EU Crypto Regulation Faces Challenges Amid National Disparities
By Lucie Lequier
Published: June 11, 2025, 10:53 PM
The implementation of the European Union’s first comprehensive cryptocurrency regulation, known as the Markets in Crypto-Asset (MiCA) framework, has encountered significant hurdles due to inconsistencies among member states. Launched in December 2024, MiCA aims to harmonize the regulatory landscape across the EU by requiring cryptocurrency service providers to obtain licenses to operate legally within the bloc. However, disparities in the enforcement and interpretation of these regulations among EU nations have opened avenues for companies to exploit regulatory weaknesses.
Overview of MiCA Regulations
MiCA mandates that cryptocurrency companies must adhere to specific standards concerning anti-money laundering (AML), the financing of terrorism, IT security, and overall financial stability before they can receive licensing. This legislation is intended to bolster investor protection and enhance the credibility of a sector frequently criticized for its lack of oversight. A valid MiCA license offers companies access to the entire European market, creating a competitive environment where companies may be incentivized to seek authorization in the member state with the most lenient regulatory approach.
Exploitation of Regulatory Gaps
Experts in the cryptocurrency field have raised concerns regarding the regulatory integrity in various EU countries. While countries like Germany and the Netherlands, which have issued the majority of MiCA licenses to date, are viewed positively, some other EU members, particularly Malta, have drawn skepticism. Analysts have pointed to Malta’s expedited licensing processes, suggesting that the country may have issued approvals prematurely, without adhering to the framework’s collective standards.
Marie-Anne Barbat-Layani, the president of France’s financial markets authority, highlighted these issues during her speech to the Senate in March, noting the potential risks associated with products approved by regulatory bodies that may not uphold rigorous standards. The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has initiated a "peer review" targeting a regulator with concerns about its lenient practices, though specifics remain undisclosed.
A Shift in Corporate Strategies
As firms navigate this regulatory landscape, it has been evident that some companies are opting for jurisdictions perceived as more business-friendly. For instance, the cryptocurrency platform OKX initially planned to establish its European headquarters in France but later opted for Malta. This was echoed by Gemini, which shifted its focus to Malta after engaging with the more proactive Maltese authorities.
"Malta began welcoming applications several months earlier than other regulators," remarked Gemini’s head of Europe, Mark Jennings, emphasizing the benefits of early application processes in establishing operational infrastructure under MiCA.
Conversely, other EU countries have been slower to issue licenses, with France only recently granting its first MiCA license to the fintech firm Deblock. Some critics argue that France’s lengthy approval process adds unnecessary complexity, while others view it as an opportunity for companies to better prepare.
Concerns over Future Viability
As regulatory bodies work to balance the need for thorough oversight with market accessibility, industry participants are expressing concern about the sustainability of such a fragmented regulatory environment. High costs associated with obtaining MiCA and national licenses are a significant barrier to entry for many firms. Tangi Le Calvez, founder of the crypto investment firm GOin, reported investing approximately one million euros to secure a French license, which was modeled after MiCA.
Historically, when Estonia implemented its own stringent licensing requirements in 2017, a staggering 75 percent of local cryptocurrency companies ceased operations, a trend that has experts worried about potential repercussions for the EU’s crypto landscape as MiCA takes hold.
As the EU continues to refine and enforce its regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies, the effectiveness of MiCA may depend heavily on how well member states can align their licensing processes and standards, ensuring that the integrity of the overall regulatory environment is maintained.
Conclusion
The EU’s ambitious regulatory initiative aims to bring structure to a burgeoning sector but is currently hindered by national inconsistencies. As market participants adapt to this evolving landscape, the need for cohesive and rigorous regulatory standards will be more crucial than ever for the long-term viability of the cryptocurrency industry across Europe.
Share this article:
