MiCA enforcement evidence
A source-backed, conservative evidence checklist for CASPs mapping Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 Article 112 supervisory-power and penalty-factor language to Article 111 penalty files, Article 94 authority-response evidence, cross-border coordination records, and governance handoffs.
Informational only. Not legal, regulatory, brokerage, underwriting, or insurance advice.
Exercise of supervisory powers and powers to impose penalties: the ESMA Interactive Single Rulebook text for Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 Article 112 says competent authorities, when determining the type and level of an administrative penalty or other administrative measure under Article 111, shall take into account all relevant circumstances, including where appropriate the gravity and the duration of the infringement.
Article 112 also says competent authorities shall cooperate closely so supervisory and investigative powers, administrative penalties, and other administrative measures are effective and appropriate, and shall coordinate action to avoid duplication and overlaps in cross-border cases.
This page is an evidence-preparation checklist. It is not a legal interpretation, penalty assessment, supervisory-response instruction, authorisation opinion, provider endorsement, broker recommendation, or assurance about any firm, investigation, infringement, penalty, measure, cooperation route, or fact pattern.
Preserve source-linked notes on gravity, duration, intentional or negligent conduct, degree of responsibility, financial-strength context, profits gained or losses avoided, third-party losses, cooperation with the competent authority, previous infringements, repetition-prevention measures, and client or holder impact.
Connect each Article 112 factor to the Article 111 administrative-penalty or other administrative-measure record, including the article route, service or activity involved, source URL, retrieval date, and unresolved external-review questions.
Keep supervisory or investigative request inventories, document-production ownership, inspection correspondence, deadline assumptions, legal-review gates, and preservation notes aligned with the Article 94 authority-powers file.
For multi-Member-State matters, maintain requesting and receiving authority records, cooperation source URLs, professional-secrecy notes, response owners, duplication or overlap checks, and Article 95/96 cooperation handoffs.
Track customer-impact records, complaints, safeguarding evidence, custody incident files, client communications, remediation steps, and links to Article 66 conduct, Article 70 safeguarding, Article 71 complaints, and Article 75 custody files.
Link Article 112 reviews to management-body minutes, incident records, remediation owners, conflicts registers, outsourcing/vendor evidence, market-abuse controls where relevant, and open counsel or competent-authority questions.
Article 112 covers factors competent authorities consider when determining the type and level of administrative penalties or other administrative measures under Article 111, plus close cooperation and coordination to avoid duplication and overlaps in cross-border cases.
It converts an enforcement topic into evidence owners: issue context, authority correspondence, cooperation records, customer impact, remediation, governance escalation, and operating-control files.
No. It only helps organize source-backed evidence and handoffs. Any formal assessment of penalties, measures, supervisory response, legal position, or cross-border coordination requires qualified review and competent-authority context.