A concrete example
Check the authorised legal entity and the specific services in the official register.
In context
MiCA includes requirements concerning issuers, disclosures and crypto-asset service providers, or CASPs. The longest transitional period for existing crypto-asset service providers under Article 143(3) ended on 1 July 2026. Other transitional provisions have different scopes and deadlines. A historical national registration should therefore not be presented as equivalent to a current MiCA authorisation; check the relevant official register and permitted services.
The related mechanism, visually
- 01Asset rights
- 02Activity and entity
- 03Applicable framework
- 04Official status verification
Read these as connected concepts, not necessarily consecutive steps.
Read the explanation
Start with the rights and economic substance of the asset, then identify the activity performed. A token’s name does not determine its regulatory category. MiCA is not the only relevant EU framework: an asset qualifying as a financial instrument is assessed under the corresponding financial-services rules rather than simply relabeled as an ordinary MiCA token.
Put the mechanism into context
A website offers both token issuance and custody through two group companies. Prepare a matrix with each entity, service, asset type and evidence of the relevant status. Do not treat a brand-level compliance statement as proof for every activity.
Apply it in the workshop →What this mechanism does not guarantee
Provider status, permitted services and the exact legal entity should be checked in official records. An authorization does not guarantee asset prices or remove all consumer risks. Distinguish requirements applying to an issuer from those applying to a service provider, and document jurisdiction and date when evaluating a concrete case.
Explore the full explanation
MiCA / MiCAR: scope and authorisation
MiCA, Regulation (EU) 2023/1114, creates an EU framework for specified crypto-assets and related service providers.