MiCA Article 123 general investigative powers
A source-backed, conservative evidence checklist for Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 Article 123, where EBA may conduct investigations into issuers of significant asset-referenced tokens and significant e-money tokens for Article 117 supervisory responsibilities.
Last reviewed · We re-read every article when ESMA, the EBA, or an NCA publishes guidance that changes it.
What Article 123 changes operationally
Investigation route: ESMA’s Interactive Single Rulebook title for Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 Article 123 is “General investigative powers.” The public text states that, to carry out Article 117 supervisory responsibilities, EBA may conduct investigations into issuers of significant asset-referenced tokens and issuers of significant e-money tokens.
The listed powers include examining records, data, procedures and other material; taking or obtaining certified copies or extracts; summoning issuers, management bodies, or staff for oral or written explanations; interviewing consenting natural or legal persons; and requesting records of telephone and data traffic.
This page is an evidence-preparation checklist. It is not a legal interpretation, supervisory-response instruction, authorisation opinion, provider endorsement, broker recommendation, or assurance about any issuer, investigation, authority measure, court authorisation, document, person, or fact pattern.
Article 123 evidence matrix
Authorisation file
Preserve EBA’s written authorisation, authorised-person identities, subject matter, purpose, production date, source URL, retrieval date, and response owner.
Records inventory
Map each requested record, data set, procedure, or other material to document owner, source system, custodian, version, confidentiality marking, Article 121 legal-privilege review status, and production status.
Explanation log
Track oral or written explanation requests, question owner, fact or document topic, management-body or staff participant, answer record, correction status, and review notes.
Interview consent
For interviews with other natural or legal persons, preserve consent evidence, subject-matter boundary, interviewer identity, notes, recording status, and follow-up ownership.
Authority and college handoff
Record college notifications for relevant findings, competent-authority notice before the investigation, competent-authority assistance or attendance requests, and Article 95/96 cooperation notes.
Court-authorisation gate
For telephone or data-traffic records, track whether applicable national law requires court authorisation, EBA application status, proportionality notes, and Court of Justice review route references.
Review-ready tracker
- Source record: ESMA Interactive Single Rulebook URL, retrieval date, Article 123 title, and source owner.
- Investigation file: written authorisation, subject matter, purpose, authorised-person identities, issuer route, and competent-authority notice.
- Evidence file: records/data/procedures inventory, certified-copy or extract requests, explanation logs, interview-consent records, and telephone/data-traffic handling.
- Review file: Article 121 legal-privilege gate, Article 100 professional-secrecy notes, Article 101 data-protection notes, and unresolved qualified-review questions.
FAQ
What does MiCA Article 123 cover?
Article 123 is titled “General investigative powers.” The ESMA public text says EBA may conduct investigations into issuers of significant asset-referenced tokens and significant e-money tokens to carry out Article 117 supervisory responsibilities.
Why is Article 123 relevant to CASP-adjacent diligence?
CASPs and service providers can be adjacent to significant-token operating models through custody, trading-platform, payment, distribution, reserve-asset, outsourcing, or evidence-production workflows, so investigation files should connect to Article 117 supervision, Article 119 college context, Article 121 privilege review, and Article 122 information-request records where relevant.
Does this page tell a firm how to respond to an EBA investigation?
No. It only helps teams organize investigation provenance, records inventories, explanation logs, competent-authority handoffs, court-authorisation status where relevant, and qualified-review ownership before a file is treated as review-ready.