European authorities added 15 crypto-asset service providers to the Markets in Crypto-Assets register, lifting the total number of listed firms to 309.
Key Takeaways
- BNY’s Belgian bank unit joins, with regional banks and payment firms.
- Grandfathering ended July 1; a pending application does not extend it.
- Listing confirms presence, not the services a firm may offer.
- Check each provider’s legal entity and scope in the live register.
The July 24 update includes BNY SA/NV in Belgium, four German institutions and three Danish companies. Bulgaria and Latvia each contributed two providers, while Cyprus, Liechtenstein and the Netherlands added one apiece.
This is the third expansion since the July 1 end of MiCA’s maximum transitional period. It follows the previous register update, which raised the total to 294 providers.
The latest additions are more revealing for their mix than their number. A global custodian, regional banks, payment companies and crypto-native firms now appear under the same framework, although their permissions and intended customers can differ substantially.
The 15 New MiCA Register Entries
The latest additions to the official ESMA MiCA register are:
- Belgium: BNY SA/NV.
- Bulgaria: Altcoins BG EOOD and Digital Assist OOD.
- Cyprus: SG Digital Assets Limited.
- Germany: JT Technologies GmbH, Spar- und Kreditbank Rheinstetten eG, VR-Bank Augsburg-Ostallgäu eG and Raiffeisenbank Falkenstein-Wörth.
- Denmark: Coinify ApS, Januar ApS and SafeLynx Technologies ApS.
- Liechtenstein: Damoon Technology (Europe) AG.
- Latvia: Bleap SIA and Nodu Digital, SIA.
- Netherlands: BitPay B.V.
Germany contributed the largest national group, but the list does not represent 15 companies entering the same line of business. Some may serve consumers, while others provide custody, transfers, payments or execution to professional clients. MiCA gathers those activities into one regulatory system without treating every registered firm as a full-service exchange.
BNY’s Entry Points to Institutional Infrastructure
BNY SA/NV is the most recognizable name in the update, and the easiest to misread. It is a regulated bank, and its likely European role is institutional infrastructure rather than a retail trading platform comparable to a conventional crypto exchange.
The Belgian company is a regulated credit institution and part of BNY’s European banking structure. Its existing business focuses on areas such as custody, asset servicing and collateral management for institutional clients.
That background makes digital-asset custody a natural strategic fit. European banks, fund managers and other financial institutions need regulated counterparties capable of safeguarding crypto assets and connecting them with established settlement and reporting systems.
BNY’s official digital custody materials describe a platform that places traditional and digital assets in one operating environment for safekeeping, settlement, accounting and servicing.
The company is also building infrastructure for tokenized finance. BNY says it has developed systems that support tokenized fund units, on-chain and off-chain record reconciliation, and stablecoin-based subscriptions and redemptions.
Those capabilities explain why the MiCA entry matters. The larger opportunity for BNY may sit behind the customer interface, providing custody and operational infrastructure to institutions offering digital assets or tokenized products.
What that means in practice depends on the permissions recorded for the legal entity. A scope limited to custody and administration would cover safekeeping, while permissions for transfers or execution would allow a broader role in client transactions and settlement. The ESMA record therefore carries more weight than BNY’s wider global product range when determining what the Belgian entity may offer in Europe.
Banks Follow a Different MiCA Route
Describing every listed company as holding an “ESMA licence” would be inaccurate.
National competent authorities approve or receive notifications from providers and send the information to ESMA, which maintains the central register. ESMA says the published records reflect information submitted by the relevant authorising or notified authority.
Standalone crypto companies generally apply for authorization under Article 63 of the MiCA regulation. Credit institutions such as banks can use the Article 60 notification process for the crypto services they intend to provide.
A bank must notify its home authority before launching those services and supply information on its governance, controls, custody arrangements and operating procedures. The notification route avoids duplicating parts of the prudential review already applied to regulated financial institutions, but it does not grant unrestricted permission to conduct every crypto activity. Each service must still appear within the scope accepted by the relevant authority.
July 1 Ended the Broad Transition
MiCA let some providers operating legally before December 30, 2024 continue temporarily under older national regimes, but the maximum grandfathering period ended on July 1, 2026, with several member states setting shorter deadlines. A pending application did not extend those rights, so firms without the required authorization or notification could no longer trade across the EU on their old national status.
A Pending Application Was Not a General Grace Period
A company saying it applied before the deadline or remains in talks with its regulator has not, by itself, confirmed it may keep operating, since MiCA allowed grandfathered providers to continue only until July 1, 2026 or until their application was approved or refused, whichever came first. Customers should therefore verify a provider’s current status in the live register rather than assume an application protects the business indefinitely.
The Register Does Not Contain 309 Exchanges
MiCA recognizes several separate services, including custody, transfers, execution of client orders, exchanging crypto for funds and operating a trading platform, and inclusion in the register does not mean a company can provide all of them. The legal entity matters too, so the company named in a customer agreement should match the entity and official website recorded by ESMA.
Smaller Markets Can Support Europe-Wide Expansion
The Bulgarian, Latvian, Cypriot and Liechtenstein entries show how smaller jurisdictions can gain importance under MiCA.
Once the relevant process is complete, a provider can use the framework to offer authorized services across other European Economic Area markets through passporting, without seeking a separate full licence in every country.
Companies may choose a home state based on their existing operations, staffing, language and familiarity with the local supervisor. That creates opportunities for smaller financial centres to attract crypto businesses.
It also makes consistent supervision essential. A provider approved or notified in one country may later serve customers across much of Europe, so weaknesses in its home supervision would not stay a local issue. ESMA’s role is partly to reduce those differences by coordinating national authorities and publishing common technical and supervisory standards.
What Customers Should Verify
A MiCA claim should be checked against the official register rather than accepted from a company announcement or licence logo.
- Legal entity: Match the registered company with the customer agreement.
- Service scope: Confirm that the permission covers the product offered.
- Home supervisor: Identify the authority responsible for the provider.
- Effective status: Check authorization, notification and withdrawal dates.
- Official website: Compare the domain with ESMA’s recorded information.
MiCA status means that a provider has entered a supervised framework with rules covering governance, capital, custody and customer protection. It does not prevent cyberattacks, poor management or investment losses.
The Mix of Providers Matters More Than the Total
The increase to 309 shows that national regulators are still working through applications after the transitional period ended. The batch also offers a clearer view of the market taking shape.
Crypto-native firms remain part of it, but BNY and the German banks show that established finance is building its own place inside the framework. Payment companies add another layer focused on moving assets rather than running large trading venues.
BNY’s appearance is particularly relevant because institutional adoption depends on more than investor demand. Large allocators also need regulated recordkeeping and settlement connections before they can use digital assets at scale.
The remaining question is what each provider is actually permitted to launch. The company name confirms its presence in the register; the service scope determines what that presence means.
- Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment or legal advice. MiCA status does not guarantee the safety, solvency or performance of a crypto-asset service provider.
- Methodology: Provider names, jurisdictions and the total count are based on ESMA’s July 24 MiCA register update. Regulatory analysis uses the official MiCA text and ESMA’s transitional guidance. BNY’s institutional strategy is assessed through its official custody and tokenization materials, while the exact services available in Europe remain subject to the scope recorded for BNY SA/NV.
Be the first to comment