France threatens with blockade for foreign cryptolications

The French financial regulator, the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF), is considering prohibiting crypto companies that are active in France with a permit from another EU member state. This puts pressure on the so -called passport mechanism, a nuclear part of European cryptow legislation.

According to Reuters news agency, the AMF fears that companies consciously opt for countries with smoother rules to gain faster access to the European market. The step questions the functioning of the European Regulation Markets for CryptoActiva (MICA), which has been in force since 2023.

Mica: Uniform framework or source of tension?

Mica was introduced to create one harmonized supervisory framework and to remove national differences. Companies with a license in one Member State could therefore automatically be active throughout the EU.

Nevertheless, the AMF warns against regulatory arbitration, where companies benefit from the smoothest regimes. “Blocking passports is technically possible, but brings considerable legal complexity,” says Marina Markezic, director of the European Crypto Initiative (EUCI).

Legal feasibility disputes

Not all experts support the French course. According to Edwin Mata, lawyer and CEO of Tokenization Platform Brickken, France cannot legally prevent a company with a valid mica license. “Mica is a regulation and applies directly in all Member States. France can supervise and pass on signals to the European Authority for Effects and Markets (ESMA), but do not impose its own blockages,” said Mata.

He does, however, point out that France wants to monitor the correct qualification of crypto products. This should prevent financial instruments that actually fall under the stricter securities law (MiFID II) are nevertheless offered under MICA.

European call for stricter supervision

France is not alone in his worries. Austria and Italy also recently argued for a greater role of ESMA in the supervision of international crypto companies. Some proposals would even require mica adjustments, which can again cause political negotiations and uncertainty in the sector.

The discussion revolves around whether national supervisors should be given more room to intervene, or whether supervision must be organized completely centrally in Brussels. The fact is that Mica, once intended to harmonize the cryptomarkt, is already causing divisions within the EU.