Gate Europe’s CEO Giovanni Cunti says the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) has raised the long-term operating burden for firms already authorized to serve EU customers, warning that some licensed providers may eventually decide they cannot afford the compliance costs.
Speaking to Cointelegraph’s Chain Reaction on Monday, Cunti argued that MiCA’s stricter requirements have tightened competition—particularly for newcomers—and that the market may now be too small for some businesses to sustain the resources required to operate under the EU framework.
Key takeaways
- MiCA compliance costs are increasingly viewed as a barrier for some licensed crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), according to Gate Europe’s CEO.
- The July 1 end of MiCA’s 18-month transition period forced a retrenchment in some services across Europe, while licensed firms continued under the new regime.
- Regulatory burden may push certain startups and projects to launch outside the EU to preserve room for product iteration and growth.
- Despite the pressure, ESMA’s CASP authorizations continue to expand, though at a slower pace since the transition deadline.
- As the market contracts from “thousands” of operators to “hundreds,” remaining providers may benefit from customer migration rather than losing users.
MiCA’s transition deadline changed who can serve EU users
MiCA is the EU’s comprehensive regulatory framework for crypto assets. The bloc’s 18-month transition period ended on July 1, meaning crypto firms serving EU customers needed authorization under MiCA or otherwise had to stop offering regulated services.
Cointelegraph previously reported that the deadline triggered service changes from several exchanges in parts of Europe while firms sought MiCA approvals. A notable example is Binance, which Cointelegraph said was unable to secure a MiCA license before the deadline. The result was a patchwork of restrictions depending on jurisdiction—an early sign that the authorization process would determine who could continue operating as usual.
Gate Europe warns some licensed firms may not endure
Cunti’s central concern is not simply that compliance is costly, but that the costs and staffing requirements needed to operate continuously under MiCA could outweigh the revenue potential for some firms—especially those that acquired a license expecting the broader market to remain large.
He told Cointelegraph that “quite a few” firms that obtain MiCA licenses may ultimately lack the capacity to sustain the “cost and the resources” required “in the long term.”
For investors and operators, the implication is straightforward: in a regulated environment with ongoing obligations, survival increasingly depends on business scale and risk management—not only on obtaining a license once. That can favor larger, better-capitalized platforms and reduce room for smaller providers that cannot spread compliance overhead across higher volumes.
Regulation may drive projects to other jurisdictions
Beyond business continuity, Cunti also suggested that MiCA’s stricter approach could affect where new crypto products and projects choose to launch. He said MiCA strengthens investor protections, but also leaves less space for innovation compared with jurisdictions that apply lighter regulatory requirements.
That, he argued, may lead some teams to choose non-EU markets as a first stop. “We may need to be prepared that some projects, possibly some important projects, may be looking at other jurisdictions with different guidelines,” Cunti said.
At the same time, the EU framework still appears to be gaining institutional traction. ESMA continues to add CASPs to its public register, indicating that the compliance pathway exists—though Cunti’s comments point to a tougher economic reality for firms after authorization.
ESMA licensing continues, but momentum is slower
According to ESMA updates cited by Cointelegraph, the number of companies authorized under MiCA has kept rising. On Friday, ESMA added 14 crypto-asset service providers to its register, bringing the total to 294. Cointelegraph noted that this followed the addition of 37 firms in ESMA’s first update after the July 1 transition deadline.
While the steady increase shows that regulatory onboarding is continuing, Cunti framed the broader effect as a reshaping of competition rather than a simple expansion of the market. He pointed to the difference between the pre-MiCA landscape—when, in his view, there were “thousands of operators”—and the post-deadline environment, which is now closer to “hundreds.”
From a market-structure perspective, this distinction matters. A shrinking number of compliant providers can reduce choice and increase regulatory concentration, but it can also redirect demand. Cunti suggested that customers still want access to EU-regulated services and therefore may migrate toward the remaining compliant platforms rather than leaving the ecosystem entirely.
“So definitely there is a big opportunity for all of us,” he said, adding that “there is an ongoing migration because customers do not want to lose access to this market.”
ESMA’s role also remains active as regulators oversee how major venues adapt. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph referenced an ESMA warning that brought Binance’s EU service changes into scrutiny—another signal that MiCA implementation is ongoing, not a one-time switch.
What to watch next
The key question after MiCA’s transition is whether authorization translates into sustainable operations. Readers should watch for evidence that some licensed firms scale down, exit, or consolidate—alongside continued ESMA licensing updates and any further regulatory scrutiny over how exchanges restrict services in different EU regions.
https://www.cryptobreaking.com/gate-europe-ceo-more-mica/?utm_source=blogger%20&utm_medium=social_auto&utm_campaign=Gate%20Europe%20CEO:%20More%20MiCA-licensed%20firms%20may%20leave%20EU%20market%20
Comments
Post a Comment