Italy Files Most Entries on EU Unlicensed Crypto List
Italy's market regulator accounts for 179 of the 188 entries on the European Union's register of crypto firms operating without authorization.
Updated on Nov. 4, 2026 in Financial Services
Live Poll
Do you trust regulators to keep unlicensed crypto firms away from ordinary investors?
Italy's market regulator filed 179 of the 188 entries on the EU's register of unlicensed crypto firms, while Germany's financial supervisor filed none. The register is maintained by the European Securities and Markets Authority under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, whose transition period for unlicensed providers ended on July 1.
Why it matters
The register is the only EU-wide public record of firms that national supervisors say serve clients without authorization, and its uneven filing pattern shows how differently member states are enforcing the same rules. Because MiCA sets no duty or deadline for national authorities to submit entries, the list is non-exhaustive and may understate the scale of unlicensed activity.
The ESMA register holds 188 entries, 179 of them filed by Italy, while CONSOB alone has blocked 1,861 unauthorized financial websites, 250 tied to crypto-assets, as of October 29. The file cannot yet show total unlicensed activity, because the register has no submission requirement and member-state filings vary widely.
The players
European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)
The EU body that maintains the register of unlicensed crypto-asset providers under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation and coordinates supervision across member states.
CONSOB
Italy's market regulator, which filed 179 of the register's 188 entries and has ordered internet providers to block unauthorized financial websites since 2019.
BaFin
Germany's federal financial supervisor, which filed no entries on the register despite Germany hosting the most authorized crypto providers in the EU.
The details
Authorities in four other countries supplied the remaining nine entries, and the Czech, Dutch and Slovak regulators each filed one. CONSOB has ordered internet providers to block unauthorized financial websites since 2019, and Belgium's FSMA filed six entries.
Timeline
July 1: The MiCA transition period for unlicensed providers ended.
October 9: EU finance ministers limited direct ESMA supervision to the largest providers.
October 29: ESMA reviewed the file as CONSOB's blocked-site tally reached 1,861.
November 4: FM Intelligence published its analysis of the register.
June 30, 2027: The European Commission is due to report on MiCA.
Market Dynamics
The uneven filings reflect how MiCA's authorization regime, which replaced fragmented national rules, is being applied unevenly across the bloc. Germany's large pool of licensed providers alongside zero register entries suggests supervisory priorities diverge even under a single EU framework.
Consumers using crypto platforms should check whether a provider appears on national authorization lists, since unlicensed firms operate outside MiCA protections. Investors facing unlicensed services have less regulatory recourse if disputes or losses arise.
The takeaway
Before using a crypto service in the EU, confirm it appears on its national regulator's authorized list rather than relying on the absence of a warning. Unlisted firms may fall outside MiCA's consumer safeguards.
What happens next
The European Commission is due to report on the operation of MiCA by June 30, 2027.
Further reading
Explore more on Financial Services for the wider regulatory picture behind crypto oversight in Europe.
Live Poll
Do you trust regulators to keep unlicensed crypto firms away from ordinary investors?
