When the regulator changes during the project: what it costs to be wrong
A shift in the competent authority mid-authorisation does not pause your file. The clock set by Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA) keeps running, and the new authority inherits the file as it stands, gaps included. Treat the change as a status event, not paperwork noise, and confirm in writing which office now holds jurisdiction before you file anything else.
Basis
Two EU regulations frame the shift. Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA) sets the authorisation regime for crypto-asset service providers and issuers, and it assigns supervision to a competent authority designated by each member state. Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (TFR) runs in parallel for information accompanying transfers of crypto-assets, and its counterpart authority is not always the office that grants the MiCA licence. When a national arrangement moves a file between bodies — a central bank taking over from a financial intelligence unit, for example — neither regulation pauses on that account.
Practical consequence
The practical effect lands on three points. The deadline for responding to a request for further information keeps running against the original clock. The file must be re-indexed under the new authority's own reference. Any submission sent to the outgoing office after the handover risks being treated as if it had not been filed at all. Missing this window is the most common way an otherwise complete application loses its place in the queue.
What to do
- Compliance officer: confirm in writing, from the outgoing authority, the exact date the handover took effect.
- Compliance officer: request written confirmation from the incoming authority that it holds the file and its assigned reference.
- Compliance officer: resend, addressed to the new authority, any submission filed within ten days either side of the handover.
- Counsel: recalculate every outstanding deadline from the original trigger date, never from the handover date itself.
- Compliance officer: update the contact record held by the authority to stop notices going to the wrong office.
- Compliance officer: keep both offices' correspondence on file — the transition itself is rarely documented unless the applicant does it.
Who decides
The incoming competent authority decides, on the file as transferred, using the evidence already submitted plus anything sent after the handover. A change of authority is not grounds for restarting the review period. Where the transition crosses two member states — the file opened under one national regime and moved under a group restructuring — the receiving authority typically confirms the transfer with the originating one before treating any deadline as complete.
What tends to raise the cost of getting this wrong
| Factor | Effect on the file |
|---|---|
| Number of jurisdictions already notified | Each one needs its own handover confirmation, not a single blanket letter |
| Whether a deadline is already running | Sets whether resubmission is urgent or can wait for routine confirmation |
| Whether the outgoing office replies in writing | Written confirmation is the only proof the transfer occurred on a given date |
| Whether a counterparty relies on the licence | A delay in confirming authority spills into commercial deadlines outside the file |
Branches
If your token issuance project also moves personal data outside the EU, the compliance file may face a separate question, covered in When a transfer mechanism is questioned.
If a group company, rather than the licensed entity, ends up filing intellectual-property applications tied to the asset's brand, the mismatch is a distinct problem, described in When a group company files instead of the owner.
If a founder or contractor leaves before a smart-contract prototype is formally assigned to the company, the resulting ownership gap is covered separately in A founder leaves with the prototype ownership of results.
If the tokenised collection itself is delisted from a marketplace while the authorisation file is still open, a parallel situation applies: see A marketplace delists the collection tokenised rights what it.
Limit
This page does not calculate how many working days a re-filed authorisation takes to clear; that depends on which authority now holds the file and how complete the original submission was. It does not resolve disputes over which member state had jurisdiction in the first place — that is a separate procedural question, decided before a handover is even possible.
Related publications
For a closely related supervisory scenario, see What it costs to be wrong in this situation, covering what happens when a licence is suspended pending review.
Verified
Checked against the consolidated texts of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA) and Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (TFR) as published on EUR-Lex. Last checked: 15 January 2025.
A supervisory handover is a status change, not a reset. We answer the first message in minutes during business hours and confirm the scope and timeline for handling a transfer within one business day.
FAQ
What is the first step when the regulator changes during the project?
Confirm in writing, from the outgoing authority, the exact date the handover took effect, then request the same confirmation from the incoming authority before filing anything further.
Which deadline is already running?
Any deadline set before the handover keeps running from its original trigger date. The change of authority does not reset it under either Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA) or Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (TFR).
Who decides, and on what evidence?
The incoming competent authority decides, using the file as transferred plus anything filed after the handover. It typically confirms the transfer with the outgoing office before treating any deadline as complete.