MiCA vs. US Crypto Regulations
When comparing MiCA with U.S. crypto regulations, a few key differences stand out, especially in terms of approach and structure.
-
Regulatory Bodies and Oversight
In the U.S., crypto regulation is more fragmented, with different agencies handling different aspects of crypto business operations. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) oversees digital assets that are considered securities, while the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) focuses on derivatives and commodities. These agencies have a somewhat reactive approach, issuing guidance and enforcement actions as the industry evolves.
In contrast, MiCA provides a comprehensive, proactive framework for the regulation of crypto-assets, including crypto exchanges, custody services, and stablecoins. MiCA's uniform regulatory structure ensures a consistent, clear and stable approach across all EU member states.
MiCA applies to a wide range of crypto activities, covering everything from custody services to the issuance of stablecoins and the operation of trading platforms. In the U.S., while there is regulation on certain crypto activities, the lack of a unified national framework creates some uncertainty. This can lead to conflicting interpretations and regulatory overlap between different authorities.
MiCA and Other EU Regulations
MiCA doesn’t operate in isolation within the EU; it works alongside other key regulations that affect crypto businesses, including the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) and the Payment Services Directive (PSD2).
-
DORA (Digital Operational Resilience Act)
DORA was introduced to strengthen the operational resilience of the EU's financial sector, ensuring that firms can withstand digital disruptions. For crypto businesses, this is particularly important, as it mandates that firms, including crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), must have robust systems and security measures in place to manage technological risks. We also recommend you check out our article What Is DORA Compliance.
MiCA & DORA generally overlap, especially when it comes to security protocols and risk management practices. Both regulations require businesses to take proactive steps to safeguard assets and protect users, making compliance with both equally crucial.
-
PSD2 (Payment Services Directive 2)
PSD2 regulates payment services and electronic money institutions within the EU. For crypto businesses that offer payment services, MiCA and PSD2 work together to ensure that these companies meet stringent customer protection and data privacy standards. While MiCA focuses on the broader framework for crypto-assets, PSD2 provides additional clarity on how crypto payments and transactions should be handled, especially in terms of security and authentication.
-
AML-CFT (Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Financing of Terrorism)
MiCA also operates alongside the AML-CFT Directive (Directive (EU) 2015/849), which requires businesses to implement robust anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-financing of terrorism (CFT) measures. Crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) must comply with this directive in addition to MiCA to prevent financial crimes and maintain transparency in crypto transactions.
-
Interconnections and Compliance Across Regulations
While MiCA focuses on the regulatory framework for crypto-assets, its rules are closely tied with other EU regulations like DORA, PSD2, and AML-CFT. These regulations often overlap in terms of requirements, particularly regarding security standards, customer protection, and financial transparency.
It’s important for crypto businesses to comply with all these regulations simultaneously, as they address different aspects of crypto operations. Failure to meet one regulation's requirements could lead to non-compliance with others, which might result in legal penalties or loss of market access.