SWEDEN Law and Practice Contributed by: Niclas Rockborn, Rikard Sundstedt and Robin Entenza, Gernandt & Danielsson
principles of separation rights can apply to cryptocur- rencies. 1.2.6 Industry and Trade Bodies Being a relatively small country, the Swedish indus- try for blockchain and crypto-assets is largely unified rather than separated into distinct sectors. Therefore, there is an overlap of industry organisations active within the blockchain sector and those active within the crypto-asset sector. In addition to the organisations that have a specialised focus on blockchain and crypto-assets, the Swedish FinTech Association acts as a more broadly present industry organisation of relatively significant scale (with over 100 members) where crypto-assets is one among several industries covered by the association. 2. Regulation 2.1 Regulators and International Alignment The SFSA is the competent authority for the purposes of MiCA and the DLT Regulation in Sweden. It has both a supervisory mandate and the role of processing applications for authorisation and other types of regu- latory approval under MiCA and the DLT Regulation. The SFSA has historically been cautious towards cryptocurrency and has repeatedly warned consum- ers against investing in cryptocurrencies. MiCA may prompt a shift in this position, as more diligent regula- tion brings a degree of legitimacy to firms that qualify for authorisation. The SFSA granted its first regulatory licence under MiCA in October 2025, and, in addition, a large num- ber of foreign crypto-asset service providers are permitted to provide services in Sweden on a cross- border basis under the passporting regime (see 3.4 Passporting ). 2.2 Crypto-Asset Regulatory Frameworks Categorisation As Swedish law does not include a national bespoke categorisation system for digital assets, their classifi- cation must be analysed case-by-case against gen- eral legal concepts. Historically, the focus has been on
whether digital assets qualify as financial instruments, which would subject related investment services to securities and investment laws and regulations, most notably Directive 2014/65/EU (MiFID II) and the Pro- spectus Regulation. In March 2025, ESMA published guidelines on the conditions and criteria for qualifying crypto-assets as financial instruments. The guidelines stipulate that classification should be carried out in line with the principle of technological neutrality and should take a substance over form approach. When assess- ing whether tokenised securities qualify as financial instruments under the Swedish Securities Market Act, the characteristics distinguishing crypto-assets from traditional securities and traditional capital markets should also be considered. For example, the fact that a crypto-asset is traded on online trading platforms may indicate that the assets are freely transferable but does not necessarily mean that the assets meet the condition of being negotiable on the capital markets. MiCA has introduced a new regime for categorisa- tion of digital assets which distinctly regulates three An e-money token is a crypto-asset that seeks to maintain a stable value by referencing one official cur- rency. An asset-referenced token aims to maintain a stable value by referencing another value or right (or a combination thereof), including one or more official currencies. Both can be considered “stablecoins” (see also 6.2 Stablecoins ). Utility tokens are defined in MiCA as a type of crypto- asset that is only intended to provide access to a good or a service supplied by its issuer. Regulated Activities MiCA regulates various activities involving crypto- assets. There is fundamental divide between how MiCA regulates issuing of crypto-assets on the one hand, and providing services relating to crypto-assets on the other hand. classes of crypto-assets: • asset-referenced tokens; • e-money tokens; and • utility tokens.
617 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook