- Up to €5,000,000 — or 3% of total annual turnover, whichever is higher: the administrative-fine range for providing crypto-asset services to EU clients without authorisation.
- ~83% of pre-MiCA firms are still unlicensed. Only around 210 of 1,200+ formerly-registered entities (~17%) have obtained CASP authorisation.
- AML/KYC duties continue through any wind-down. Stopping service does not switch off your obligations to existing EU clients.
General penalty exposure for context, not legal advice — confirm your position with your national competent authority. Sources: ESMA statements (2026); reporting via Yahoo Finance, CCN, Bitcoin Magazine (June 2026).
Get a Full Professional Audit before 1 July →The rule.
Fully applicable to CASPs since 30 December 2024, MiCA gave firms already operating under national regimes a grandfathering window under Article 143. It closes 1 July 2026.
“Crypto-asset service providers that provided their services in accordance with applicable law before 30 December 2024 may continue to do so until 1 July 2026, or until they are granted or refused an authorisation pursuant to Article 63, whichever is sooner.”
1 July 2026 is the outer boundary — ESMA confirmed on 17 April 2026 that no member state may extend grandfathering. Several set shorter national windows, so your real cut-off may already have passed. “Whichever is sooner” cuts against the firm.
What changes on the day.
On expiry, the position flips to “providing a regulated service without authorisation.”
Service provision becomes unlawful. Operating as a CASP for EU clients — custody, exchange, execution, transfer, advice, placement — requires a MiCA authorisation.
Marketing becomes exposure, not growth. Every live acquisition asset — landing page, paid ads, KOL posts, app-store listing — now solicits clients for a service the firm cannot lawfully provide. The promotion becomes evidence of continued solicitation.
The obligation becomes client protection. ESMA is explicit: firms losing transitional cover must wind down in an orderly way that minimises harm to clients. Comms shift from acquisition to managed exit.
Scale: as of May 2026, only around 17% of pre-MiCA registered entities had obtained CASP authorisation.
Who is affected.
A formerly nationally-registered exchange with no granted MiCA authorisation, still running EU-targeted ads and onboarding new EU users in late June 2026.
The highest-exposure position: past the cut-off, both the service and its active solicitation are outside the perimeter. Citation: MiCA Art. 143; ESMA statement, 17 April 2026.
A firm with an authorisation application in progress marketing “MiCA-licensed” or “MiCA-ready” before the licence is actually granted.
A pending application is not an authorisation. Claiming licensed status before grant is itself misleading marketing under Article 88. Citation: MiCA Art. 63; Art. 88.
A non-EU firm relying on “reverse solicitation” while still running EU-language campaigns, EU influencer deals, and EU geo-targeted ads.
The exemption is construed narrowly and destroyed by active marketing into the EU. You cannot solicit and then claim the client came to you. Citation: MiCA Art. 61; ESMA guidance on reverse solicitation.
What to do about the marketing surface.
NorthPoint does not file authorisation applications. We own the live marketing surface — the part most firms forget under deadline pressure.
Find the national transitional window that actually applies in your client member states — it may be shorter than 1 July 2026. Plan the wind-down to the earliest binding date.
If you will be past your cut-off without a grant, switch off EU-targeted acquisition: paid ads, KOL contracts, EU-language landing pages, new-client signups.
Strip “MiCA-licensed,” “regulated,” or “authorised” until the authorisation is granted under Article 63. “Application submitted” is a fact; implied licensed status is a misleading-marketing finding waiting to happen.
If winding down, convert comms from acquisition to client protection: notify existing EU clients, explain withdrawal and close-out, set a clear timeline.
Market only the services and member states the licence actually covers — and clear the Article 88 “clear, fair, and not misleading” bar on every live communication.
Related rules.
-
Grandfathering closed, the €5M / 3%-of-turnover exposure live, and the decision routes from here.
-
Licence, cease, wind down, transfer clients, or merge — and the reverse-solicitation trap.
-
Enforcement posture by member state, and how to exit a market compliantly.
-
The “clear, fair, and not misleading” rule — including any “licensed” claim.
-
Consistency between marketing and the published whitepaper.
-
Paid endorsements into the EU are marketing communications — and active solicitation.
-
MiCA, FCA, GDPR — the marketing rules, quoted and explained.
This page is an operator-grade heuristic for marketing and communications teams, not legal advice and not a determination of any firm’s authorisation status. The Article 143 quotation is a plain-English rendering of the transitional provision; for the binding text and your firm’s position, consult the Regulation and qualified counsel in your client member states.