MiCA · CELEX 02023R1114-20240109

Article 64

Verbatim text of the current consolidated version (consolidated 2024-01-09) · status: in force. Check it on EUR-Lex ↗

MiCA, Article 64(1) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

Competent authorities shall withdraw the authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider if the crypto-asset service provider does any of the following: (a) has not used its authorisation within 12 months of the date of the authorisation; (b) has expressly renounced its authorisation; (c) has not provided crypto-asset services for nine consecutive months; (d) has obtained its authorisation by irregular means, such as by making false statements in its application for authorisation; (e) no longer meets the conditions under which the authorisation was granted and has not taken the remedial action requested by the competent authority within the specified timeframe; (f) fails to have in place effective systems, procedures and arrangements to detect and prevent money laundering and terrorist financing in accordance with Directive (EU) 2015/849; (g) has seriously infringed this Regulation, including the provisions relating to the protection of holders of crypto-assets or of clients of crypto-asset service providers, or market integrity.

MiCA, Article 64(2) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

Competent authorities may withdraw authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider in any of the following situations: (a) the crypto-asset service provider has infringed the provisions of national law transposing Directive (EU) 2015/849; (b) the crypto-asset service provider has lost its authorisation as a payment institution or its authorisation as an electronic money institution, and that crypto-asset service provider has failed to remedy the situation within 40 calendar days.

MiCA, Article 64(3) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

Where a competent authority withdraws an authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider, it shall notify ESMA and the single points of contact of the host Member States without undue delay. ESMA shall make such information available in the register referred to in Article 109.

MiCA, Article 64(4) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

Competent authorities may limit the withdrawal of authorisation to a particular crypto-asset service.

MiCA, Article 64(5) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

Before withdrawing an authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider, competent authorities shall consult the competent authority of another Member State where the crypto-asset service provider concerned is: (a) a subsidiary of a crypto-asset service provider authorised in that other Member State; (b) a subsidiary of the parent undertaking of a crypto-asset service provider authorised in that other Member State; (c) controlled by the same natural or legal persons who control a crypto-asset service provider authorised in that other Member State.

MiCA, Article 64(6) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

Before withdrawing an authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider, competent authorities may consult the authority competent for supervising compliance of the crypto-asset service provider with the rules on anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing.

MiCA, Article 64(7) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

EBA, ESMA and any competent authority of a host Member State may at any time request that the competent authority of the home Member State examine whether the crypto-asset service provider still complies with the conditions under which the authorisation was granted, when there are grounds to suspect it may no longer be the case.

MiCA, Article 64(8) — Withdrawal of authorisation of a crypto-asset service provider

Crypto-asset service providers shall establish, implement and maintain adequate procedures ensuring the timely and orderly transfer of their clients’ crypto-assets and funds to another crypto-asset service provider when an authorisation is withdrawn.

This text is not written by an AI. It is rendered from a corpus built from the official EUR-Lex source, where every fragment is content-hashed and signed at ingestion — which is what lets you cite it and defend the citation. Ask a question about this article →

Other articles of the MiCA

Art. 1 Art. 2 Art. 3 Art. 4 Art. 5 Art. 6 Art. 7 Art. 8 Art. 9 Art. 10 Art. 11 Art. 12 Art. 13 Art. 14 Art. 15 Art. 16 Art. 17 Art. 18 Art. 19 Art. 20 Art. 21 Art. 22 Art. 23 Art. 24 Art. 25 Art. 26 Art. 27 Art. 28 Art. 29 Art. 30 Art. 31 Art. 32 Art. 33 Art. 34 Art. 35 Art. 36 Art. 37 Art. 38 Art. 39 Art. 40 Art. 41 Art. 42 Art. 43 Art. 44 Art. 45 Art. 46 Art. 47 Art. 48 Art. 49 Art. 50 Art. 51 Art. 52 Art. 53 Art. 54 Art. 55 Art. 56 Art. 57 Art. 58 Art. 59 Art. 60 Art. 61 Art. 62 Art. 63 Art. 64 Art. 65 Art. 66 Art. 67 Art. 68 Art. 69 Art. 70 Art. 71 Art. 72 Art. 73 Art. 74 Art. 75 Art. 76 Art. 77 Art. 78 Art. 79 Art. 80 Art. 81 Art. 82 Art. 83 Art. 84 Art. 85 Art. 86 Art. 87 Art. 88 Art. 89 Art. 90 Art. 91 Art. 92 Art. 93 Art. 94 Art. 95 Art. 96 Art. 97 Art. 98 Art. 99 Art. 100 Art. 101 Art. 102 Art. 103 Art. 104 Art. 105 Art. 106 Art. 107 Art. 108 Art. 109 Art. 110 Art. 110a Art. 111 Art. 112 Art. 113 Art. 114 Art. 115 Art. 116 Art. 117 Art. 118 Art. 119 Art. 120 Art. 121 Art. 122 Art. 123 Art. 124 Art. 125 Art. 126 Art. 127 Art. 128 Art. 129 Art. 130 Art. 131 Art. 132 Art. 133 Art. 134 Art. 135 Art. 136 Art. 137 Art. 138 Art. 139 Art. 140 Art. 141 Art. 142 Art. 143 Art. 144 Art. 145 Art. 146 Art. 147 Art. 148 Art. 149

← Article 63 · Article 65 →

Acquis returns official sources verbatim with citations; it is not legal advice. Texts © European Union, reuse permitted (Decision 2011/833/EU) — only the EUR-Lex original is authentic. Why legal AI fails · Coverage