MiCA vs National Regulations: What Changes for Existing Licensees

If your firm already holds a national VASP registration in an EU Member State, the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation does not switch you off overnight, but it does not leave you alone forever either. MiCA replaces the patchwork of national crypto regimes with a single EU framework built around a Crypto-Asset Service Provider (CASP) authorisation. For a firm that was authorised under national law, the question is not "if" but "by when": your national licence buys you a time-limited bridge, and a full MiCA CASP authorisation is the destination. This page explains, from the actual instrument, exactly what changes, how long your bridge lasts, and what you must upgrade to keep serving clients in the EU.

By Magnus Müller · Reviewed by Magnus Müller · Last updated: 2026-06-14

Does MiCA replace my national crypto licence? (answer-first)

MiCA applies fully to crypto-asset service providers from 30 December 2024. If you were already providing crypto-asset services under applicable national law before that date, you are not shut off. Article 143(3) lets you keep operating during a transitional grandfathering window, but only until your Member State's deadline, at most 1 July 2026. After that, a full MiCA CASP authorisation is mandatory.

So MiCA does replace your national authorisation, in the sense that the national VASP regime ceases to be the basis on which you can serve EU clients. What it does not do is grandfather you indefinitely. MiCA harmonises the rules for CASPs and crypto-asset issuers across all 27 Member States, while some national procedural and AML elements still apply during the transition. The practical reading for a firm already in the market is straightforward: treat your national registration as a countdown clock, and plan the upgrade to CASP authorisation while the clock still runs. For the wider framework, see the full MiCA regulation guide.

The short answer for grandfathered firms

Your national licence keeps working, but only until your country's transitional deadline, and never later than 1 July 2026. The window also closes earlier if your competent authority grants or refuses your MiCA authorisation before the cap. In short, the grandfathering period is a bridge, not a renewal. The day your window ends is the day you either hold full MiCA CASP authorisation or stop providing crypto-asset services in that Member State. There is no automatic conversion of a national VASP registration into a MiCA CASP authorisation.

National regulation vs MiCA CASP authorisation at a glance

A national VASP registration and a MiCA CASP authorisation are different instruments with different reach. The table below contrasts the two on the dimensions that matter for a firm deciding how much work the transition involves. For the entity-level distinction behind these labels, see VASP vs CASP under MiCA.

This contrast is why a national VASP licence rarely satisfies MiCA on its own. The supervisor stays national, but the substantive bar rises to the EU-wide standard.

What is the MiCA grandfathering period under Article 143(3)?

The grandfathering period is the transitional mechanism in MiCA Article 143(3) that lets firms already authorised under national law keep operating after MiCA starts applying to CASPs. It runs for up to 18 months from 30 December 2024, ending no later than 1 July 2026, and Member States may shorten it, producing a range of roughly 5 to 18 months.

This is the most misunderstood part of the regime. The 18-month maximum is a ceiling, not a guarantee. The actual duration depends on what your home Member State has decided, and several states have chosen materially shorter windows. The clock also stops the moment your competent authority grants or refuses your MiCA authorisation, whichever comes first. Treat the MiCA key dates and transition periods as the calendar against which you sequence your application.

How the transitional window works

The Article 143(3) mechanics are easiest to read as a short sequence:

• MiCA applies fully to CASPs from 30 December 2024, when the grandfathering clock starts. [S1, S2]
• Firms already providing services under applicable national law before that date may keep operating during the window. [S1, S2, S3]
• The window is capped at a maximum of 18 months, ending no later than 1 July 2026. [S2, S3, S5]
• It ends earlier if the firm is granted or refused MiCA authorisation before the cap, whichever is sooner. [S2, S5]
• Member States may shorten or switch off the window, so the real deadline is country-specific. [S2, S3, S5]

Why Member States can shorten the window

National competent authorities (NCAs) were given discretion to reduce the 18-month period or decline to offer it, typically where the existing national VASP framework was considered less strict, or simply where the authority wanted firms to migrate to the MiCA standard faster. This is the structural reason deadlines differ so much across the EU: the same regulation, applied through 27 different national decisions. The consequence for an existing licensee is that you cannot assume the 1 July 2026 cap. You have to read your own Member State's choice, because in several countries the door closes well before the maximum.

VERIFY: verbatim Article 143(3) wording

VERIFY before publishing: the EUR-Lex article body for MiCA Article 143 did not render through automated fetch during research. Pull the exact paragraph wording for Article 143(3) and 143(6) from the EUR-Lex consolidated text, and confirm the "1 July 2026" cap and the simplified-procedure clause, before quoting any sentence as a direct quotation. Until that is done, the page paraphrases the mechanism rather than quoting it.

When does my grandfathering window end? (deadlines by Member State)

Your grandfathering deadline depends entirely on your home Member State. ESMA publishes the official per-country list under Article 143(3), and the confirmed dates for the best-documented states diverge sharply: the Netherlands closes first, Germany and Austria run to the end of 2025, and only firms in states that took the full window reach the 1 July 2026 cap.

Grandfathering deadlines by Member State (table)

The rows below are cross-referenced against ESMA's official Article 143(3) list and the Freshfields tracker. They are the confirmed states; do not extrapolate dates for any country not listed here.

The spread is real money and real risk. A Dutch-registered firm had roughly six months from the start of MiCA's CASP application; a firm relying on the full cap has until mid-2026. If you are unsure where you fall, the safe assumption is the earlier date, not the later one.

Countries not in the table: read the live ESMA list

The full 27-state list exists only in ESMA's official Article 143(3) PDF, which is a rendered table that does not extract reliably as text. For any country not in the confirmed rows above, including France, Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Cyprus, Poland, Romania and Belgium, read the live ESMA list before you act, and never infer a date from a phrase like "around X months." Lithuania is a clear example of why this matters: sources conflict on whether its window is roughly twelve months or the shortest in the EU at about five, so we do not state a Lithuanian date here until it is verified against the live list. The deadlines are time-sensitive and ESMA updates the list as Member States finalise their positions.

What is the simplified authorisation procedure (Article 143(6))?

MiCA Article 143(6) permits, but does not require, a Member State to run a lighter authorisation procedure for entities already authorised under national law before 30 December 2024. It is a national option, applied unevenly, and among the four best-documented states only Germany offers it. The procedure mainly reduces duplicated documentation the NCA already holds; it does not lower the substantive MiCA bar.

Which countries offer the simplified procedure

Among the states with clear published positions, Germany offers the simplified route via BaFin, while Austria, the Netherlands and Italy do not. [S3b, S5] For any other Member State, confirm the position against ESMA's official list rather than assuming a simplified path exists. The presence or absence of this option can change your sequencing materially, because a simplified procedure can shorten the documentation burden even though it does not change what you must ultimately prove.

"Simplified" does not mean automatic

Even where a simplified procedure is available, it is not an automatic conversion. The firm still files an application with its NCA and must demonstrate full MiCA conformity across capital, governance, client-asset safeguarding and conduct. What "simplified" reduces is the re-submission of material the authority already holds from the national authorisation; it does not waive the substantive obligations of MiCA Titles II to V. VERIFY before publishing: confirm the exact German simplified-procedure mechanics against the relevant German implementing or delegated measure before stating any specifics about BaFin's process.

No transition for firms not licensed before 30 December 2024

There is a hard cut-off that the grandfathering regime does not soften. If your firm was not authorised under applicable national law before 30 December 2024, you get no transitional regime at all. You cannot rely on a national VASP registration obtained after that date as a bridge, because the bridge only exists for firms already in the market when MiCA began applying to CASPs.

What newcomers must do instead

A firm without a pre-30-December-2024 national authorisation must obtain full MiCA CASP authorisation up front, before providing any crypto-asset services in the EU. There is no operating-while-applying allowance for newcomers. The practical route is the standard MiCA application: build to the full Title II to V standard from day one, then file with your home Member State NCA. For the end-to-end process, see how to get a CASP authorisation.

What new requirements does MiCA add beyond a national licence?

This is the substance of "what changes." MiCA Titles II to V impose a harmonised set of obligations that most national VASP regimes did not fully cover, and the gap between a national registration and a CASP authorisation is exactly this list. The headline is capital: MiCA ties a minimum own-funds floor to your CASP service class through its Annex IV tiers. The rest of the uplift covers governance, client-asset safeguarding, conduct, ICT resilience and, for issuers, white papers. For the firm-level building blocks behind these obligations, see national VASP licensing.

Own-funds and capital floors

MiCA sets a minimum capital floor tied to the CASP service class you operate, through the Annex IV tiers referenced in the authorisation rules. VERIFY before publishing: attach the precise EUR figures and the exact Annex IV / Article 67 article numbers from the MiCA text. Until those are confirmed, describe capital only as a "tier tied to your CASP service class" and do not state a number. For most national VASP holders this is a genuine uplift, because national capital requirements were often lighter than the MiCA floor.

Governance, fit-and-proper and outsourcing

MiCA requires demonstrable management-body suitability, a shareholder and qualifying-holding assessment, a documented conflicts-of-interest policy, and controls over outsourcing arrangements. A firm that satisfied a lighter national fit-and-proper test will usually need to rebuild its governance file to MiCA's standard, including evidence on each board and senior member.

Client-asset safeguarding and prudential rules

MiCA imposes segregation of client crypto-assets and client funds from the firm's own, with custody and safekeeping obligations for firms holding assets on behalf of clients. This is one of the most operationally demanding upgrades, because it touches wallet architecture, banking arrangements and reconciliation processes, not just paperwork.

Conduct, disclosure and complaints

MiCA applies an honest, fair and professional conduct duty toward clients, with transparent fee and risk disclosures and a formal complaints-handling process. Existing licensees often have the commercial elements but lack the documented, MiCA-aligned disclosure and complaints frameworks the regulation expects to see evidenced.

ICT resilience (DORA) and operational continuity

MiCA-authorised firms must run business-continuity and ICT risk-management arrangements, aligned with the EU Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), and maintain the security of their systems. For many crypto firms this is a substantial programme covering incident management, third-party ICT risk and resilience testing, well beyond what national VASP registration required.

AML/CFT and the Travel Rule

Full AML and KYC obligations apply, including Travel Rule compliance for crypto-asset transfers. This is the area of greatest continuity, since most national VASP regimes were AML-driven, but MiCA layers it onto the broader prudential and conduct framework rather than treating AML as the whole of compliance. For the underlying programme, see the crypto compliance AML and KYC guide.

White papers: issuers, not every grandfathered VASP

A point the old guidance blurred: the MiCA white-paper regime applies to issuers of asset-referenced tokens (ARTs), e-money tokens (EMTs) and other crypto-assets, not to every grandfathered service provider. Mandatory white-paper content, notification and liability rules are an issuer obligation. If your firm only provides services and does not issue tokens, the white-paper rules are not your direct burden, though they may affect the assets you list.

Have questions about your specific situation? Book a free 15-minute discovery call with our licensed advisers, no commitment. Book a Call

Can I passport across the EU during the transition?

No. During grandfathering, a firm operates only under its home national authorisation, and the MiCA single-licence passport that lets a CASP serve clients across other Member States is unlocked only on full MiCA authorisation. VERIFY before publishing: this passporting-during-transition position originates from the prior page text; confirm it against the relevant ESMA statement and the Article 143 wording before asserting it as settled.

Home-state-only operation during grandfathering

In practice this means a grandfathered firm cannot lawfully extend its national footprint into other Member States on the strength of the transitional regime. Cross-border expansion is one of the strongest commercial reasons to prioritise full authorisation rather than ride the grandfathering window to its end. To understand how the EU-wide right works once granted, see single EU licence passporting.

How to move from a national VASP registration to a MiCA CASP authorisation

The transition is a project, not a form. The path below sequences the work so you reach an application that an NCA can grant before your Member State deadline. The order matters: do the analysis first, fix the substance second, file last.

Step 1: Run a MiCA gap analysis

Map your national-licence coverage against MiCA Titles II to V and identify the deltas: where capital, governance, client-asset safeguarding, conduct, ICT and AML fall short of the MiCA standard for your service class. The output is a prioritised remediation list with a realistic timeline against your deadline.

Step 2: Upgrade capital, governance and policies

Close the gaps. Raise own-funds to the relevant Annex IV tier, rebuild governance and fit-and-proper files, implement client-asset segregation, align ICT and continuity with DORA, and bring AML and conduct frameworks to the MiCA standard. This is the longest stage and should start the moment the gap analysis is done.

Step 3: File with your NCA before your deadline

Submit the CASP application, or the simplified-procedure dossier where your Member State offers one, to your home NCA before the transitional end date. Filing late risks losing the right to operate when the window closes, so plan the submission against the earlier of your country's deadline and the 1 July 2026 cap.

Does MiCA affect Swiss firms with a national licence?

Switzerland sits outside MiCA. A Swiss firm holding a FINMA-related authorisation is regulated under Swiss law, not the EU framework. But the geographic test in MiCA is about where the service is provided, not only where the firm is based, so a Swiss firm targeting EU clients can fall within MiCA's scope for those specific services.

Switzerland is outside MiCA but EU-facing services are not

If a Swiss-regulated firm actively serves clients in the EU, it generally needs MiCA CASP authorisation for those EU-facing services, alongside its Swiss authorisation for its Swiss activity. This is a common situation for Crypto Valley firms expanding into the single market, and it turns on the VASP-to-CASP distinction rather than on the firm's home regulator. From our practice in Zug, the firms that manage this best treat EU expansion as a separate authorisation project from the outset rather than assuming Swiss status carries over. We have repeatedly seen that early gap analysis is what separates a clean MiCA application from a scramble against the deadline.