LIECHTENSTEIN Trends and Developments Contributed by: Thomas Plattner and Fabian Jenny, Ospelt & Partners Attorneys at Law Ltd.
Taxonomy, interoperability, and supervisory oversight The use of iXBRL allows the FMA and investors to perform large‑scale, automated comparisons of tokenised projects across the EEA. To reduce compli - ance burdens, the regulation permits the integration of Legal Entity Identifiers (LEIs) and Digital Token Identi - fiers (DTIs). Key data – such as valuation methods and risk disclosures – must be tagged according to the ESMA‑published European XBRL taxonomy. This granular tagging enables real‑time supervision, risk monitoring, and detection of market abuse. Transition to data‑centric reporting via the FMA e‑Service Market participants must transition from traditional PDF documentation to structured, data‑centric report - ing through the FMA e‑Service Portal. Under Arti - cle 8, MiCAR, issuers of Title II tokens must submit iXBRL‑compliant White Papers and marketing materi - als at least 20 working days before publication. FMA Guidance 2026/1 additionally requires statutory audits during 2026 to verify technical and operational compliance. Adopting these standards is essential for cross‑border interoperability and maintaining market integrity. A new standard of tax transparency: implementing CARF Reporting obligations for art‑related crypto‑asset service providers The Crypto‑Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), intro - duced through the CARF Act (LGBl 2025, No 589) and CARF Ordinance (LGBl 2025, No 599), creates a new transparency standard for tokenised art. “Reporting Liechtenstein crypto‑asset service pro - viders” (RCASPs) must report exchange transactions involving relevant crypto‑assets (Article 2 (1)(8), CARF Act). This includes exchanges, NFT marketplaces, and issuers of art‑backed tokens that can be used for pay - ment or investment (Article 2 (1)(4), (10), CARF Act). They must report all relevant transactions to the Tax Administration (Article 6, CARF Act).
Due diligence and the 30 June deadline RCASPs must conduct due diligence to determine users’ tax residency (Article 5, CARF Act), including obtaining self‑certifications and identifying beneficial owners of passive entities. The first reporting year concludes in 2026, and the initial transmission of data is due by 30 June 2027 (Article 3, CARF Ordinance). Enforcement and Administrative Criminal Framework (VStG) CARF violations fall under the penal provisions of the CARF Act (Article 26 ff) and the Administrative Criminal Law and Procedure Act (VStG; LGBl 2025, No 375). Importantly, the “Counsel instead of Punish - ment” mechanism under Article 29, VStG does not apply (Article 29 (4), CARF Act). This means breaches may result directly in administrative fines. Article 29 (3), VStG considers offences that compro - mise financial stability or international obligations as “not low” ( nicht gering ), increasing sanction risks. Article 26 (5), CARF Act allows aggravating and miti - gating factors to be considered in the abbreviated procedure ( Strafverfügung ), enabling early resolution where co-operation is shown. Integration with the Automatic Exchange of Information (AIA) CARF operates alongside the existing AIA regime. While traditional financial accounts fall under AIA, digital assets – such as NFTs used as investments – are covered by CARF. This dual system closes prior “token gaps” and enhances Liechtenstein’s reputation for transparency. AML compliance in the Liechtenstein art market: from SPG to the EU Single Rulebook Current framework under the Due Diligence Act (SPG) Under the SPG, art dealers and brokers are subject to due diligence obligations when handling cash, virtual currency, or token payments of CHF10,000 or more (Article 3 (1)(q), (u), SPG). The FMA prioritises identi - fication and verification of the beneficial owner (BO),
122 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook