ITALY Law and Practice Contributed by: Francesco Paolo Patti and Marta Vittoria Colombo, Studio Patti
information of a precise nature, not made public, relat- ing directly or indirectly to one or more crypto-assets, and which, if made public, would be likely to have a significant effect on their price. In Italy, Consob is the authority responsible for super- vising compliance with these rules. Its approach is consistent with its longstanding focus on market integrity in traditional securities markets. This trans- lates into a high level of scrutiny on governance and control systems, particularly in the context of authori- sation procedures for CASPs. In fact, a portion of the authorisation process is devoted to assessing the adequacy of internal arrangements aimed at prevent- ing, detecting and reporting market abuse, including surveillance systems, conflict management proce- dures and internal controls over trading activity. Con- sob expects applicants to demonstrate robust mecha- nisms comparable, in substance, to those required in regulated financial markets. 2.6 Non-Compliance Italian regulators, and Consob in particular, have his- torically adopted a proactive and rigorous enforce- ment approach, especially in relation to the protec- tion of investors and the integrity of markets in digital environments. This posture has carried over into the crypto-asset sector, where enforcement activity has been both visible and comparatively more intensive than in many other EU jurisdictions. Consob has been particularly active in monitoring and sanctioning unauthorised offerings and the pro- vision of crypto-asset services through digital chan- nels, including websites, social media and messag- ing platforms. This focus reflects the perceived risks associated with retail investor exposure to unregu- lated or misleading initiatives. A clear indicator of this approach is Consob’s contribution to the ESMA reg- ister of non-compliant crypto-asset service providers, where approximately 130 notifications originate from the Italian authority alone. By comparison, only iso- lated notifications have been submitted by other Euro- pean authorities, such as those in the Netherlands and Slovakia. This disparity highlights the level of scrutiny and enforcement intensity applied by Consob relative to its European peers.
A recent and illustrative enforcement case concerns a public offering of crypto-assets carried out in breach of MiCAR Title II requirements. In January 2026, Con- sob issued a formal public statement under Article 111 MiCAR and the relevant national implementing provisions, relating to the promotion of a so-called memecoin ($CORONA). The offering had been con- ducted via online channels without compliance with the core regulatory requirements, including: • the absence of a qualifying legal entity as issuer; • the failure to prepare a compliant white paper under Article 6 MiCAR; and • the lack of notification and publication of such white paper in accordance with Articles 8 and 9 MiCAR. The activity had already been subject to a blocking order in 2025 and was subsequently followed by enforcement action, including the imposition of an administrative fine of EUR200,000. The case illus- trates the willingness of the Italian authority to inter- vene decisively in relation to non-compliant public offerings, particularly where retail investors may be affected. With regard to cross-border activities, Italian regula- tors operate within the framework of EU supervisory co-operation, including co-ordination with ESMA and other national competent authorities. In practice, Con- sob actively targets operators that offer services into Italy without proper authorisation, regardless of their place of establishment. Enforcement tools include public warnings, blocking orders against websites and, where necessary, co- operation with foreign authorities. The emphasis is on protecting Italian investors, even in cases involv- ing entities established outside Italy or the EU. This approach is consistent with broader European efforts to address regulatory arbitrage and ensure a level playing field across member states. Looking ahead, the general attitude of Italian regula- tors is unlikely to soften. On the contrary, the transi- tion to the full application of MiCAR is expected to further strengthen enforcement activity, particularly as the first authorisations of crypto-asset service provid-
345 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook