Europe’s crypto regulatory framework faces scrutiny over whether enforcement of MiCA should stay with national authorities or shift to ESMA. Disparities in licensing between member states raise concerns about inconsistent supervision and regulatory arbitrage. Calls for centralization of oversight are growing, with France, Austria, and Italy supporting the move. Centralization could improve efficiency in enforcing regulations.

The ESMA peer review of Malta’s authorization of a crypto service provider revealed only partial compliance. Some regulators and policymakers support transferring supervisory powers to ESMA for a more centralized enforcement model. While MiCA’s design is praised, technical questions remain, such as interpreting the requirement for custodians to return client assets “immediately.” Ambiguities need clarification for wider adoption.

Lewin Boehnke from Crypto Finance Group highlights the uneven application of MiCA across EU jurisdictions. While the overarching structure of MiCA is praised for regulating intermediaries, technical ambiguities remain unresolved. Centralization of oversight could streamline enforcement and reduce delays caused by differing national approaches. The crypto industry awaits clarity from ESMA on technical questions.

Read more at Coin Telegraph: ESMA Centralization and MiCA Enforcement Debate