AUSTRIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Oliver Völkel, Jara Erhard and Bryan Hollmann, CERHA HEMPEL
CERHA HEMPEL Parkring 2 1010 Vienna Austria Tel: +43 699 182 68 777 Fax: +43 1 514 35 35 Email: oliver.voelkel@cerhahempel.com Web: www.cerhahempel.com
Introduction: The Overarching Theme One year of MiCA in practice: how participants are dealing with the new regulatory regime Since the EU Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) became fully applicable at the end of 2024, Austria has moved beyond the national transitional phase and into full MiCA supervision. Throughout 2025, the European supervisory authorities contin- ued to release regulatory technical standards (RTS) and guidelines, keeping market participants busy with adapting to the new framework. As the first practical “licensing-year”, 2025 marked a pivotal point: when the grandfathering period expired at year-end, the Austrian Financial Market Authority (FMA) had already granted the first eight crypto-asset service provider (CASP) licences. MiCA – together with subsequent Level 2 and 3 measures – now fully harmonises the crypto industry across all EU member states. It remains the overarch- ing theme of recent developments in Austria’s crypto industry. • An increasing number of international companies are choosing Austria to obtain MiCA authorisation. One factor that makes Austria particularly attractive is the FMA. The authority prepared early for its role under MiCA and can offer potential applicants legal certainty and clarity (see “Austrian FMA as a MiCA Licensing Venue: EU’s Leading Regulator”). • After the first full year of MiCA in practice, CASPs in Austria are shifting from project planning and licence applications to operating under ongoing, increasingly detailed supervisory scrutiny. The main challenges in the licensing process are discussed
under “CASPs Under MiCA: Key Practical Hurdles in the Licensing Process”. • The traditional financial industry is also having a close look and preparing for licensing under the new regime. After all, and this cannot be stressed enough, MiCA was not written as a regulation for the crypto industry but to incentivise traditional financial market participants to enter the ring (see “How TradFi Prepares for Crypto Business Under MiCA: The Equivalence Regime”). • While many third-country firms still view the reverse-solicitation exemption as a convenient “safe harbour”, this perception is increasingly out of step with reality. It is now not only in the FMA’s interest, but also in that of MiCA-licensed CASPs, to keep unregulated third-country providers out of the EU market. In this environment, a broad interpretation of “solicitation”, stringent evidentiary expectations and a rapidly shrinking window for any follow-up offers are transforming Article 61 MiCA from a supposed safe harbour into a high- risk strategy for cross-border crypto business (“Reverse Solicitation: How the FMA Ensures a Level Playing Field by Scrutinising Third-Country Firms”). What is MiCA, actually? MiCA is a complex framework that aims to regulate crypto-assets in the EU comprehensively. It introduc- es, for example, the obligation to draw up a (standard- ised) crypto-asset white paper before offering crypto- assets to the public in the EU or listing crypto-assets on an EU exchange. Additional requirements apply to issuers of asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens. Crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) wish-
53 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook