Europe’s crypto market has moved beyond the race to secure a Markets in Crypto-Assets licence.
The next test is whether authorised firms can afford the staff, capital and controls required to keep operating under the European Union’s full rulebook.
The cost pressure may push smaller crypto companies towards mergers, sales or bank partnerships. The same pattern could develop in the U.K., where the Financial Conduct Authority will open its authorisation gateway on September 30, 2026.
MiCA moves Europe from licensing to long-term compliance
The MiCA transition ended across the EU on July 1, 2026. The European Securities and Markets Authority said any company serving EU clients without authorisation must stop covered crypto services. Unlicensed firms must execute wind-down plans and help customers move assets to an authorised provider or self-hosted wallet.
A licence gives a crypto-asset service provider access to MiCA’s passporting system, but it also brings continuing duties. Firms must maintain governance, capital, market conduct, complaint handling, cybersecurity and anti-money laundering systems. These fixed costs weigh more heavily on smaller exchanges, brokers and custodians.
Notably, more than 3,000 crypto firms held registrations under earlier national systems, while only 194 had obtained MiCA approval by May. ESMA’s register later reached about 300 authorised providers after approvals around the July deadline.
U.K. rules could raise the cost of remaining independent
The U.K. has chosen to place crypto inside its existing financial-services framework rather than build a separate MiCA-style regime. The FCA said trading platforms, custodians, intermediaries, stablecoin issuers and firms arranging staking will need authorisation. Applications will run from September 30, 2026, to February 28, 2027, before the regime starts on October 25, 2027.
Steven Lightstone, a Morgan Lewis partner quoted by CoinDesk, said the FCA keeps “very high standards” where consumers are involved. He said a crypto company would be “treated like any normal traditional financial institution.” Banks already operate many required governance, reporting and financial-crime systems.
The FCA’s final crypto rules also extend client-asset protections to crypto custody. Its CASS 17 framework covers safeguarding duties for authorised custodians. Building key management, reconciliations, segregation and recovery procedures from scratch may cost more than joining a regulated group.
Banks and larger firms gain a route into crypto
Banks can use acquisitions to gain technology, licences and specialist teams without building every service internally. Crypto firms can gain capital, compliance staff, distribution and customer relationships. Partnerships may offer a middle route when neither side wants a full takeover.
Recent European activity shows both models. France’s CACEIS was nearing a deal for MiCA-licensed crypto platform Meria. Portugal’s Bison Bank became a MiCA-authorised provider after integrating its digital-asset subsidiary. Spain’sCecabank also launched regulated crypto custody for financial institutions.
A group of European banks selected Fireblocks to support a planned MiCA-compliant euro stablecoin, while Qivalis expanded its consortium to 37 financial institutions across 15 countries.
Simon Schneider, chief executive of Sygnum Europe, told CoinDesk that fewer than 20% of European banks offer crypto services. Bank executives expect regulatory certainty to move more client assets towards licensed institutions. Banks already have customer networks and compliance frameworks, creating room for partnerships in custody, brokerage, staking and tokenisation.
Scale may become Europe’s next competitive advantage
A BCG and FT Partners report found that fintech M&A value rose from $105 billion in 2023 to $251 billion in 2025. Scaled fintech companies completed 659 acquisitions in 2025, compared with 589 by banks and other established institutions. Digital assets and compliance ranked among the areas attracting buyers.
MiCA may add another reason to pursue deals. A buyer can spread compliance costs across a larger customer base, while an acquired company can avoid maintaining duplicate licences and systems. Regulators will still review ownership, governance, outsourcing and customer protection after any transaction.
Consolidation does not mean banks will replace all crypto-native companies. Specialist providers still supply technology and market knowledge that many banks lack. Self-custody will also remain outside regulated custodians’ business models. The likely change is fewer standalone providers and more groups combining banking distribution with crypto infrastructure.
The final shape will depend on authorisation decisions, operating costs and customer migration. MiCA has separated authorised providers from firms that must leave the EU market. The FCA’s 2027 regime may apply similar pressure in Britain. Smaller companies may need to raise capital, share infrastructure, sell or leave regulated markets. This could make scale more valuable than speed for firms seeking long-term regulated European access.
