Digital assets meet tradfi in London at the fmls25
Early implementation, however, revealed significant differences in how national authorities enforce the rules. These gaps could affect investor protection and the functioning of the European internal market.
Concerns About Non-EU Platforms
Authorities also raised concerns about platforms outside the EU that serve European clients through intermediaries not covered by MiCA. Such activity may expose investors to unregulated risks and create uneven competition for EU-based service providers.
To address these issues, Consob, AMF, and FMA proposed targeted improvements. Recommendations from the Financial Stability Board and IOSCO informed the proposals.
You may find it interesting at FinanceMagnates.com: CFTC to “Explore” Allowing MiCA-Authorized Platforms to Serve U.S. Markets.
Key measures include direct supervision by the European Securities and Markets Authority of major crypto-asset service providers. This aims to ensure consistent rule application and could reduce supervision costs.
Stricter Rules for Non-EU Platforms
The proposals also address non-EU platforms. Intermediaries executing orders for European clients should only use platforms compliant with MiCA or equivalent regulations.
Regulators recommended independent cybersecurity audits before granting authorisation and periodically thereafter. Audits would cover asset protection, resilience to cyber-attacks, and incident management.
White Paper Filing Changes
Finally, the regulators suggested clarifying the scrutiny process for white papers and establishing a single access point for managing token offerings, excluding stablecoins. This is intended to improve legal certainty for issuers and centralize filings, reflecting the pan-European reach of most offerings.
Authorities said the measures aim to provide consistent oversight, reduce investor risks, and support the competitiveness of European market participants.