, as long as they're updated and refer to matters that are covered in both MiCA and 5AMLD (e.g., information on qualifying holdings, management and group/corporate structure) may not be required in the course of the MiCA authorization, under the proportionality principle. But yeah, other than these cases, it will mostly be a whole new process for VASPs in the majority of the EU countries.
I’m not sure that I would agree regarding the French regime. The DASP registration is actually much more similar to an authorization. It’s a licensing process where many documents are submitted and reviewed, and the regulator eventually validates the registration and allows the DASP to operate. It’s not a mere registration by notification (i.e. without any substantial review by a regulatory authority).
Its not a question of being useless rather than having been maybe badly explained or understood. The registration is a mandatory thing since 2019 and stems from FATF recommendations to combat financial crime. Its not and never was a license to carry-out regulated business. Also there is another issue to adress, ie the fact that for regulated businesses its the regulations that must drive technology: regulations are technologically neutral. Indeed many firms have not fully grasped those facts and therefore obtaining an agreement may be challenging. Call us if you need any support #Deontea #MiCA
But they will be able to continue to operate as before under 143(3), no?
Is that true Martin Hanzl and Luigi Cantisani ? I believe that Germany, Austria and Italy think different. The law reads different certainly.
I agree. You'd have to be naive to think that many players will get their MiCA approval, especially in early 2025. Project owners will have to be smart and position themselves in the ecosystems that will be best equipped to take advantage of them, while optimizing tax and social security contributions. Quite a challenge.
Finland ❤️
Founding Partner (Crypto Regulation) - d&a partners
3moFrench registered DASP under the French 'reinforced DASP regime' can also benefit from the MiCA fast track process. Numerous companies are undergoing reinforced registration in France at the moment.