# The CASP Directory — full LLM text bundle

Informational only. This is not legal, regulatory, brokerage, underwriting, or insurance advice.

## Canonical pages

- Homepage: https://thecaspdirectory.com/
- CASP insurance evidence pack: https://thecaspdirectory.com/insurance.html
- CASP insurance brokers directory: https://thecaspdirectory.com/casp-insurance-brokers.html
- MiCA Article 60 financial entity notification: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-60-financial-entity-notification-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 59 CASP services scope: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-59-casp-services-scope-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 61 reverse solicitation: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-61-reverse-solicitation-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 64 withdrawal of authorisation: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-64-withdrawal-of-authorisation-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 65 cross-border services: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-65-cross-border-services-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 66 conduct obligations: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-66-conduct-obligations-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 67 prudential safeguards: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-67-prudential-safeguards.html
- MiCA Article 67 insurance policy checklist: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-67-insurance-policy-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 62 CASP authorisation application: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-62-casp-authorisation-application-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 63 CASP authorisation assessment: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-63-casp-authorisation-assessment-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 75 custody liability insurance: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-75-custody-liability-insurance.html
- CASP custody insurance underwriting questions: https://thecaspdirectory.com/casp-custody-insurance-underwriting-questions.html
- Article 67 own funds vs insurance: https://thecaspdirectory.com/article-67-own-funds-vs-insurance.html
- Article 75 custody agreement checklist: https://thecaspdirectory.com/article-75-custody-agreement-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 70 client assets safeguarding: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-70-client-assets-safeguarding-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 68 governance and controls: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-68-governance-controls-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 69 information to competent authorities: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-69-information-to-competent-authorities-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 71 complaints handling: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-71-complaints-handling-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 72 conflicts of interest: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-72-conflicts-of-interest-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 73 outsourcing: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-73-outsourcing-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 74 wind-down plan: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-74-wind-down-plan-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 76 trading platform rules: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-76-trading-platform-rules-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 77 exchange services: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-77-exchange-services-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 78 execution of orders: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-78-execution-of-orders-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 79 placing crypto-assets: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-79-placing-crypto-assets-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 80 reception and transmission of orders: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-80-reception-transmission-orders-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 81 advice and portfolio management: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-81-advice-portfolio-management-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 82 transfer services: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-82-transfer-services-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 83 CASP acquisitions: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-83-casp-acquisitions-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 84 CASP acquisition assessment: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-84-casp-acquisition-assessment-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 85 significant CASPs: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-85-significant-casps-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 86 market abuse scope: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-86-market-abuse-scope-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 87 inside information: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-87-inside-information-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 88 public disclosure: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-88-public-disclosure-inside-information-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 89 insider dealing: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-89-insider-dealing-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 90 unlawful disclosure: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-90-unlawful-disclosure-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 91 market manipulation: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-91-market-manipulation-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 92 market abuse detection: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-92-market-abuse-detection-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 93 competent authorities: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-93-competent-authorities-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 94 competent authority powers: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-94-competent-authority-powers-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 95 cooperation between competent authorities: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-95-cooperation-between-competent-authorities-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 96 cooperation with EBA and ESMA: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-96-cooperation-with-eba-and-esma-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 97 third-country cooperation: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-97-third-country-cooperation-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 98 cooperation with other authorities: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-98-cooperation-other-authorities-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 99 duty of notification: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-99-duty-of-notification-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 100 professional secrecy: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-100-professional-secrecy-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 101 data protection: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-101-data-protection-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 102 precautionary measures: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-102-precautionary-measures-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 103 ESMA temporary intervention: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-103-esma-temporary-intervention-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 104 EBA temporary intervention: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-104-eba-temporary-intervention-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 105 product intervention: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-105-product-intervention-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 106 coordination with ESMA or EBA: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-106-coordination-esma-eba-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 107 cooperation with third countries: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-107-third-country-cooperation-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 108 complaints handling by authorities: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-108-complaints-handling-by-authorities-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 109 ESMA CASP register: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-109-esma-casp-register-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 110 non-compliant entities register: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-110-non-compliant-entities-register-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 111 administrative penalties: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-111-administrative-penalties-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 112 supervisory powers and penalties: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-112-supervisory-powers-penalties-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 113 right of appeal: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-113-right-of-appeal-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 114 publication of decisions: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-114-publication-decisions-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 115 reporting penalties: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-115-reporting-penalties-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 116 reporting infringements: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-116-reporting-infringements-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 117 EBA supervision: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-117-eba-supervision-significant-tokens-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 118 EBA crypto-asset committee: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-118-eba-crypto-asset-committee-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 119 colleges for significant tokens: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-119-colleges-significant-tokens-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 120 college opinions: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-120-college-opinions-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 121 legal privilege: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-121-legal-privilege-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 122 request for information: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-122-request-information-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 123 general investigative powers: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-123-general-investigative-powers-checklist.html
- MiCA Article 124 on-site inspections: https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-124-on-site-inspections-checklist.html
- CASP application evidence pack checklist: https://thecaspdirectory.com/casp-application-evidence-pack-checklist.html
- Provider listing request: https://thecaspdirectory.com/list-your-firm.html
- Sponsor and listing page: https://thecaspdirectory.com/sponsor.html

## Provider categories

- Audit and risk firm: https://thecaspdirectory.com/category/audit-and-risk-firm.html
- CASP applicant/operator: https://thecaspdirectory.com/category/casp-applicant-operator.html
- CASP compliance consultant: https://thecaspdirectory.com/category/casp-compliance-consultant.html
- Crypto/fintech insurance broker: https://thecaspdirectory.com/category/crypto-fintech-insurance-broker.html
- Custody/security provider: https://thecaspdirectory.com/category/custody-security-provider.html
- MiCA legal advisor: https://thecaspdirectory.com/category/mica-legal-advisor.html

## Country provider pages

- Austria: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/austria.html
- EU: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/eu.html
- Germany: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/germany.html
- Global: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/global.html
- Malta: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/malta.html
- UK: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/uk.html
- UK/EU: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/uk-eu.html
- UK/EU/Luxembourg: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/uk-eu-luxembourg.html
- UK/Jersey/EU: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/uk-jersey-eu.html
- US/EU: https://thecaspdirectory.com/country/us-eu.html

## Public-source provider listings

- Chainalysis — Audit and risk firm, US/EU: https://www.chainalysis.com/
- Coinfirm — Audit and risk firm, UK/EU: https://www.coinfirm.com/
- Elliptic — Audit and risk firm, UK: https://www.elliptic.co/
- Merkle Science — Audit and risk firm, Global: https://www.merklescience.com/
- TRM Labs — Audit and risk firm, US/EU: https://www.trmlabs.com/
- Bitpanda Technology Solutions — CASP applicant/operator, Austria: https://www.bitpanda.com/en/bts
- DLT Finance — CASP applicant/operator, Germany: https://www.dlt-finance.com/
- A2C Malta — CASP compliance consultant, Malta: https://a2co.com/services/casp-licence/
- Fintech Harbor — CASP compliance consultant, EU: https://www.fintecharbor.com/micas-2026-casp-licensing-plan/
- Gofaizen & Sherle — CASP compliance consultant, EU: https://gofaizen-sherle.com/casp-license
- MAXCORP — CASP compliance consultant, EU: https://www.maxcorp.eu/eng/crypto/mica-casp-license/
- Plenitude Consulting — CASP compliance consultant, EU: https://www.plenitudeconsulting.com/sectors/digital-assets-crypto
- Sedric — CASP compliance consultant, EU: https://www.sedric.ai/blog/mica-compliance-for-crypto-firms-in-the-eu-a-practical-guide-to-regulation-and-risk-management
- Thistle Initiatives — CASP compliance consultant, EU: https://www.thistleinitiatives.co.uk/sectors/digitalassets/
- fscom — CASP compliance consultant, UK: https://fscom.co/sectors/digital-assets/
- Canopius — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, EU: https://www.canopius.com/insurance/cryptocurrency-insurance/
- Elmore Insurance Brokers — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, EU: https://elmorebrokers.com/insurance-vs-own-funds-under-mica-why-forward-thinking-casps-are-choosing-strategic-risk-transfer/
- Evertas — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, EU: https://evertas.com/
- Howden — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, UK: https://www.howdengroup.com/uk-en/sector/financial-services/digital-assets-and-cryptocurrency-insurance
- Jensten Insurance — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, EU: https://jensteninsurance.co.uk/digital-asset-crypto-insurance/
- Lockton — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, UK: https://global.lockton.com/gb/en/products-services/digital-asset-insurance
- Superscript — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, EU: https://gosuperscript.com/broker/blockchain-insurance/
- Verlingue — Crypto/fintech insurance broker, UK: https://www.verlingue.co.uk/our-services/business-insurance/cryptocurrency-insurance/
- Coincover — Custody/security provider, UK: https://www.coincover.com/
- Fireblocks — Custody/security provider, US/EU: https://www.fireblocks.com/
- Komainu — Custody/security provider, UK/Jersey/EU: https://www.komainu.com/
- Zodia Custody — Custody/security provider, UK/EU/Luxembourg: https://zodia.io/
- Buckingham Capital Consulting — MiCA legal advisor, EU: https://www.buckinghamcapitalconsulting.com/casp-licence
- CMS Law — MiCA legal advisor, EU: https://cms.law/
- Crystal Intelligence — MiCA legal advisor, EU: https://crystalintelligence.com/
- Kroll — MiCA legal advisor, EU: https://www.kroll.com/en/services/financial-crime-advisory/crypto-risk-investigation-compliance
- Legal Nodes — MiCA legal advisor, EU: https://www.legalnodes.com/article/mica-regulation-explained
- Norton Rose Fulbright — MiCA legal advisor, EU: https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/2cec201e/regulating-crypto-assets-in-europe-practical-guide-to-mica
- Sumsub — MiCA legal advisor, EU: https://sumsub.com/blog/crypto-regulations-in-the-european-union-markets-in-crypto-assets-mica/

## Commercial-intent guide summaries

### CASP insurance evidence pack
CASPs should organize activity scope, custody design, controls, governance, incident history, vendors, client terms, and Article 67/75 risk-transfer questions before asking brokers or markets for terms.

### CASP insurance brokers
CASPs should use broker listings as a public-source starting point after preparing evidence for Article 67 prudential safeguards, professional indemnity, cyber/crime, custody liability, and Article 75 loss-scenario questions. Listings are not recommendations or endorsements.

### List your MiCA CASP provider firm
Providers can request a factual listing or correction through the Netlify form or mailto fallback by sending firm identity, geography, category, and a public source URL showing MiCA/CASP relevance. Requests are reviewed before publication and commercial placements stay labeled and separate.

### MiCA Article 60 financial entity notification
Already-authorised financial entities should map existing permissions, planned crypto-asset services, notification evidence, governance, ICT, outsourcing, custody/client-asset exposure, and insurance/prudential-safeguard assumptions before relying on the Article 60 route.

### MiCA Article 61 reverse solicitation
Third-country firms and EU-facing teams should make the client-initiative record, solicitation or promotion history, contractual clause or disclaimer limits, close-link and on-behalf-of relationships, new crypto-asset or service boundaries, and Article 59/62 authorisation-route handoffs easy to verify before relying on a reverse-solicitation assumption.

### MiCA Article 64 withdrawal of authorisation
CASPs should make service activity, inactivity thresholds, express renunciation decisions, irregular-authorisation remediation, authorisation-condition evidence, AML issue ownership, governance escalation, client-impact planning, and Article 74 wind-down handoffs easy to verify before withdrawal risk becomes an operational crisis.

### MiCA Article 65 cross-border services
Authorised CASPs preparing to provide crypto-asset services in more than one Member State should make the Member State list, cross-border service scope, starting date, other activity boundaries, 10 working days communication tracking, 15th calendar day fallback timing, and Article 62/68 evidence handoffs easy to verify.

### MiCA Article 66 conduct obligations
CASPs should make honest, fair and professional conduct, client communications, marketing communications, pricing, costs and charges, complaint routes, conflicts handoffs, and governance ownership easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### MiCA Article 59 CASP services scope
Crypto firms assessing MiCA applicability should use the Article 59 scope checklist to document current, planned, and marketed activities against the Article 59(1) crypto-asset service list, record in-scope versus out-of-scope determinations for each activity, assess ancillary versus primary activity framing, map third-country EU-facing activity controls, and route the determination to Article 60 notification, Article 62 authorisation, or Article 61 reverse-solicitation evidence. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-59-casp-services-scope-checklist.html for the full scope evidence checklist.

### MiCA Article 67 prudential safeguards
Article 67 allows prudential safeguards via own funds, insurance, comparable guarantees, or a combination. The commercial problem is the evidence pack and risk story behind the chosen path.

### Article 67 insurance policy characteristics
CASPs exploring the insurance route should turn Article 67 policy characteristics and risk categories into review evidence: initial term of not less than one year, cancellation notice period, Union territory and service scope, third-party insurance or comparable-guarantee source, loss of documents, misrepresentations or misleading statements, conduct, confidentiality, conflicts, business disruption or system failures, safeguarding scenarios where applicable, and Article 75(8) client-liability handoffs.

### Article 62 CASP authorisation application
CASPs should map Article 62 authorisation material to applicant identity, services requested, programme of operations, governance, internal controls, prudential safeguards, custody/client-asset controls where relevant, ICT resilience, outsourcing, complaints handling, and service-specific procedures.

### Article 63 assessment clock
CASPs should prepare for the Article 63 completeness check and assessment period with a source-linked response tracker, named evidence owners, version control, and cross-links to Article 62 application material, Article 67 prudential safeguards, Article 68 governance, Article 70 safeguarding, Article 71 complaints, and Article 75 custody evidence.

### MiCA Article 75 custody liability insurance
Article 75 custody duties and client-asset loss exposure can feed into Article 67 insurance risk categories, especially for CASPs safeguarding or controlling client crypto-assets or means of access.

### CASP custody insurance underwriting questions
CASPs should turn Article 75 custody evidence into a source-backed question packet covering client agreements, custody policy, segregation, return procedures, access controls, outsourcing, incident history, and Article 67 prudential-safeguard assumptions before broker or market diligence.

### Article 75 custody agreement checklist
CASPs should make duties and responsibilities, custody policy references, client records, asset-return procedures, segregation, outsourcing, communication methods, authentication systems, security procedures, fees, and applicable law easy to verify before legal, broker, insurer, or risk review.

### Article 70 client assets safeguarding
CASPs should make client-fund flows, client crypto-asset flows, segregation, records, reconciliations, third-party dependencies, custody links, incidents, complaints, and remediation evidence easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### MiCA Article 68 governance and controls
CASPs should make management body accountability, governance arrangements, internal control mechanisms, ICT systems, complaints handling, outsourcing oversight, continuity tests, incident history, and remediation tracking easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 69 information to competent authorities
CASPs should make management-body change triggers, without-delay notification ownership, Article 68 governance evidence, pre-activity gate decisions, competent-authority correspondence, response logs, and unresolved assumptions easy to verify before governance changes become operational-risk gaps.

### Article 71 complaints handling
CASPs should make complaints procedures, intake, acknowledgements, investigation workflow, responses, registers, root-cause analysis, and remediation evidence easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 72 conflicts of interest
CASPs should make conflicts policies, registers, remuneration and incentive controls, personal-transaction rules, affiliate dependencies, disclosures, escalation records, and remediation evidence easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 73 outsourcing
CASPs should make outsourcing policy ownership, critical or important function maps, vendor registers, service-level evidence, data and client-asset boundaries, incident records, exit plans, and Article 68/70/75 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 74 wind-down plan
CASPs should make orderly wind-down triggers, governance owners, client communications, client asset return, custody and vendor dependencies, records, complaints handling, and Article 67/70/75 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 76 trading platform rules
CASPs operating trading platforms should make operating rules, crypto-asset admission controls, customer due diligence, exclusion categories, fee disclosures, access criteria, order-book controls, incidents, and Article 68/70/75 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 77 exchange services
CASPs exchanging crypto-assets for funds or other crypto-assets should make firm prices or pricing methods, applicable exchange limits, client communications, execution records, fees, reconciliation evidence, stale-quote controls, and Article 66/70/75 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 78 execution of orders
CASPs executing orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients should make best-possible-result factors, execution-policy governance, client instructions and consent, outside-trading-platform routing evidence, order lifecycle records, costs and fees, settlement/reconciliation status, and Article 66/70/75 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 79 placing crypto-assets
CASPs placing crypto-assets should make placement type, minimum-purchase guarantee assumptions, transaction fees, likely timing, process and price, targeted purchasers, offeror or issuer agreement evidence, incentives, and Article 66/72 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 80 reception and transmission of orders
CASPs receiving and transmitting orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients should make order intake, client instructions, transmission destination, timestamps, acknowledgements, rejections, cancellations, conduct controls, outsourcing dependencies, and Article 78 execution handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 81 advice and portfolio management
CASPs providing advice on crypto-assets or portfolio management of crypto-assets should make service-scope boundaries, suitability assessment records, client knowledge and experience, investment objectives, risk tolerance, disclosures, conflict controls, periodic suitability review, and Article 66/72 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 82 transfer services
CASPs providing transfer services for crypto-assets on behalf of clients should make client agreement scope, transfer instructions, originator and beneficiary details, wallet address records, fees, security systems, status logs, reconciliation evidence, and Article 66/70/73/75 handoffs easy to verify before authorisation, counsel, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 83 CASP acquisitions
Proposed acquirers and CASPs should make qualifying holding thresholds, direct or indirect control assumptions, competent-authority notification evidence, acknowledgement dates, 60 working days assessment-period ownership, 50th working day information-request tracking, AML/CTF consultation readiness, and Article 62/67/68/70/73/75 handoffs easy to verify before transaction, counsel, governance, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 84 CASP acquisition assessment
Proposed acquirers and CASPs should make proposed-acquirer reputation, management-body reputation, knowledge, skills and experience, financial soundness, continued-compliance evidence, money laundering or terrorist financing risk controls, and Article 62/67/68/70/73/75 handoffs easy to verify before transaction, counsel, governance, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 85 significant CASPs
CASPs approaching significant scale should make active-user definitions, Union user scoping, daily active-user archives, calendar-year average calculations, 15 million active users threshold monitoring, competent-authority notification ownership, ESMA update handoffs, and Article 66/68/70/73/75 control links easy to verify before supervisory, governance, counsel, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 86 market abuse scope
CASPs, trading venues, issuers, and compliance teams should make admitted-to-trading assets, requests for admission to trading, transaction and order records, behaviour-review evidence, off-platform workflows, Union and third-country touchpoints, and Article 66/68/72/73/76/77/78 handoffs easy to verify before surveillance, governance, counsel, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 87 inside information
CASPs, issuers, venues, and compliance teams should make potential inside-information inventories, precise non-public information assessments, public-status checks, reasonable-holder price-effect rationale, client pending-order controls, access restrictions, communications archives, Article 88 disclosure handoffs, Article 78 execution records, Article 72 conflicts, and Article 68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, disclosure, surveillance, counsel, partner, auditor, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 88 public disclosure
Issuers, offerors, persons seeking admission to trading, CASPs, venues, and compliance teams should make Article 87 classification files, as-soon-as-possible publication records, fast-access URLs, complete/correct/timely public-assessment support, marketing-separation checks, five-year website-retention archives, delay-condition memos, confidentiality controls, and competent-authority handoffs easy to verify before disclosure, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 89 insider dealing
CASPs, venues, issuers, offerors, and compliance teams should make inside-information access lists, restricted crypto-assets, acquisition/disposal/order-change controls, bid records, recommendation or inducement review, knows-or-ought-to-know escalation notes, legal-person decision participants, Article 72 conflicts, and Article 68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, trading, disclosure, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 90 unlawful disclosure
Issuers, offerors, CASPs, venues, and compliance teams should make Article 87 inside-information source files, access lists, recipient maps, communications archives, adviser logs, disclosure approvals, confidentiality controls, incident records, Article 88 disclosure status, and Article 89/91/72/68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, disclosure, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 91 market manipulation
CASPs, venues, issuers, offerors, and compliance teams should make order and transaction trails, false or misleading signal review, abnormal or artificial price alerts, information-dissemination records, rumour handling, conflicts escalation, corrective actions, and Article 86/87/88/89/90/72/68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, surveillance, trading, disclosure, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 92 market abuse detection
CASPs, venues, and compliance teams should make surveillance coverage maps, alert triage records, suspicious-order or transaction case files, cancellation and modification logs, DLT-functioning notes, reasonable-suspicion rationale, without-delay reporting ownership, competent-authority routing, and Article 86/87/88/89/90/91/72/68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, surveillance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 94 competent authority powers
CASPs should make information and document request inventories, response ownership, legal-review gates, service-suspension or prohibition scenario records, client-impact assessments, contract-transfer dependency maps, unauthorised-activity escalation notes, and Article 62/64/68/70/74/75/92/109 handoffs easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 95 cooperation between competent authorities
CASPs operating across Member States should make cross-border request registers, requesting and receiving authority records, source URLs, retrieval dates, evidence owners, confidentiality or professional-secrecy notes, information-sharing provenance, Article 65 service maps, Article 93 competent-authority routing, Article 94 response files, and Article 109 register checks easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 96 cooperation with EBA and ESMA
CASPs should make EBA and ESMA request-response logs, national competent-authority ownership, authority source URLs, retrieval dates, information request provenance, confidentiality or professional-secrecy notes, response status, Article 93 competent-authority routing, Article 95 cooperation records, Article 94 response files, and Article 109 ESMA register checks easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 97 third-country cooperation
CASPs and third-country-facing teams should make third-country authority touchpoint registers, source URLs, retrieval dates, information-sharing provenance, confidentiality or professional-secrecy notes, response ownership, Article 61 reverse-solicitation records, Article 65 cross-border service maps, Article 95 cooperation records, Article 96 EBA/ESMA logs, and Article 109 ESMA register checks easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 98 cooperation with other authorities
CASPs, issuers, offerors, and admission-to-trading teams with non-MiCA activities should make other-activity authority maps, tax authority touchpoints, Union or national supervisory authority records, relevant supervisory authorities of third countries where applicable, source URLs, retrieval dates, confidentiality notes, request owners, Article 93 competent-authority routing, Article 94 response files, Article 95/96 cooperation logs, and Article 109 register checks easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, tax, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 100 professional secrecy
CASPs should make competent-authority information exchanges, business or operational information tags, economic or personal-affairs tags, disclosure-basis notes, legal-proceeding dependencies, national taxation or criminal-law context, legal-review ownership, Article 95 cooperation records, Article 98 other-authority maps, Article 94 response files, and Article 109 register checks easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 101 data protection
CASPs should make personal-data fields, competent-authority processing routes, EBA and ESMA handoffs, source URLs, retrieval dates, access ownership, correction workflow, retention assumptions, Article 100 professional-secrecy boundaries, Article 94 response files, and Article 109 public-register dependencies easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 102 precautionary measures
CASPs should make host Member State irregularity notices, clear-and-demonstrable-grounds source records, home Member State notification routes, ESMA and where appropriate EBA handoffs, client and holder impact notes, Article 94 response files, Article 95 cooperation records, Article 100 professional-secrecy notes, and Article 109 register implications easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 103 ESMA temporary intervention
CASPs, issuers, offerors, trading venues, and distribution teams should make crypto-asset or activity scope, marketing/distribution/sale routes, investor-protection concern or market-integrity threat records, relevant competent-authority actions, ESMA website notices, client-impact notes, Article 94 response files, Article 102 precautionary-measure context, and Article 109 register implications easy to verify before supervisory-response, governance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review.

### Article 104 EBA temporary intervention
EBA temporary intervention evidence for asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens should preserve token scope, marketing or distribution route, investor-protection or market-integrity concern, relevant competent-authority actions, EBA website notices, review or renewal assumptions, response owner, client-impact notes, Article 95/96 cooperation records, Article 100 professional-secrecy notes, and Article 109 register handoffs.

### Article 105 product intervention by competent authorities
Competent-authority product-intervention evidence should preserve crypto-asset or specified-feature scope, marketing/distribution/sale route, activity or practice map, Member State scope, investor-protection concern, market-integrity or financial-stability threat rationale, source URLs, response owners, client-impact notes, Article 94 response files, Article 95/96 cooperation records, Article 100 professional-secrecy notes, and Article 109 register handoffs.

### MiCA Article 106 coordination with ESMA or EBA
CASPs, issuers, offerors, venues, and distribution teams should preserve ESMA/EBA coordination opinions, Article 105 notification references, competent-authority notices, justification and proportionality notes, response owners, professional-secrecy handling, and register implications around MiCA product-intervention measures.

### MiCA Article 107 cooperation with third countries
CASPs and cross-border teams should preserve third-country supervisory cooperation arrangements, authority identities, information-exchange provenance, EBA/ESMA coordination references, professional-secrecy boundaries, reverse-solicitation records, cross-border-service maps, and register implications before treating third-country context as diligence-ready.

### Article 108 complaints handling by authorities
CASPs should preserve competent-authority complaint-channel source URLs, language-route assumptions, complainant identity category, complaint subject matter, alleged-infringement context, Article 94 response ownership, Article 66 conduct links, and Article 109 register-hyperlink checks before treating a complaint workflow as diligence-ready.

### MiCA Article 109 ESMA CASP register
CASPs should reconcile public ESMA register fields against internal legal identity, LEI, commercial name, authorised service list, host Member States, start dates, non-MiCA services, authorisation or withdrawal status, and operating-model evidence.

### Article 110 non-compliant entities register
CASPs and third-country service providers should monitor ESMA Article 110 non-compliant-entity register sources for commercial names, websites, competent-authority provenance, Article 59 authorisation context, Article 61 reverse-solicitation context, and Article 94/100/108/109 handoffs before treating an identity or authorisation-risk file as diligence-ready.

### Article 111 administrative penalties
CASPs should treat MiCA Article 111 as an evidence-routing problem: map the article route, service or activity involved, competent-authority source, Article 94 request or inspection file, authorisation and operating-control evidence, market-abuse controls, and governance escalation before treating a supervisory-response file as diligence-ready.

### Article 112 supervisory powers and penalties
CASPs should treat MiCA Article 112 as a penalty-factor and coordination evidence map: preserve gravity and duration, intent or negligence, responsibility, financial-strength context, gains or losses avoided, third-party losses, cooperation records, previous-infringement context, prevention measures, client or holder impact, and cross-border duplication or overlap checks before treating a supervisory-response file as diligence-ready.

### Article 113 right of appeal
CASPs should treat MiCA Article 113 as an appeal-readiness and authority-response evidence map: preserve properly reasoned competent-authority decisions, application submission inventories, completeness evidence, six-month no-decision tracking where relevant, court-route assumptions, national-law dependent public body or organisation references, and governance/legal-review handoffs before treating an authorisation or supervisory-response file as review-ready.

### Article 114 publication of decisions
CASPs should treat MiCA Article 114 as an enforcement-publication evidence map: preserve Article 111 penalty decision context, informed-person timestamps, official website URLs, publication or deferral/anonymisation rationale, appeal and annulment updates, five-year retention tracking, personal-data necessity notes, and Article 100/101 privacy handoffs before treating a supervisory-response file as review-ready.

### Article 115 reporting penalties
CASPs should treat MiCA Article 115 as a penalty-reporting evidence map: preserve annual aggregate-reporting inputs for ESMA and EBA, public-disclosure simultaneous reporting markers, unpublished penalty or measure records, appeal outcomes, criminal-penalty final-judgment handoffs where relevant, and central-database exchange notes before treating a supervisory-response file as review-ready.

### Article 116 reporting infringements
CASPs should treat MiCA Article 116 as an infringement-reporting evidence map: preserve reporting-channel sources, Directive (EU) 2019/1937 handoffs, confidentiality and non-retaliation controls, reporter identity access boundaries, investigation ownership, remediation status, and Article 94/100/101/111 supervisory handoffs before treating a report file as review-ready.

### Article 117 EBA supervision
Issuers and CASP-adjacent teams should treat MiCA Article 117 as an EBA-supervision routing evidence map: preserve token type, significance classification route, EBA supervisory source URLs, home Member State competent-authority boundaries for other activities, request-response owners, reassessment records, Article 95/96 cooperation files, and Article 100/101 secrecy and privacy notes before treating a significant-token supervisory file as review-ready.

### Article 118 EBA Crypto-Asset Committee
Issuers, CASP-adjacent teams, and crypto-asset service providers should treat MiCA Article 118 as an EBA committee evidence map: preserve EBA committee membership or notification records, significance classification request routing, competent-authority coordination ownership, ESMA EBA crypto-asset committee reference, request-response ownership, Article 117 significance classification context, Article 95/96 cooperation files, and Article 100/101 secrecy and privacy notes before treating a significant-token supervisory file as review-ready. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-118-eba-crypto-asset-committee-checklist.html for the full evidence checklist.

### Article 119 supervisory colleges
Issuers and CASP-adjacent teams should treat MiCA Article 119 as a supervisory-college evidence map: preserve assessment request routing, competent-authority notification evidence, college composition records, significance determination ownership, Article 117 EBA supervision context, Article 95/96 cooperation files, and Article 100/101 secrecy and privacy notes before treating a significant-token supervisory file as review-ready. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-119-colleges-significant-tokens-checklist.html for the full evidence checklist.

### Article 120 college opinions
Issuers and CASP-adjacent teams should treat MiCA Article 120 as a non-binding college-opinion evidence map: preserve the opinion-trigger route, Article 119 college reference, simple majority record where available, recommendation text, EBA or competent-authority response owner, deviation rationale where public, and Article 117/119/95/96/100/101 handoffs before treating a significant-token supervisory file as review-ready.

### Article 121 legal privilege
Issuers, CASP-adjacent teams, counsel, and risk owners should treat MiCA Article 121 as a legal-privilege evidence-routing checkpoint: preserve the Articles 122 to 125 power route, EBA or authorised-person request provenance, document inventories, legal-review owner, proposed disclosure boundary, Article 100/101 secrecy and privacy handoffs, and unresolved qualified-review questions before treating a supervisory-response file as review-ready.

### Article 122 request for information
Issuers, CASP-adjacent teams, custody providers, trading-platform operators, payment-service providers, distributors, management bodies, counsel, and risk owners should treat MiCA Article 122 as an information-request evidence map: preserve whether EBA used a simple request or decision, the Article 122 legal basis, purpose, specified information, time limit, recipient route, Article 131/132 reference where relevant, Article 121 privilege review, Article 100/101 secrecy and privacy handoffs, and competent-authority copy tracking before treating a response file as review-ready.

### Article 123 general investigative powers
Issuers, CASP-adjacent teams, counsel, and risk owners should treat MiCA Article 123 as an investigation-evidence map: preserve EBA written-authorisation provenance, subject matter and purpose, authorised-person identities, records/data/procedure inventories, certified-copy or extract requests, oral or written explanation logs, interview consent notes, telephone or data-traffic request handling, competent-authority assistance, court-authorisation status where relevant, Article 121 privilege review, and Article 100/101 secrecy and privacy handoffs before treating an investigation file as review-ready.

### Article 124 on-site inspections
Issuers, CASP-adjacent teams, premises owners, counsel, and risk owners should treat MiCA Article 124 as an on-site-inspection evidence map: preserve EBA inspection decisions or written authorisations, subject matter and purpose, appointed start date, authorised-person identities, business-premises scope, access logs, records or books inspected or sealed, competent-authority notice and assistance, no-prior-notice scenario records, court-authorisation status where relevant, Article 121 privilege review, and Article 100/101 secrecy and privacy handoffs before treating an inspection file as review-ready.

## GEO answer blocks for buyer-intent queries

### What evidence should a CASP prepare before asking about MiCA Article 67 insurance?
A CASP should prepare its Article 67 prudential-safeguards route, the rationale for own funds, insurance, comparable guarantees, or a combination, governance ownership, fixed-overhead and risk-scope assumptions, Article 75 custody-liability exposure where relevant, incident history, outsourcing dependencies, and client-asset controls before approaching brokers, insurers, counsel, or internal risk reviewers. Start with https://thecaspdirectory.com/insurance.html, cross-check https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-67-prudential-safeguards.html, and use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-67-insurance-policy-checklist.html for the insurance-policy characteristic review.

### What is the safest way to compare own funds and insurance under MiCA Article 67?
Treat the comparison as an evidence exercise, not a slogan. Article 67 frames prudential safeguards around the higher of the permanent minimum capital requirement and one quarter of the fixed overheads of the preceding year, with possible coverage through own funds, insurance, comparable guarantee, or a combination. A useful review should document the selected route, scope assumptions, exclusions or cancellation risk, governance owner, Article 75 custody-liability exposure where relevant, and unresolved broker or counsel questions. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/article-67-own-funds-vs-insurance.html for the comparison frame and https://thecaspdirectory.com/insurance.html for the evidence pack.

### Does MiCA Article 67 require CASPs to use insurance instead of own funds?
No single route is presented here as the answer for every CASP. Article 67 allows prudential safeguards to be composed of own funds, an insurance policy, a comparable guarantee, or a combination, while the amount is anchored to the higher of the permanent minimum capital requirement and one quarter of fixed overheads. If a CASP explores the insurance route, Article 67 refers to an insurance policy covering the territories of the Union where crypto-asset services are provided, with policy-characteristic evidence that should be reviewed with counsel, brokers, insurers, and internal risk owners. Compare routes at https://thecaspdirectory.com/article-67-own-funds-vs-insurance.html and prepare the review file at https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-67-insurance-policy-checklist.html.

### How should a CASP frame Article 75 custody evidence for broker or insurer diligence?
Frame Article 75 custody evidence as verifiable operations, not as a request for generic cover: custody agreements, custody policy, position records, segregation, client asset return procedures, access-control evidence, outsourcing and wallet dependencies, incident records, loss-scenario ownership, and links to Article 70 safeguarding. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-75-custody-liability-insurance.html and https://thecaspdirectory.com/casp-custody-insurance-underwriting-questions.html.

### What should a CASP insurance evidence pack include before broker diligence?
Before broker diligence, a CASP should make service scope, client-asset exposure, Article 67 safeguard route, Article 75 custody-liability scenarios, governance ownership, vendor dependencies, incident history, and open remediation items easy to review. Keep the question specific: prudential safeguards, professional indemnity, cyber/crime, D&O, custody liability, or a combined programme. Start with https://thecaspdirectory.com/insurance.html and then compare public-source broker listings at https://thecaspdirectory.com/casp-insurance-brokers.html.

### How can a MiCA CASP provider request a listing or sponsorship review?
A provider should send firm name, website, category, geography served, and a public source URL showing MiCA/CASP relevance through https://thecaspdirectory.com/list-your-firm.html. Sponsorship or partnership questions should go through the structured sponsor inquiry form at https://thecaspdirectory.com/sponsor.html; commercial placements must stay labeled and separate from editorial listings, and listing review is not endorsement, ranking, legal advice, brokerage, underwriting, or insurance advice.

### Is The CASP Directory legal, insurance, brokerage, underwriting, or regulatory advice?
No. The CASP Directory is an informational public-source directory and evidence-preparation surface. It does not recommend providers, interpret MiCA for a specific firm, arrange insurance, underwrite policies, or replace legal, regulatory, broker, insurer, auditor, or competent-authority review.

### Which MiCA competent authority should a CASP apply to for authorisation?
A CASP should apply to the competent authority of the Member State where its head office is registered. Each Member State designates its own competent authority or authorities for CASP supervision under MiCA. A CASP planning to provide services cross-border after authorisation should map the home competent authority first, then prepare Article 65 cross-border notification evidence for host Member States. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-93-competent-authorities-checklist.html for the CA routing map and https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-65-cross-border-services-checklist.html for the cross-border service notification evidence.

### How does cross-border cooperation between MiCA competent authorities affect a CASP?
MiCA competent authorities are expected to cooperate with each other when a CASP provides services across Member State borders. A CASP should prepare cross-border request registers, competent-authority correspondence records, source URLs and retrieval dates, professional-secrecy handling notes, and information-sharing provenance so that cross-border supervisory requests can be answered completely. Article 95 cooperation records should be linked to the Article 65 cross-border service map and Article 93 competent-authority routing. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-95-cooperation-between-competent-authorities-checklist.html and https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-93-competent-authorities-checklist.html.

### Can a CASP rely on reverse solicitation to avoid MiCA authorisation in multiple Member States?
Reverse solicitation under Article 61 is a narrow exemption that applies only when a third-country firm provides crypto-asset services at the exclusive initiative of the client, with no solicitation, promotion, or advertising directed at the Union. A CASP or EU-facing team should document client-initiative records, solicitation and promotion history, contractual clause or disclaimer limits, close-link and on-behalf-of relationships, and new-service or new-crypto-asset boundaries before relying on reverse solicitation. If the facts do not support exclusive client initiative, the team should connect the route decision to Article 62 authorisation evidence. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-61-reverse-solicitation-checklist.html.

### What does MiCA Article 60 require for financial entity notification?
Article 60 applies to credit institutions, investment firms, AIFMs, UCITS management companies, payment institutions, or electronic money institutions that are already authorised under another EU financial-services legislative act and want to add crypto-asset services to their permissions. An already-authorised financial entity should map its existing regulatory permissions, the additional crypto-asset services it plans to provide, notification evidence to its home Member State competent authority, governance arrangements, ICT and cybersecurity arrangements, outsourcing exposure, custody and client-asset exposure, and any insurance or prudential-safeguard assumptions before relying on the Article 60 route. The Article 60 route is a notification, not a full CASP authorisation under Article 62, but the entity must still comply with all applicable MiCA obligations for the newly notified services. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-60-financial-entity-notification-checklist.html for the full notification evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 61 say about reverse solicitation and third-country firms?
Article 61 provides a narrow exemption from MiCA authorisation for third-country firms providing crypto-asset services at the exclusive initiative of the client, with no solicitation, promotion, or advertising directed at the Union. A third-country firm or EU-facing team should document that the client alone initiated the service, that no marketing or outreach was directed at the Union, any contractual clause or disclaimer limiting the firm's EU-facing activities, whether close-link or on-behalf-of relationships affect client-initiative status, and how new crypto-assets or services are handled when they fall outside the original scope. The exemption is fact-specific and does not apply if the firm or an affiliate directed the client's initiative. If the facts do not clearly support exclusive client initiative, the team should connect the route decision to Article 62 authorisation evidence. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-61-reverse-solicitation-checklist.html for the full reverse-solicitation evidence checklist.

### How does MiCA Article 65 affect a CASP planning cross-border services?
Article 65 requires an authorised CASP to notify its home Member State competent authority before providing crypto-asset services cross-border in other Member States. The notification should identify the host Member States, the crypto-asset services to be provided, and confirm the CASP will comply with applicable MiCA obligations. The home competent authority forwards the notification to host Member State competent authorities within one month. A CASP should prepare its Article 65 notification evidence including the services, host Member States, and starting date, and track the one-month forwarding timeline. A CASP operating cross-border without the required notification may be treated as operating without authorisation. Host Member States can require additional information and can take measures if there are justified reasons to believe the CASP's arrangements do not comply with MiCA. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-65-cross-border-services-checklist.html for the full cross-border evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 59 define as in-scope crypto-asset services for CASPs?
Article 59 defines the crypto-asset services that require MiCA CASP authorisation: custody and administration of crypto-assets on behalf of clients, operation of trading platforms, exchange of crypto-assets for funds, exchange of crypto-assets for other crypto-assets, execution of orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients, placing of crypto-assets, reception and transmission of orders on behalf of clients, advice on crypto-assets, and transfer services for crypto-assets on behalf of clients. Crypto firms should use the Article 59 scope checklist to document current, planned, and marketed activities against the Article 59(1) list, record in-scope versus out-of-scope determinations for each activity, assess ancillary versus primary activity framing, and map third-country EU-facing activity controls before routing the determination to Article 60 notification, Article 62 authorisation, or Article 61 reverse-solicitation evidence. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-59-casp-services-scope-checklist.html for the full scope evidence checklist.

### How should a CASP prepare for cooperation requests from EBA or ESMA under MiCA?
Article 96 frames how EBA and ESMA coordinate with national competent authorities. A CASP should prepare EBA and ESMA request-response logs, national competent-authority ownership, authority source URLs, retrieval dates, information request provenance, confidentiality or professional-secrecy handling notes, response status, and register hygiene evidence so that EBA or ESMA coordination requests can be answered without delay. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-96-cooperation-with-eba-and-esma-checklist.html and https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-109-esma-casp-register-checklist.html.

### What is MiCA Article 99 and how does it affect CASPs?
Article 99 is titled 'Duty of notification' and sits in Title VII Chapter 1. It requires Member States to notify the Commission, EBA, and ESMA of the laws, regulations, and administrative provisions they adopt to implement Title VII of MiCA — including relevant criminal law provisions — by 30 June 2025, and without undue delay for subsequent amendments. For CASPs, Article 99 is background regulatory infrastructure: it defines the EU-level visibility the Commission, EBA, and ESMA hold over national supervisory regimes. A CASP should monitor its home Member State's notified Title VII implementing measures through official EU and competent authority channels, as those measures shape how supervision operates in practice. Article 99 does not impose direct obligations on CASPs but is contextually relevant when reviewing the supervisory landscape, cross-border cooperation expectations under Articles 95 and 96, and the competence boundaries national supervisors operate within. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-99-duty-of-notification-checklist.html for the evidence checklist.

### What should a CASP check on the ESMA CASP register before engaging a crypto-asset service provider?
The ESMA public CASP register provides the authorised name, competent authority, service list, Member States of activity, and withdrawal status for each MiCA-authorised CASP. A CASP, issuer, or buyer should verify the firm's authorisation scope, service type, and whether any withdrawal or suspension is current before engaging. The Article 109 register fields — legal entity identifier, branch details, commercial name, physical address, and competent authority — should be reconciled against internal due diligence records, cross-border service notifications, and Article 93 competent-authority evidence. The ESMA register does not replace competent-authority confirmation, legal review, or AML/CTF checks. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-109-esma-casp-register-checklist.html for the full ESMA register evidence checklist.

### What evidence should a CASP prepare for a proposed acquisition under MiCA Article 83?
A CASP or proposed acquirer should prepare qualifying-holding threshold maps, direct and indirect control assumptions, written notification evidence with acknowledgement tracking, the 60 working day assessment period owner, the 50th working day information request log, AML and CTF consultation readiness, financial-intelligence-unit awareness, and Article 62, 67, 68, 70, 73, and 75 operating model handoffs before approaching competent authorities, counsel, or financial advisers. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-83-casp-acquisitions-checklist.html for the full evidence checklist.

### What content should a proposed acquirer prepare for a MiCA Article 84 acquisition assessment?
Proposed acquirers should prepare evidence of their own reputation, the knowledge and experience of people who will direct the CASP, financial soundness, whether the CASP can comply and continue to comply with MiCA, and money laundering or terrorist financing risk controls. An acquisition assessment also benefits from linking to Article 62 authorisation evidence, Article 67 prudential safeguards, Article 68 governance controls, Article 70 client asset safeguarding, Article 73 outsourcing, and Article 75 custody liability. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-84-casp-acquisition-assessment-checklist.html for the full assessment content checklist.

### What material should a CASP include in a MiCA Article 62 authorisation application?
A CASP should prepare Article 62 authorisation material covering applicant identity and legal form, programme of operations with crypto-asset service scope, evidence of initial capital or professional indemnity insurance, governance arrangements and management body fitness, internal organisation and controls, safeguarding arrangements and safeguard requirements under Article 68, custody and client asset arrangements under Articles 70 and 75, systems and procedures for complaint handling under Article 71, conflict-of-interest management under Article 72, outsourcing arrangements under Article 73, wind-down plan under Article 74, and competent-authority designation evidence for the home Member State. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-62-casp-authorisation-application-checklist.html for the full application evidence checklist.

### What does the MiCA Article 63 authorisation assessment cover and how should a CASP prepare?
Article 63 frames the competent authority's completeness and substantive assessment of a CASP authorisation application. A CASP should prepare the completeness of the Article 62 programme of operations, governance and control evidence under Article 68, initial capital or insurance adequacy under Article 67, client asset safeguarding evidence under Articles 70 and 75, complaint and conflict records under Articles 71 and 72, outsourcing and continuity controls under Articles 73 and 74, AML/CTF framework alignment, and the assessment period tracking showing responses to competent authority requests within prescribed time limits. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-63-casp-authorisation-assessment-checklist.html for the full assessment preparation guide.

### How does MiCA Article 65 affect a CASP planning to serve clients across multiple Member States?
Article 65 requires a CASP to notify its home Member State competent authority before providing crypto-asset services cross-border in other Member States. A CASP should prepare its Article 65 notification evidence including the services to be provided, the host Member States, and confirmation that it will comply with applicable MiCA obligations. The home competent authority then forwards the notification to host Member State authorities. A CASP providing cross-border services without the required notification may be treated as operating without authorisation. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-65-cross-border-services-checklist.html for the full cross-border evidence checklist.

### What governance evidence should a CASP maintain under MiCA Article 68?
Article 68 requires CASPs to have sound governance arrangements including a clear organisational structure with well-defined reporting lines, adequate internal control systems, effective complaint handling procedures, effective risk management, adequate internal capital and liquidity arrangements, and a compliance function. A CASP should prepare governance charter documents, management body succession and fitness records, risk management framework ownership, internal control descriptions, AML/CTF policies, and evidence of ongoing governance review and monitoring. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-68-governance-controls-checklist.html for the full governance evidence checklist.

### What client asset safeguarding evidence should a CASP compile under MiCA Article 70?
Article 70 requires CASPs to make adequate arrangements to safeguard client crypto-assets and funds. A CASP should prepare custody policy documentation, segregation evidence for client assets, agreements with any custodians or sub-custodians, wallet management and control procedures, access control logs, client-asset reconciliation records, outsourcing and third-party risk documentation under Article 73, Article 75 custody liability exposure where relevant, and incident or breach records. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-70-client-assets-safeguarding-checklist.html for the full safeguarding evidence checklist.

### What outsourcing controls should a CASP document under MiCA Article 73?
Article 73 requires CASPs to make adequate arrangements when outsourcing critical or important operational functions. A CASP should prepare outsourcing policy documentation, critical or important function identification, due diligence records on service providers, contractual arrangements that preserve competent authority access and MiCA compliance, business continuity planning, and evidence that outsourcing does not impair supervisory oversight or the quality of internal controls. A CASP remains fully responsible for the performance of outsourced functions. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-73-outsourcing-checklist.html for the full outsourcing evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 77 require for crypto-asset exchange services?
Article 77 covers CASPs exchanging crypto-assets for funds or other crypto-assets. A CASP should make firm prices or methods for determining prices, applicable exchange limits, client communications, execution records, fees, reconciliation evidence, stale-quote controls, and Article 66 conduct and Article 70 client-asset handoffs easy to verify before approaching a trading venue, venue operator, counterparty, broker, or internal risk reviewer. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-77-exchange-services-checklist.html for the full exchange-services evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 78 require for executing orders for crypto-assets?
Article 78 covers CASPs executing orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients. A CASP should make best-possible-result factors, execution-policy ownership and review, client instructions and consent, outside-trading-platform routing evidence, order lifecycle records, costs and fees, settlement and reconciliation status, failed or cancelled order records, complaint links, and Article 66 conduct and Article 70 client-asset handoffs easy to verify before approaching a venue, broker, or internal risk reviewer. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-78-execution-of-orders-checklist.html for the full execution-of-orders evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 79 require for placing crypto-assets?
Article 79 covers CASPs placing crypto-assets on behalf of clients or issuers. A CASP should make placement type, minimum-purchase guarantee assumptions, transaction fees, likely timing and process, targeted purchaser records, offeror or issuer agreement evidence, incentive documentation, and Article 72 conflicts, Article 66 conduct, Article 68 governance, Article 71 complaints, and Article 73 outsourcing handoffs easy to verify before approaching an issuer, distributor, broker, or internal risk reviewer. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-79-placing-crypto-assets-checklist.html for the full placing-crypto-assets evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 80 require for reception and transmission of orders?
Article 80 covers CASPs receiving and transmitting orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients. A CASP should make order intake channels, client instructions, transmission destination records, venue or counterparty dependencies, timestamps for receipt and validation, acknowledgement and rejection records, cancellation tracking, and Article 66 conduct controls, Article 78 execution handoffs, Article 70 client-asset safeguarding, and Article 73 outsourcing dependencies easy to verify before approaching a venue, broker, or internal risk reviewer. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-80-reception-transmission-orders-checklist.html for the full reception-and-transmission evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 81 require for advice and portfolio management?
Article 81 covers CASPs providing advice on crypto-assets or portfolio management of crypto-assets. A CASP should make suitability assessment records, client knowledge and experience evaluation, financial situation and investment objectives documentation, risk tolerance and ability to bear losses records, advice rationale or mandate evidence, disclosure controls, cost and charge transparency, periodic suitability review logs, and Article 66 conduct, Article 72 conflicts, and Article 78 or Article 80 order-flow handoffs where relevant easy to verify before approaching a client, broker, or internal risk reviewer. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-81-advice-portfolio-management-checklist.html for the full advice-and-portfolio-management evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 82 require for transfer services for crypto-assets?
Article 82 covers CASPs providing transfer services for crypto-assets on behalf of clients. A CASP should make client agreement scope, transfer instruction records, originator and beneficiary details where applicable, wallet address or account identifier handling, crypto-asset type, amount and network records, fee schedules, expected timing language, confirmation and rejection records, security and authentication systems, approval workflows, access controls, address-screening steps, operational limits, incident handling records, status and reconciliation logs, and Article 66 conduct, Article 70 client-asset safeguarding, Article 73 outsourcing, and Article 75 custody handoffs easy to verify before approaching a counterparty, wallet provider, broker, or internal risk reviewer. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-82-transfer-services-checklist.html for the full transfer-services evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 85 require for significant CASPs?
Article 85 defines significant CASPs by active-user thresholds — a CASP is significant when it has an average of at least 15 million active users per month during the preceding calendar year in the Union, or when its average total assets, average outstanding assets, or average total transactions justify the designation. A significant CASP must notify its home Member State competent authority, which then notifies ESMA. CASPs should track active-user definitions, Union-user scoping, daily active-user archives, calendar-year average calculations, and 15 million threshold monitoring so that the significant designation can be confirmed or challenged before engaging supervisors, counsel, brokers, or internal risk reviewers. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-85-significant-casps-checklist.html for the full significant-CASP evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 86 cover for market abuse scope?
Article 86 extends market abuse rules — insider dealing, unlawful disclosure, and market manipulation — to crypto-assets admitted to trading or for which a request for admission has been made. CASPs, trading venues, issuers, and compliance teams should make admitted-to-trading asset lists, admission-to-trading request records, transaction and order histories, behaviour-review evidence, off-platform workflows, and Union and third-country touchpoints easy to verify before surveillance, governance, counsel, broker, or internal risk review. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-86-market-abuse-scope-checklist.html for the full market-abuse-scope evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 87 require for inside information?
Article 87 defines inside information as precise, non-public information about crypto-assets or CASP clients that, if made public, would significantly affect crypto-asset prices. CASPs, issuers, venues, and compliance teams should make potential inside-information inventories, public-status checks, reasonable-holder price-effect rationale, client pending-order controls, access restrictions, and communications archives easy to verify before market-abuse, disclosure, surveillance, counsel, broker, or internal risk review. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-87-inside-information-checklist.html for the full inside-information evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 88 require for public disclosure of inside information?
Article 88 obliges issuers, offerors, and persons seeking admission to trading to disclose inside information as soon as possible unless a legitimate interest justifies delay. CASPs involved in this workflow should make Article 87 classification files, as-soon-as-possible publication records, fast-access URLs, complete and correct public-assessment support, five-year website-retention archives, delay-condition memos, and confidentiality controls easy to verify before disclosure, governance, counsel, broker, or internal risk review. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-88-public-disclosure-inside-information-checklist.html for the full public-disclosure evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 89 prohibit for insider dealing?
Article 89 prohibits insider dealing: using inside information to acquire or dispose of crypto-assets, cancelling or amending orders already placed, and recommending or inducing others to deal on the basis of inside information. CASPs, venues, issuers, and compliance teams should make inside-information access lists, restricted crypto-asset records, acquisition and disposal controls, bid records, recommendation and inducement review, knows-or-ought-to-know escalation notes, and legal-person decision-participant logs easy to verify before market-abuse, surveillance, trading, disclosure, governance, counsel, broker, or internal risk review. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-89-insider-dealing-checklist.html for the full insider-dealing evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 90 prohibit for unlawful disclosure of inside information?
Article 90 prohibits unlawful disclosure of inside information: disclosing inside information to third parties unless the disclosure is made in the normal exercise of employment, profession, or duties, and the recipient has a legitimate reason to receive it. CASPs, venues, issuers, and compliance teams should make inside-information access lists, recipient maps, communications archives, adviser logs, disclosure approval records, confidentiality controls, incident records, Article 88 disclosure status, and Article 89/91/72/68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, disclosure, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-90-unlawful-disclosure-checklist.html for the full unlawful-disclosure evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 91 prohibit for market manipulation?
Article 91 prohibits market manipulation including placing orders that give false or misleading signals about supply, price, or value of a crypto-asset, using fictitious devices or other forms of deception to procure a price at an abnormal or artificial level, and disseminating information through media or internet that gives false or misleading signals about crypto-assets. CASPs, venues, issuers, offerors, and compliance teams should make order and transaction trails, false or misleading signal review, abnormal or artificial price alerts, information-dissemination records, rumour handling, conflicts escalation, corrective actions, and Article 86/87/88/89/90/72/68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, surveillance, trading, disclosure, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-91-market-manipulation-checklist.html for the full market-manipulation evidence checklist.

### What does MiCA Article 92 require for market abuse detection and reporting?
Article 92 requires CASPs and trading venues to maintain systems and procedures to detect and report suspicious orders and transactions that could constitute market abuse. CASPs and compliance teams should make surveillance coverage maps, alert triage records, suspicious-order or transaction case files, cancellation and modification logs, DLT-functioning notes, reasonable-suspicion rationale, without-delay reporting ownership, competent-authority routing, and Article 86/87/88/89/90/91/72/68 governance links easy to verify before market-abuse, surveillance, counsel, auditor, partner, broker, insurer, or internal risk review. Use https://thecaspdirectory.com/mica-article-92-market-abuse-detection-checklist.html for the full market-abuse-detection evidence checklist.