Should the business model whereby a crypto-asset service provider (CASP) provides exchange services but only ever allows clients to collect their balance in fiat currency be allowed?

Is the preparation of a white paper under MiCA mandatory for crypto-asset offerings that fall under the exceptions in Article 4(2) and 4(3) of MiCA, where the offeror only intends to have the token traded on DEX platforms or CEXs in other jurisdictions (i.e. outside the European Union)?

Where a crypto-asset service provider (CASP) provides execution of orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients (as defined in Article 3(1)(21) of MiCA), does the obligation under Article 78(5) of MiCA for the CASP to inform their clients about the possibility that their orders “might be executed outside a trading platform” and to obtain “the prior express consent of their clients before proceeding to execute their orders outside a trading platform” apply whenever a CASP’s order execution policy provides for the possibility that client orders might be executed outside of CASPs that are authorized in accordance with Article 59 of MiCA to provide the service of ‘operation of a trading platform for crypto-assets’ as defined in Article 3(1)(18) of MiCA?

Does MiCA permit crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) to earn interest on client funds deposited in a savings account at a credit institution?

Do “copy trading services” (also referred as “auto trading services”) related to crypto-assets fall within the scope of portfolio management or any other crypto-asset services as listed in Article 3(1)(16) of MiCA?