ESMA Q&A 2143 on Tied agents under MiCA.
Authority
ESMA
Q&A ID
ESMA_QA_2143
Status
Answer Published
Published
12 September 2024
Legal basis
Source
May crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) designate persons or entities to provide crypto-asset services on their behalf as agents (similarly to the tied agent regime under MiFID II), where such person or entity is not an authorised CASP?
Answer provided by the European Commission
Article 59 of MiCA stipulates that a person shall not provide crypto-asset services, within the EU, unless that person is either authorised as CASP, or a certain financial entity fulfilling the notification criteria according to Article 60 of MiCA. There is no provision in MiCA that would allow a CASP to designate agents (third parties) for the purposes of receiving orders from clients or potential clients and transmitting them or providing advice in respect of crypto-assets and services offered by that CASP. MiCA therefore, does not provide a regulatory framework for agents acting on behalf of CASPs. Consequently, a CASP cannot designate agents in order to provide crypto-asset services on behalf of the CASP concerned. If a CASP appoints an agent, the agent needs to be a CASP itself.
** Disclaimer: **
The answers clarify provisions already contained in the applicable legislation. They do not extend in any way the rights and obligations deriving from such legislation nor do they introduce any additional requirements for the concerned operators and competent authorities. The answers are merely intended to assist natural or legal persons, including competent authorities and Union institutions and bodies in clarifying the application or implementation of the relevant legal provisions. Only the Court of Justice of the European Union is competent to authoritatively interpret Union law. The views expressed in the internal Commission Decision cannot prejudge the position that the European Commission might take before the Union and national courts.
Source: ESMA original document
Last updated