CASP application evidence pack
A practical checklist for EU CASP teams turning MiCA authorisation material, Article 67 prudential-safeguard decisions, and Article 75 custody risk into a coherent evidence pack.
Why this page exists
Article 62 application material is broad: identity, governance, programme of operations, controls, custody arrangements where relevant, complaints, outsourcing, ICT and operational risk, and service-specific procedures. CASPs need a clear, source-backed way to assemble evidence before asking a competent authority, broker, counsel, or internal risk owner to react.
Mintara Labs can help prepare the application narrative, evidence inventory, and risk-transfer questions. That does not make Mintara Labs a broker, insurer, underwriter, law firm, or regulated adviser.
Evidence pack structure
1. Authorisation scope
Services requested, target member state, passporting plan, client segments, operating entities, and the boundaries between crypto-asset services, custody, transfer, exchange, trading platform, advice, or portfolio management.
2. Governance and ownership
Management body, fit-and-proper evidence, ownership and group structure, decision rights, conflicts management, and board-level risk ownership.
3. Programme of operations
Business model, commercial policy, client onboarding, service flow, outsourced functions, critical vendors, continuity planning, and operational resilience assumptions.
4. Article 67 prudential-safeguard narrative
Article 67 own-funds calculation, fixed-overhead basis, whether insurance or a comparable guarantee is being evaluated, and how the selected path maps to the firm’s actual risk profile.
5. Custody and client-asset controls
Wallet model, key-control procedures, segregation of client crypto-assets and funds, access recovery, reconciliation, incident response, and the Article 75 loss scenarios the firm can evidence.
6. Insurance-market questions
Professional indemnity, cyber, crime, custody liability, D&O, exclusions, retroactive dates, deductibles, claims history, and the exact question being asked of brokers or insurers.
Source-backed hooks to cite internally
- MiCA Article 62: application for authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider and information to be submitted to the home member-state competent authority.
- MiCA Article 67: prudential safeguards may be own funds, an insurance policy, a comparable guarantee, or a combination, with minimum policy characteristics where insurance is used.
- MiCA Article 75: custody and administration duties matter when the CASP safeguards or controls client crypto-assets or the means of access.
- National competent-authority forms: public forms and guidance from authorities such as Ireland’s Central Bank, Luxembourg CSSF, Austrian FMA, or Hungary MNB can help teams understand what evidence may be requested in practice.
FAQ
Is this a legal checklist?
No. It is an operational evidence-pack structure for discovery and preparation. CASPs should validate legal and regulatory interpretation with qualified advisers and their competent authority process.
What is the highest-value use of this page?
Use it before a broker, counsel, or regulator-facing adviser call so the team can separate missing evidence from genuine product, capital, custody, or risk-transfer decisions.
Why include insurance in an application evidence pack?
Because Article 67 explicitly allows insurance or comparable guarantees as part of prudential safeguards, and custody/client-asset exposure under Article 75 often becomes a risk-transfer and underwriting diligence topic.