Author: Black Mario
As of July 1st this year, the CASP transition period of the MiCA (Mixed Asset Providers Act) officially ended. This means that, in principle, any cryptocurrency trading platform that has not obtained CASP authorization will no longer be able to provide services to users in the EU region.
For the entire industry, this day is more like a watershed moment.
Some are happy, some are worried: some mainstream platforms have obtained licenses and successfully entered the MiCA regulatory framework; but many platforms have not yet made substantial progress and may have to face the pressure of business contraction, user migration, and even gradual withdrawal from the EU market.
In fact, the MiCA regulatory framework for cryptocurrency service providers was already officially applied at the end of 2024. However, in the past year or so, the market has been digesting the rules, applying for licenses, and adjusting its business structure during the transition period.
With the end of the transition period, MiCA has begun its actual implementation phase. However, many people still lack a clear understanding of how MiCA's CASP authorizations are categorized, the differences in regulatory requirements faced by different platforms, and the actual impact this will have on exchanges and EU users. MiCA is a unified regulatory framework established by the European Union for the cryptocurrency market; its full name is Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, which translates to the "Crypto-Asset Markets Act." Its core objective is to establish a common set of regulatory rules for crypto assets across the 27 EU member states, covering the issuance, trading, custody, exchange, order execution, asset transfer, and related service provision of crypto assets such as stablecoins. This aims to unify the previously fragmented crypto regulatory rules across EU member states, allowing crypto asset issuers and service providers to operate under clear requirements regarding licensing, capital adequacy, governance, risk control, information disclosure, and customer asset protection. Focusing on the MiCA framework itself, it primarily targets two types of entities: The first type is crypto asset issuers, especially issuers of Asset Reference Tokens (ART) and Electronic Money Tokens (EMT). These entities need to obtain the appropriate issuer authorization, disclose white papers and establish reserve arrangements as required by regulations, and meet governance, risk management, and ongoing compliance requirements. For the market, ART and EMT are the two core categories of stablecoins regulated by MiCA. ART leans more towards multi-asset-pegged stablecoins, while EMT primarily corresponds to stablecoins pegged to a single fiat currency, such as USDC. However, regulation of the issuance side is not the focus of this article; we can discuss this in detail in a separate article later. The second category is Crypto-Asset Service Providers, or CASPs for short. This category mainly includes cryptocurrency exchanges, custodians, brokers, order fulfillers, and cryptocurrency transfer service providers. Unlike the issuer system, CASP regulation focuses on how platforms provide cryptocurrency-related services to customers, including trading, custody, exchange, order fulfillment, investment advice, portfolio management, and asset transfer. Accordingly, MiCA's regulatory requirements for CASPs mainly focus on capital, corporate governance, risk control, customer asset protection, information disclosure, and operational compliance. Since July 1st of this year, only crypto asset service providers that have obtained the corresponding CASP service authorization can legally provide services such as customer asset custody, trade matching, asset exchange, order execution, and asset transfer within the EU. It is important to note that, strictly speaking, a CASP is not a so-called "all-encompassing exchange license." Under the MiCA framework, "obtaining CASP authorization" and "being able to operate a trading platform" are not simply equivalent. CASPs are actually authorized according to specific service types. In other words, what services a platform can perform depends on which service codes it has applied for and obtained authorization for. This is somewhat similar to the business scope on a business license: even within the same CASP-authorized entity, different entities may be permitted to operate within different business scopes. Currently, there are 279 entities authorized by MiCA CASP, of which approximately 222 are major service providers offering crypto trading-related services such as trading, exchange, or order execution. However, among these entities, only 18 are actually authorized to operate crypto asset trading platforms, i.e., those authorized to provide MiCA Class b services. Therefore, understanding the CASP authorization system under MiCA requires examining the specific service types it covers. Below, we will break this down in detail. What are the different categories of MiCA CASP licenses? In MiCA's CASP licensing system, crypto asset services are subdivided into 10 categories, or 10 service codes from A to J, which determine the businesses a platform is permitted to operate. Based on these 10 service categories, MiCA further divides the minimum capital requirements for CASP into three tiers—Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3—through Annex IV, determining the minimum capital requirements that a platform must meet.
Type a mainly corresponds to custody services, where the platform holds crypto assets on behalf of clients or controls how clients access these assets, such as private keys, account permissions, and custodial wallets.
For CEXs, as long as users place their coins in the platform's account, the platform effectively assumes custody responsibilities. The core focus of this type of business is more on client asset security, private key management, asset isolation, and whether the platform can control client assets.
Type b is actually closest to what people usually understand as "exchange business".
Type b is actually the closest to what people usually understand as "exchange business".
This refers to a platform operating a trading system that allows multiple buyers and sellers to complete transactions under the platform's rules. Typical examples include order books, matching engines, and multilateral trading markets. Therefore, if a platform only facilitates buying and selling between itself and its customers, it may not fall into category B. However, if it allows many users to trade with each other through order books, it falls into the category of trading platform operation. Category C: Crypto-assets for funds. This category refers to a platform using its own capital to exchange cryptocurrencies for funds with its customers. In simpler terms, users use Euros, US dollars, etc., to buy cryptocurrencies, or sell cryptocurrencies to the platform for fiat currency, with the platform itself acting as the counterparty. This is somewhat similar to OTC trading. The key point here is that the platform doesn't simply facilitate transactions between others; rather, it uses its own asset pool to exchange crypto assets for fiat currency with its clients. Category d: Crypto-assets for other crypto assets. Category d refers to what we commonly call cryptocurrency-to-crypto trading services, i.e., the exchange between crypto assets. If the platform uses its own capital or asset pool to complete the exchange with clients, then it falls into this category. Category e: Execution of orders on behalf of clients. Category e refers to the platform executing buy, sell, or purchase orders for crypto assets on behalf of clients. It's somewhat like a brokerage business; after a user places an order, the platform executes the transaction on behalf of the client, rather than the user directly operating on the trading platform. The platform doesn't just receive orders; it actually completes the transaction for the client. **F Category: Placement of Crypto-Assets** This category primarily corresponds to issuance-side services. If a platform promotes, sells, or allocates a crypto asset to investors on behalf of the project owner, issuer, or related party, it may fall into this category. Examples include Launchpad, IEOs, and new coin issuance sales. **G Category: Reception and Transmission of Orders** This category refers to a platform receiving customer orders and then passing them on to a third party for execution. It's easily confused with category e. However, the difference is that in e, the platform executes the order on behalf of the customer, while in g, the platform only receives and transmits the order; the final execution may occur on another platform or third party. Some aggregators, order routing platforms, and brokerage portals may involve this type of service. h type: Advice on crypto-assets h type refers to providing clients with personalized advice on crypto assets. For example, based on the client's personal circumstances, risk tolerance, and investment goals, it recommends buying, selling, or using a specific crypto asset service; this is more of an advisory service. i type: Portfolio management i type corresponds to crypto asset management business, where users authorize a platform or service provider to manage their crypto asset portfolio. The service provider has a certain degree of discretion in the client's asset allocation; that is, the platform can buy, sell, adjust positions, and manage the portfolio on behalf of the client based on the authorization. Class J: Crypto Asset Transfer Services Class J refers to platforms that, on behalf of clients, transfer crypto assets from one address or account to another. Examples include exchanges helping users withdraw funds, custody platforms helping clients transfer funds, and payment platforms completing crypto asset transfers on behalf of clients. These all fall into this category. In addition to these 10 service codes, MiCA's Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 are frequently mentioned in the market. In fact, Class 1/2/3 are not three different MiCA licenses; they are essentially classifications of minimum capital requirements in MiCA Annex IV. Class 1 corresponds to services such as e, f, g, h, i, and j, including order execution, crypto asset placement, receiving and transmitting orders, investment advice, portfolio management, and transfer services, with a minimum capital requirement of €50,000. These services are more related to brokerage, consulting, asset management, order transmission, and transfers, as they do not necessarily involve the platform itself hosting large amounts of client assets or operating the trading platform; therefore, the minimum capital requirement for these services is €50,000. Class 2 builds upon Class 1 by adding services categories a, c, and d. This means that in addition to the original services, it includes client asset custody, crypto-to-funds exchange, and crypto-to-crypto exchange. The minimum capital requirement is €125,000. Class 2 initially involves client asset custody and exchange transactions between the platform and clients using its own capital. It further covers custody and exchange services on top of basic brokerage, order processing, consulting, and transfer services. Class 3 primarily includes the operation of trading platforms in category b. Class 3 can exist solely as category b, or it can incorporate services such as custody, exchange, order execution, and transfer (adding category b to a complete or partial Class 2 framework). Class 3 is actually the closest to a complete exchange business, with a minimum capital requirement of €150,000. In summary, the core of MiCA CASP is service code licensing. License codes a through j represent the specific crypto asset services a platform can offer. Class 1/2/3 simply set different minimum capital requirements based on the risk and complexity of these services. Therefore, understanding this rule allows for a better assessment of which businesses a platform can legally conduct under MiCA.
As of ESMA July 3, 2026 (weekly update), there are 279 MiCA CASP authorized entities. The vast majority are Class 2, with a small number in Class 3.
Currently, there are 18 entities with Class 3 authorization that include Class b trading platform operation service codes.
1. OKX
OKX obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Maltese entity OKX Europe Limited, with the authorization date being January 27, 2025. Its service codes are a, b, c, d, e, f, g, i, and j, covering client asset custody, trading platform operation, fiat currency exchange, cryptocurrency exchange, order execution, cryptocurrency allocation, order receipt and transmission, portfolio management, and cryptocurrency transfer services. Based on the service code coverage, OKX is one of the Class 3 platforms with a relatively complete authorization scope.
2. Gate.io EU
Gate.io EU obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Maltese entity Gate Technology Limited, with the authorization date being September 29, 2025.
9. RULEMATCH
RULEMATCH obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Liechtenstein entity RULEMATCH Europe AG, with the authorization date of June 1, 2026. Its service codes are a, b, and j, covering client asset custody, trading platform operation, and crypto asset transfer services.
10. Bitstamp
Bitstamp obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Luxembourg entity Bitstamp Europe S.A., with the authorization date of May 15, 2025. Its service codes are a, b, c, d, e, g, and j, covering client asset custody, trading platform operation, fiat currency exchange, cryptocurrency exchange, order execution, order receipt and transmission, and crypto asset transfer services.
11. Kanga Exchange EU
Kanga Exchange EU obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Latvian entity SIA AlphaRoute, with the authorization date being June 18, 2026. Its service codes are a, b, c, d, f, and j, covering client asset custody, trading platform operation, fiat currency exchange, cryptocurrency exchange, cryptocurrency allocation, and cryptocurrency transfer services.
12. Anycoin
Anycoin obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Czech entity MP Developers s.r.o., with the authorization date being February 11, 2026. Its service codes are a, b, c, d, and e, covering client asset custody, trading platform operation, fiat currency exchange, cryptocurrency exchange, and order execution services.
13. Revolut Crypto
Revolut Crypto obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Cypriot entity Revolut Digital Assets (Europe) Ltd, with the authorization date being October 20, 2025. Its service codes are a, b, c, d, f, and j, covering client asset custody, trading platform operation, fiat currency exchange, cryptocurrency exchange, cryptocurrency allocation, and cryptocurrency transfer services.
14. ZBX
ZBX obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Maltese entity Zillion Bits Limited, with the authorization date being February 6, 2025.
17. zerohash Europe
zerohash Europe obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Dutch entity zerohash Europe B.V., with the authorization date being October 29, 2025. Its service codes are a, b, c, d, and j, covering client asset custody, trading platform operation, fiat currency exchange, cryptocurrency exchange, and crypto asset transfer services.
18. FIRI AS
FIRI AS obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Norwegian entity FIRI AS, with the authorization date being May 22, 2026.
FIRI AS obtained MiCA CASP authorization through the Norwegian entity FIRI AS, with the authorization date being May 22, 2026.
Includes:
Binance
Bitget
MEXC
HTX / Huobi
Upbit
Nexo
Deribit
Bitfinex
Poloniex
Phemex
Thailand's Ministry of Finance revoked Zipmex's license due to compliance issues, financial risks, and improper management, following an SEC investigation revealing unauthorized fund transfers.
AlexCoinbase acquires a French VASP license, expanding its European reach and aligning with France's tech goals.
Cheng YuanThis makes Commerzbank the first full-service German bank to receive such a license. With the license, it enables Commerzbank to provide custody services for crypto assets and expand its offerings to include "further digital asset services."
AaronFTX previously purchased an Australian company to bypass the financial services license process.
BeincryptoOne of the world's largest crypto firms, Binance, is aggressively making its presence felt across several nations. Before now, the ...
BitcoinistThe Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas said that the closing of VASP applications begins on Sept. 1, 2022, and will last for three years.
CointelegraphThe mobile-first cryptocurrency exchange recently received regulatory approvals to operate in Greece, Singapore and Dubai.
CointelegraphA spokesman for Commerzbank confirmed to local media that it applied for a license with BaFin earlier this year, the first time a major German bank has applied for a license.
CointelegraphThe new license from Puerto Rico further strengthens Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao's vision to be licensed everywhere.
CointelegraphA spokesperson for Commerzbank confirmed to local media that it applied for the license with BaFin earlier this year as a first for a major bank in Germany.
Cointelegraph