What a CASP licence is under MiCA: the services it covers, capital and governance requirements, how passporting works across the EEA, and how to check whether a firm actually holds one.

Last updated: 30 July 2026
"MiCA licensed" appears on a great many crypto websites. A much smaller number of companies hold the thing being described. The gap exists because the underlying authorisation, a CASP licence, is frequently confused with adjacent permissions that are easier to obtain and mean something different.
This guide explains what a CASP licence actually is, which services it covers, what a firm has to demonstrate to get one, how passporting works, and how to verify a claim in a few minutes. Educational only, not legal advice.
CASP stands for crypto-asset service provider. Under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2023/1114, any firm providing crypto-asset services professionally in the EU needs authorisation from a national competent authority in a member state.
The rules for service providers applied from 30 December 2024, following the stablecoin provisions which applied from 30 June 2024. Member states could operate a transitional regime letting existing firms continue while applications were processed, running in some cases until 1 July 2026.
That transitional window is the single biggest source of confusion in this area. A firm operating legitimately under grandfathering was not an authorised CASP; it was a firm permitted to continue while it applied. Marketing produced during that period frequently blurred the two.
MiCA defines a specific list. A licence is granted for the services a firm applies for, not as a blanket permission, which is why "is this firm licensed?" is an incomplete question. The right question is whether it is licensed for the service you are using.
| Service | Plain description |
|---|---|
| Custody and administration | Holding crypto-assets or the means of access on behalf of clients |
| Operation of a trading platform | Running an exchange or matching venue |
| Exchange for funds | Fiat on- and off-ramps |
| Exchange for other crypto-assets | Crypto-to-crypto conversion |
| Execution of orders | Trading on behalf of clients |
| Placing of crypto-assets | Marketing assets to buyers for an issuer |
| Reception and transmission of orders | Routing client orders elsewhere |
| Advice on crypto-assets | Personalised recommendations |
| Portfolio management | Discretionary management of client holdings |
| Transfer services | Moving crypto-assets between accounts on behalf of clients |
The bar is closer to a financial services licence than to a registration, which is precisely the change MiCA introduced.
The aggregate cost of this is substantial and largely fixed. It does not scale down for a smaller firm, which is a significant part of why the mid-tier venue population thinned during 2026, as covered in why crypto exchanges are closing.
The compensating benefit is the single market. A CASP authorised in one member state can notify and provide its authorised services across the EEA without seeking separate authorisation in each country. One licence, twenty-seven-plus markets.
This is why the choice of home member state matters commercially, and why several jurisdictions have positioned themselves as attractive venues for applications. It also means the entity serving you may be authorised somewhere other than where you live, which is normal rather than suspicious, but worth knowing when you go looking for it.
There is one authoritative method and it takes about two minutes.
Our companion guide to verifying MiCA compliance covers the wider framework, including stablecoin issuers.
MiCA's recitals state that where crypto-asset services are provided in a fully decentralised manner without any intermediary, they fall outside its scope. The operative word is fully, and the analysis turns on facts rather than self-description. An identifiable operator, a controlled fee mechanism, or a service provided on behalf of users can bring an arrangement into scope regardless of how it is labelled.
JewelSwap is non-custodial across MultiversX, Sui and Radix. Users hold their own keys and interact with smart contracts directly; the protocol does not take custody of client assets, does not operate a trading venue on users' behalf, and does not issue an e-money or asset-referenced token. Its liquid staking tokens, JWLSUI, JWLEGLD and JWLXRD, are staking derivatives backed by the underlying staked asset rather than currency-referencing tokens.
On the facts as they stand, that places it outside the CASP categories above. This is an architectural consequence, not a regulatory endorsement, and anyone adding custody, a fiat on-ramp or brokerage on top of a DeFi protocol is squarely in scope.
Authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider under MiCA, granted by a national competent authority in an EU member state. It permits specified crypto-asset services and can be passported across the EEA without separate authorisation in each country.
MiCA's rules for crypto-asset service providers applied from 30 December 2024. Member states could run a transitional regime allowing existing firms to continue while their applications were assessed, in some cases until 1 July 2026.
Identify the legal entity serving EEA customers, then look it up in the ESMA register of authorised CASPs and in its national competent authority's register. Confirm the authorisation covers the specific service you are using, not just that the firm is listed.
A VASP registration was a national AML-focused regime that varied by country. A CASP authorisation under MiCA is a harmonised EU-wide licence with prudential, governance, client-asset and conduct requirements, and it can be passported across the EEA. They are not equivalent.
Yes, through passporting. A CASP authorised in one member state can notify and provide its authorised services across the EEA. This is why a firm may be authorised in a country other than the one you live in.
MiCA states that fully decentralised services provided without any intermediary fall outside its scope. In practice an identifiable operator, a controlled fee mechanism, or services provided on behalf of users can bring an arrangement into scope, so the analysis depends on specific facts.