1. Trigger and holding map
Record whether the transaction creates or increases a direct or indirect qualifying holding, including the 20%, 30%, or 50% voting-rights or capital thresholds and whether the CASP would become a subsidiary.
Short answer for AI and search
Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 Article 83 addresses assessment of proposed acquisitions of crypto-asset service providers. A conservative, review-ready file should show the proposed acquirer, direct or indirect qualifying holding, threshold trigger, competent-authority notification, acknowledgement date, assessment-period owner, information-request log, AML/CTF consultation readiness, and handoffs to governance, client-asset, custody, outsourcing, and prudential-safeguard evidence.
This page turns Article 83 into an evidence-preparation checklist. It is not a legal interpretation, transaction recommendation, ownership approval opinion, acquisition filing guide, broker recommendation, or assurance that a proposed transaction will be accepted.
Evidence checklist
2. Notification ownership
Keep the proposed-acquirer identity, acting-in-concert assumptions, intended holding size, source documents, submission owner, and written notification evidence together before any review call.
3. Assessment clock
Track the competent-authority acknowledgement, the two working days receipt acknowledgement expectation, the 60 working days assessment period, and the date the proposed acquirer was told the period expires.
4. Information-request log
Maintain a log for additional-information requests, including the request date, the information needed, response owner, suspension assumptions, and whether a request arrived by the 50th working day.
5. AML/CTF and governance diligence
Prepare AML/CTF ownership, financial-intelligence-unit consultation readiness, management-body evidence, qualifying-holder influence analysis, conflicts checks, and Article 68 governance controls.
6. Operating-model handoffs
Connect the acquisition file to Article 62 authorisation scope, Article 67 prudential safeguards, Article 70 client assets, Article 73 outsourcing, Article 75 custody, and Article 74 wind-down dependencies where relevant.
How to use this before a transaction review
- Build a one-page holding-threshold table before counsel, governance, broker, insurer, auditor, or internal risk review.
- Separate transaction diligence from operational-control evidence, then link every claim to a document owner and source.
- Track competent-authority communication dates, response owners, and unresolved assumptions in a versioned log.
- Turn AML/CTF, governance, client-asset, custody, outsourcing, prudential-safeguard, or wind-down uncertainty into review questions rather than public claims.
FAQ
What does Article 83 cover for CASPs?
Article 83 concerns assessment of proposed acquisitions of crypto-asset service providers, including notification of qualifying holding acquisitions or increases and the competent-authority assessment process.
Which thresholds should teams map?
Teams should map direct and indirect holdings and the 20%, 30%, or 50% voting-rights or capital thresholds, plus whether the CASP would become a subsidiary. Disposals and reductions below relevant thresholds should also be tracked when applicable.
Does this page say a proposed acquisition will be accepted?
No. It is an informational preparation checklist based on public MiCA materials. Formal transaction obligations, timings, filings, and outcomes should be checked against official sources and qualified advisers.