HUNGARY Law and Practice Contributed by: Pál Rahóty, Lakatos, Köves & Partners
6.3 Impact of the Emergence of Cryptocurrency Exchanges
• P2P lending marketplaces: These may fall under ECSPR, lending regulation or securities law depending on the structure – particularly whether funds are pooled or interests are transferable. Overall, classification depends on substance, and the MNB determines the applicable regime based on the platform’s actual role. 6.2 Regulation of Different Asset Classes In Hungary (in line with EU law), different asset classes are subject to different regulatory regimes, and clas - sification is decisive. • Traditional financial instruments (shares, bonds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), derivatives): These fall under MiFID II/MiFIR and related EU frame - works. Firms providing brokerage, trading, custody or advice must be licensed as investment firms or credit institutions and comply with capital, con - duct, best execution, market abuse and disclosure rules. • Security tokens (tokenised financial instruments): If a token qualifies as a “financial instrument” (eg, transferable security) under MiFID II, it is regu - lated in the same way as its traditional equivalent. Tokenisation does not change the regime; MiFID, Prospectus Regulation and market abuse rules apply. • Crypto-assets that are not financial instruments: These fall under MiCA. Service providers (exchang - es, custody, advice, execution) must be authorised as CASPs and comply with governance, conduct, capital and disclosure requirements. Issuers of certain tokens (eg, asset-referenced tokens or e-money tokens) face additional obligations. • E-money tokens (stablecoins referencing a single currency): These are regulated under MiCA but aligned closely with e-money rules, often requir - ing issuance by a credit institution or author - ised e-money institution, with safeguarding and redemption rights. In short, the key question is whether the asset quali - fies as a financial instrument (MiFID) or a crypto-asset under MiCA. The regulatory consequences (licensing, capital requirements, disclosures and supervision by the MNB) differ accordingly.
The emergence of cryptocurrency exchanges has significantly reshaped regulation in Hungary, primar - ily through the implementation of MiCA. Under MiCA, centralised crypto exchanges operating in Hungary (or targeting Hungarian clients) must obtain authori - sation as CASPs and comply with conduct, govern - ance, capital, custody, complaints-handling and mar - ket abuse prevention requirements, AML/CFT and EU sanctions screening obligations, etc. For decentralised exchanges (DEXs), regulation is more complex. MiCA generally applies to identifiable legal or natural persons providing crypto-asset ser - vices “in a professional capacity”. Fully decentralised protocols without a central operator may fall outside direct authorisation requirements, but where there is a controlling entity, governance body or frontend opera - tor facilitating access, regulators may treat that party as a service provider subject to MiCA. 6.4 Listing Standards In the Hungarian fintech context, “listing standards” If securities (including security tokens qualifying as financial instruments) are listed or admitted to trad - ing on a regulated market or MTF, the issuer must comply with the EU Prospectus Regulation, MiFID II/MiFIR venue rules, and the Market Abuse Regu - lation (MAR), including publication of an approved prospectus (unless an exemption applies), ongoing disclosure of inside information, periodic reporting and corporate governance requirements. For crowd - funding platforms under ECSPR, issuers must publish a key investment information sheet (KIIS) rather than a full prospectus (within thresholds). For crypto-asset exchanges, MiCA requires the publication of a com - pliant crypto-asset white paper (for in-scope tokens) and imposes due diligence and disclosure obligations before admission to trading. AML/sanctions screening also forms part of listing controls for platforms. There are no formal, binding industry-wide listing standards specific to the Hungarian fintech sector beyond what is required by EU and Hungarian law. depend on what is being listed. Regulatory Listing Standards
346 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook