Post July 1, unlicensed platforms in Europe will face a shutdown.
Written by: KarenZ, Foresight News
After July 1, for crypto users in Europe, whether the app can still be accessed is just the surface signal. The more critical issue lies in the account terms: which legal entity is providing the service, and whether it has obtained MiCA authorization.
MiCA, which stands for Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, is the EU's unified regulatory framework for the crypto asset market, covering stablecoin issuance, public offerings of crypto assets, trading platforms, custody, exchanges, order execution, advisory services, and more.
Its core change is to advance the previous fragmented VASP registration and anti-money laundering regulation in various member states to a unified access rule at the EU level. In the formal MiCA document, authorized entities are referred to as CASP (Crypto-Asset Service Provider), meaning 'crypto asset service provider.'
MiCA officially took effect on June 29, 2023; rules related to ART and EMT, namely Asset Reference Tokens and Electronic Money Tokens, will apply starting June 30, 2024; CASP rules for crypto asset service providers will take effect on December 30, 2024.
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) clearly reminded in its statement on April 17, 2026, that the transitional arrangements for all member states will end no later than July 1, 2026. After that, entities that have not obtained MiCA authorization but continue to provide crypto asset services to EU clients will violate EU law and must cease related services.
This is also the backdrop of Binance's sudden statement on June 16. Reuters reported on June 16, citing two informed sources, that Binance's application submitted to the Greek market regulator is expected to be rejected.
Subsequently, Binance responded on June 16, stating that it had been in constructive communication with regulators for the past 18 months and indicated its understanding that 'the Greek regulator has completed its review of the application, believes the application meets MiCA requirements, and that the application was also reviewed at the ESMA level.' For European users, what truly needs to be awaited is Binance's further arrangements promised before June 30, 2026, and the final status of the official authorization list after July 1.
From 3,167 old VASPs to 216 CASP records.
In the past, the entry into the European crypto market was very broad. Coincub's Europe Crypto Report 2025 shows that by the end of 2024, there are over 3,167 virtual asset service providers in Europe, using terms like CASP, VASP, or DASP interchangeably, indicating the crypto service entities under various registration frameworks before MiCA.
By country, Poland has over 1,400, accounting for at least about 44.2% of the total in Europe; Lithuania has over 530, accounting for at least about 16.7%. These two registration-friendly jurisdictions together account for at least 1,930, representing approximately 61% of the old VASP scale in Europe. Italy has 150, accounting for about 4.7%; Spain 106, about 3.3%; France 104, about 3.3%. Germany has 11, Austria 12, and Belgium 8, with the three together accounting for less than 1%.
MiCA rewrites the access logic. The 3,167 businesses counted by Coincub fall under the service providers registered in the old VASP framework of various member states before MiCA.
The author downloaded the 'temporary MiCA register' from the ESMA website (data updated on June 12), which contains 216 CASP records. The figures 3,167 and 216 cannot be simply subtracted: the former is the size of the old registration, while the latter are legal entities that have entered authorized registration under MiCA, with different regulatory requirements, statistical scopes, and legal implications.
Among the 216 CASP records, by the member states of authorization, Germany has the most with 55; the Netherlands 26, France 19, Malta 15; Cyprus and Ireland each 12, Austria 9, Spain, Czech Republic, and Luxembourg each 7.
In terms of service types, CASP authorization isn't a single license but a set of specific service permissions. Out of 216 records, 147 include custody and management of crypto asset services, 131 include crypto asset transfer services, 113 include crypto asset to fiat currency exchanges, 97 include crypto-to-crypto exchanges, and 114 include order execution services. Additionally, 15 include qualifications to operate crypto asset trading platform services.
There is business overlap between these services: exchanges, order execution, receiving and transmitting orders all appear in the 'trading' process as understood by users; while 'operating a trading platform' in the regulatory context leans more towards matching or platform infrastructure permissions. Therefore, under MiCA, the competitive units are no longer just exchange brands, but the specific legal entities in the EU register. Brand presence remains important, but whether they can continue to serve the European market ultimately depends on whether these entities obtain authorization, what services they are permitted, and which member states they cover.
Additionally, MiCA licensing is registered according to specific legal entities. One brand can correspond to multiple entities, for instance, Kraken has two records in Ireland under Payward Global Solutions Limited and Payward Europe Solutions Limited; Bitpanda appears under entities in Austria, Germany, and Malta. Therefore, seeing the brand name isn't enough; users must also look at the actual company name providing the services as stated in the account terms.
Notably, the European Securities and Markets Authority also disclosed a list of non-compliant or warning entities; out of 149 records, 147 are from the Italian National Companies and Securities Commission (CONSOB), with one each from the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) and the Slovak NBS. This statistics reflects the regulatory affiliation or member state designation of the records, not necessarily the entity's registered location.
The record from the Dutch AFM for MEXC Global specifies that MEXC is providing crypto asset services in the Netherlands without obtaining the required MiCA license.
This means that the implementation of MiCA has progressed to the regulatory identification phase of 'who has obtained a license' and 'who is still providing services without a license.'
Which platforms or institutions have already appeared in the temporary MiCA CASP register?
According to the explanation on the ESMA page, this temporary register will be updated regularly until it is officially integrated into ESMA's IT system in mid-2026.
From the market role perspective, the entities in the ESMA 'temporary MiCA CASP register' can roughly be divided into several categories. The first category is global crypto exchanges, which typically enter the register through local EU entities.
For instance, Coinbase Luxembourg S.A., Payward Europe Solutions Limited / Payward Global Solutions Limited (related to Kraken), OKX Europe Limited, Foris DAX MT Limited (related to Crypto.com), Bybit EU GmbH, KuCoin EU Exchange GmbH, Gate Technology Limited, Gemini Intergalactic EU Ltd, and Bitstamp Europe S.A. as well as Backpack EU corresponding to 'Trek Technologies' SIA. Most of these entities have obtained authorization through member states like Luxembourg, Ireland, Malta, and Austria, extending to more European markets. Additionally, the stablecoin infrastructure company BVNK has also obtained a CASP license under the MiCA framework from the Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA).
The second category includes local or regional platforms in Europe, such as Bitpanda, Bitvavo, Bit2Me, Coinhouse, Coinmate, 21bitcoin, ZBX, and One Trading. Their global presence can't compare to that of large exchanges, but they have a practical advantage in the context of MiCA: the business entity, regulatory affiliation, and customer service path in Europe are more likely to fall under local legal entities.
The third category includes traditional financial institutions, brokerages/investment platforms, and professional custody institutions, stablecoin infrastructure, etc., including Spain's BBVA, Revolut, Trade Republic, Robinhood Europe, eToro, N26, AMINA, and custody-focused Zodia. Additionally, the stablecoin infrastructure company BVNK has also obtained a CASP license under the MiCA framework from the Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA).
They enter the CASP list in different ways: banks and brokerages focus more on customer access, order transmission, order execution, or investment services; custody institutions like Zodia focus more on crypto asset custody and transfer services. Their emergence indicates that the competitive landscape under MiCA is not limited to exchanges, as traditional finance and professional infrastructure service providers are also entering the same access framework.
Here, we need to look at service permissions rather than just whether the brand appears. For example, records for OKX Europe Limited, Gate Technology Limited, Bitstamp Europe S.A., Bitvavo B.V., One Trading Exchange B.V. include the operation of crypto asset trading platform services; entities like Coinbase, Crypto.com, Bybit, KuCoin, Gemini, and Backpack EU cover user trading processes more through combinations of custody, exchange, order execution, transfer, and other services. In other words, the 'exchange business' as understood by users will be broken down into multiple service permissions in the MiCA framework, and cannot be judged solely by one field.
At the same time, Binance, Bitget, MEXC, HTX/Huobi, and Bitfinex do not appear under these brands or related names in this temporary MiCA CASP register. Of course, this only means that no corresponding CASP authorization records were found in this version of the temporary register as of ESMA's last update; it does not rule out the possibility that individual platforms are applying under different entities or adjusting their service scope, or that they will be updated into the list later.
Asset Reference Tokens and Electronic Money Tokens are also major focuses of MiCA.
In addition to CASP authorization, compliance for ART/EMT is also a major focus of MiCA.
ART, or Asset Reference Tokens, typically anchor to a basket of currencies, commodities, crypto assets, or other assets; EMT, or Electronic Money Tokens, usually anchor to a single fiat currency, closer to the context of electronic money under EU regulations.
The former relates to asset reserves, redemption arrangements, and systemic risk, while the latter directly touches on payments, stablecoins, and currency sovereignty, so both are listed separately in MiCA.
This is also the reason why the ESMA temporary MiCA registration separates ART issuers and EMT issuers into different tables. However, at present, the ART issuer table has not shown any entries for ART issuers; the EMT issuer table has 40 records related to electronic money token issuers, involving entities like Payment Corporation SE (Stable Labs), Circle Internet Financial Europe, Société Générale - Forge, AllUnity, Paxos Issuance Europe, Monerium, Banking Circle, StablR, and others.
Summary
The ESMA annual report for 2025 can also explain this change. The annual report mentions that ESMA completed several key tasks under the MiCA framework in 2025, including issuing guidelines on whether crypto assets constitute financial instruments, standardizing CASP employee competency requirements, providing briefings to national regulatory authorities regarding CASP authorization, and pushing for convergence of regulatory standards through discussions of real cases. ESMA also maintained a temporary register of crypto entities and prepared to integrate into the final IT solution for the European Single Access Point (ESAP).
More critically, ESMA has linked crypto regulation with data regulation. The annual report states that ESMA procured an EU-level crypto market monitoring tool in 2025, allowing ESMA and national supervisory authorities to collect on-chain and off-chain data under the MiCA framework and generate shared alerts. This means that post-MiCA, the regulatory focus won't just stop at 'who has obtained a license' but will extend to trading monitoring, market abuse identification, on-chain data tracking, and cross-border regulatory cooperation.
The cutoff point of MiCA on July 1 feels more like a boundary between the transitional period and the execution period of European crypto regulation. The authorization list, white paper disclosure table, issuer registration, list of non-compliant entities, as well as on-chain and off-chain monitoring tools, together form the new regulatory infrastructure.
For exchanges and institutions, the competitive variables in the European market are changing. User scale and brand presence remain important, but the ability to continue serving European business depends on more specific regulatory coordinates: which legal entity is authorized, what services are permitted, which member states are covered, and whether the assets supported by the platform enter the corresponding MiCA disclosure or issuance framework.