Search a question

Article 5(2) of MiCA states that “when a crypto-asset is admitted to trading on the initiative of a trading platform and a crypto-asset white paper has not been published in accordance with Article 9 in the cases required by this Regulation [emphasis added], the operator of that trading platform for crypto-assets shall comply with the requirements set out in paragraph 1 of this Article”.

In turn, Article 9 requires offerors and persons seeking admission to trading of crypto-assets other than ARTs or EMTs to publish their crypto-asset white papers and any marketing materials.

However, recital 22 of MiCA states that “Where crypto-assets have no identifiable issuer, they should not fall within the scope of Title II, III or IV of this Regulation”.

Does the expression “in the cases required by this Regulation” mean that Article 5(2) exempts operators of trading platforms from the requirements of Article 5 for crypto-assets without an identifiable issuer?

Can persons who are authorized in writing by the issuer to offer crypto-assets to the public conduct this activity on a commercial basis, continuously, repeatedly, and possibly for different issuers (whether concurrently or consecutively) without having a MiCA CASP license for the crypto-asset service 'placing of crypto-assets'?

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?