What happened
- Specific facts/numbers: The Council’s position would leave direct ESMA supervision for “significant” crypto-asset service providers rather than all MiCA-authorised CASPs; the Ledger Insights report says MiCA’s existing 15 million EU-user significance threshold remains, while added alternative criteria could bring in firms with just over 1 million users if they also meet at least two other tests such as custody assets and trading volume.
- Institutions involved: The key institutions are the Council of the EU, the European Commission, ESMA, and MiCA-regulated crypto-asset service providers.
- Regulatory/technical context: The change sits inside the EU’s Market Integration and Supervision Package, separate from the Commission’s MiCA review often dubbed “MiCA 2”; according to the article, Commissioner Maria Luís Albuquerque said the Commission “deeply regrets” the compromise because only some providers would move to ESMA supervision.
- What to watch next: Watch the next stage of EU negotiations on the MISP package and whether the final text keeps the Council’s narrower test for significant CASPs; no specific next milestone beyond further negotiations was identified.
Why it matters
This would keep more day-to-day crypto supervision with national authorities, while still giving ESMA a direct role over the largest or otherwise significant cross-border firms.
HKMA Relevance
Indirect: The EU’s choice between centralised and national crypto supervision could influence how Hong Kong firms and regulators benchmark oversight of large cross-border crypto intermediaries, but no HKMA action is involved.