A practical evidence checklist for CASPs documenting how conflicts are identified, prevented, managed, disclosed, recorded, and escalated under MiCA Article 72.
Informational only. Not legal, regulatory, brokerage, underwriting, or insurance advice.
Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 Article 72 requires crypto-asset service providers to maintain and operate effective policies and procedures to identify, prevent, manage and disclose conflicts of interest. For practical diligence, that means a CASP should be able to show a current conflicts policy, a conflicts register, disclosure controls, governance escalation, and evidence that staff incentives, personal transactions, affiliates, outsourcing and client-order handling do not undermine client interests.
This page turns Article 72 into an evidence-preparation checklist. CASPs should validate formal obligations, disclosure wording, and competent-authority expectations with qualified advisers.
Board or management approval, named policy owner, review cadence, staff training records, escalation route, and evidence that the policy covers the CASP's actual services, affiliates, distribution channels, and client types.
A live conflicts register with conflict type, affected service, client impact, owner, mitigation, disclosure decision, review date, residual risk, and evidence that closed items were remediated rather than ignored.
Compensation, referral fees, sales incentives, token-related interests, treasury exposure, affiliate payments, and vendor arrangements that could bias advice, execution, custody, transfer, or placement decisions.
Rules for employee dealing, restricted lists, pre-clearance where used, attestations, gifts and entertainment, outside business interests, and monitoring evidence for staff who can influence client outcomes.
Plain-language disclosures, timing of disclosure, channel used, client acknowledgement where relevant, version control, and a record of when disclosure alone was not treated as enough to manage the conflict.
Open conflicts, weak segregation, unresolved client complaints, affiliate dependencies, and incentive risks should be summarised for Article 67 prudential-safeguard, professional indemnity, governance, and operational-risk diligence discussions.
No. A policy is only the starting point. Diligence usually needs an operating record: register entries, escalation decisions, disclosure evidence, training, approvals, and remediation tracking.
Conflicts can reveal governance, conduct, disclosure, client-order, custody, affiliate, and incentive risks. A conservative evidence pack helps counterparties understand how conflicts are controlled and whether unresolved issues affect the risk story.
No. It is an informational preparation checklist based on public MiCA sources. Use official MiCA materials, ESMA materials, and qualified advisers for formal interpretations and filings.