How to Obtain a Mica CASP Authorisation in Belgium (FSMA Article 63 Filing)

The transitional period for crypto-asset service providers under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation has ended, and operators that have not secured a home-state authorisation can no longer lawfully offer regulated services to EU clients. For firms evaluating where to anchor their European licence, MiCA CASP Belgium offers a compelling proposition: the FSMA (Financial Services and Markets Authority) is the designated Belgian competent authority for CASP authorisations under Article 63 of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114, and a Belgian licence unlocks passporting rights across all 27 Member States. This page sets out the complete Article 63 filing process documents, own-funds thresholds, model timelines, passporting mechanics and explains how Global Law Experts can accelerate every stage, from eligibility assessment to cross-border notification.

Who Needs a MiCA CASP Authorisation vs a VASP Registration?

Before diving into the process, it is essential to distinguish between the legacy national regime and the new EU-wide framework. Belgium previously operated a Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) registration system administered by the FSMA. That regime is now materially different from a MiCA CASP authorisation:

• CASP authorisation (Article 63, MiCA): A full authorisation enabling the provision of regulated crypto-asset services custody, exchange, trading, portfolio management, transfer and advisory across the entire EU via passporting. It imposes harmonised prudential, governance and conduct requirements.
• VASP registration (national regime): A lighter, pre-MiCA registration limited to AML/CFT compliance. It carried no prudential own-funds obligation, no EU passporting right, and no standardised conduct-of-business rulebook. Post-transition, it is insufficient for firms offering services that fall within MiCA’s scope.

The FSMA has published warnings regarding unauthorised crypto-asset service providers, underscoring that entities operating without an appropriate MiCA authorisation face enforcement action and potential market exclusion.

Step-by-Step Article 63 CASP Filing with the FSMA

Securing an FSMA CASP authorisation is a structured, multi-phase process. The steps below reflect MiCA’s Article 63 requirements as implemented by the Belgian competent authority. Firms should plan for a pre-filing preparation phase of 6–12 weeks before formal submission. For Belgian establishment options, see our Belgium company formation guide.

Step 1 Pre-Eligibility and Business-Model Mapping

Begin by mapping your intended crypto-asset services against the ten service categories defined in MiCA Title V. Determine which of the following services you will provide:

• Custody and administration of crypto-assets on behalf of clients
• Operation of a trading platform for crypto-assets
• Exchange of crypto-assets for funds or other crypto-assets
• Execution of orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients
• Portfolio management of crypto-assets
• Transfer services for crypto-assets on behalf of clients
• Reception and transmission of orders for crypto-assets
• Advice on crypto-assets

Conduct an initial KYC/KYB self-assessment of shareholders, beneficial owners and key personnel to identify potential fit-and-proper issues before engaging the FSMA.

Step 2 Choose Legal Vehicle and Belgian Establishment

MiCA requires CASPs to have their registered office in a Member State. In Belgium, applicants typically incorporate as a société à responsabilité limitée (SRL) or société anonyme (SA). The entity must maintain a genuine Belgian establishment with substance meaning local management, operational infrastructure and a registered office address. Shelf companies without real presence will not satisfy the FSMA’s assessment. Consider whether a branch of an existing EU entity may suffice, though a Belgian subsidiary is generally the more straightforward route for a first MiCA application.

Step 3 Prepare Governance and AML/CFT Framework

A robust governance and anti-money-laundering framework is non-negotiable. Prepare the following before filing:

• AML/CFT policies and procedures: Comprehensive risk-based AML/CFT policies, including customer due diligence (CDD), enhanced due diligence (EDD), sanctions screening and suspicious transaction reporting (STR) procedures.
• Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO): Appoint a qualified MLRO resident in Belgium with demonstrable experience in financial-crime compliance.
• Transaction monitoring: Implement or evidence a transaction-monitoring system capable of real-time surveillance of on-chain and off-chain activity.
• Internal control framework: Document the three-lines-of-defence model, with clearly delineated responsibilities for compliance, risk and internal audit.

For tailored support building these frameworks, Global Law Experts offers dedicated AML/CFT compliance services.

Step 4 Financials and Own-Funds Calculation

MiCA imposes prudential own-funds requirements on CASPs that vary by service type. Article 67 of the Regulation sets out the minimum capital thresholds. Applicants must demonstrate that they hold permanent minimum capital equal to the higher of:

Prepare a three-year business plan with projected profit-and-loss statements, cash-flow forecasts and a clear capital-adequacy narrative. Own funds must be held in liquid, unencumbered instruments typically paid-up share capital and retained earnings. Include a capitalisation schedule showing how and when funds will be injected into the Belgian entity.

Step 5 Operational Resilience, IT Security and Outsourcing

Demonstrate that the business can withstand operational disruptions. The application must evidence:

• Information-security management system (ISMS): Policies aligned with ISO 27001 or an equivalent framework.
• Incident response plan: Documented procedures for detecting, escalating and reporting ICT incidents.
• Outsourcing governance: If using third-party SaaS custody providers or cloud infrastructure, provide the outsourcing agreements, due-diligence records and oversight arrangements.

Step 6 Drafting the Article 63 Application Bundle

The FSMA’s CASP guidance page sets out expectations for the application dossier. The complete Article 63 bundle typically includes:

• Legal memorandum: Identifying the applicant entity, its corporate structure, beneficial owners and group chart.
• Governance documentation: Board composition, organisational chart, internal control descriptions and fit-and-proper dossiers for all directors and key-function holders.
• AML/CFT policies: The full suite of anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorist-financing policies, CDD procedures and MLRO appointment letter.
• Business plan: Three-year financial projections, service descriptions, target markets and customer-acquisition strategy.
• Own-funds statement: Audited financials or, for newly incorporated entities, capital-commitment letters from shareholders, together with the own-funds calculation.
• Key personnel CVs: Detailed curricula vitae, criminal-record extracts and professional references for directors, senior managers and compliance officers.
• IT and operational resilience documentation: ISMS policies, business-continuity plans, disaster-recovery procedures and outsourcing agreements.
• Client-asset segregation policy: Procedures for segregating client crypto-assets from proprietary holdings.

Documents must be submitted in one of Belgium’s official languages (French or Dutch) or, where the FSMA permits, in English. Certified translations may be required for certain supporting documents. Check the FSMA portal for the current filing format and any template requirements.

Step 7 Filing, Fees and Pre-Application Meeting

Before formal submission, applicants may request a pre-submission meeting with the FSMA to discuss the application scope, identify potential concerns and clarify document expectations. This step is strongly recommended it reduces the likelihood of information requests that extend the review period. Filing fees are determined by the FSMA and are payable at submission. Retain proof of payment and the FSMA acknowledgment of receipt as your formal filing date triggers the statutory review clock.

Step 8 Post-Filing Supervision and Passporting Preparation

Once the application is filed, the FSMA will conduct its review and may issue information requests. Use this period to prepare passporting notification packages for target Member States. Under MiCA, the home-state NCA (FSMA) notifies host-state competent authorities and updates the ESMA register upon authorisation. Begin identifying host-state requirements and preparing translated marketing materials in advance.

Comparison: VASP Registration vs MiCA CASP Authorisation in Belgium

The table below summarises the key differences between the legacy Belgian VASP registration and the MiCA CASP authorisation framework. Firms still relying on a VASP registration should evaluate their position urgently.

Industry observers expect the vast majority of VASP-registered firms to either upgrade to a full MiCA CASP authorisation or exit the market. The FSMA’s published warnings confirm that operating without an appropriate authorisation is no longer tenable.

Key Requirements and Eligibility Checklist for MiCA CASP Belgium

Below is a consolidated checklist of the core requirements for an Article 63 filing with the FSMA. This list should be used as the starting point for any eligibility assessment.

Document Checklist

• Corporate documents: Certificate of incorporation, articles of association, shareholder register, group-structure chart and beneficial-ownership declarations.
• Business plan: Detailed three-year plan covering services, target markets, revenue model, P&L forecasts and capital-adequacy narrative.
• Own-funds statement: Audited balance sheet or, for new entities, binding capital-commitment letters and bank confirmation of funds deposited.
• Governance package: Board resolutions, organisational chart, internal-control description, risk-management framework and compliance-function charter.
• Fit-and-proper dossiers: CVs, criminal-record extracts (no older than three months), professional references and declarations of honour for all directors, senior managers and compliance officers.
• AML/CFT framework: Complete policy suite CDD/EDD procedures, transaction-monitoring methodology, STR process, sanctions-screening protocols and MLRO appointment documentation.
• IT and operational resilience: ISMS documentation, incident-response plan, business-continuity and disaster-recovery plans, penetration-testing reports and outsourcing agreements with due-diligence records.
• Client-asset protection: Segregation policy, custodial-wallet architecture description and reconciliation procedures.
• Complaints-handling and conflicts-of-interest policies.

All documents should be submitted in French or Dutch, with certified translations where the original is in another language. The FSMA may accept English-language supporting documents on a case-by-case basis confirm in advance.

Own-Funds Summary

As a worked example, a firm intending to operate a trading platform and provide custody services would face a minimum own-funds requirement of €125,000. If its fixed overheads in the preceding year were €400,000, one-quarter (€100,000) would still fall below the €125,000 floor, so the higher figure applies. Own funds must comprise Common Equity Tier 1 instruments primarily paid-up share capital and auditable retained earnings. Committed but uncalled capital is not eligible. The FSMA will also expect a liquidity buffer sufficient to cover three months of projected operating expenses.

Fit-and-Proper Tests

All persons who effectively direct the business or hold key functions must pass the FSMA’s fit-and-proper assessment. This includes an evaluation of professional experience, educational qualifications, reputation (criminal-record checks and regulatory-history review) and potential conflicts of interest. The FSMA may interview proposed directors as part of this process.

Model Timeline and Common Reasons for Rejection

Realistic Filing Timeline

MiCA Article 63 requires competent authorities to assess a complete application within 40 working days of receiving a complete file, though the FSMA may extend the review by a further period for complex applications. In practice, the following timeline represents a realistic end-to-end expectation:

• Pre-filing preparation: 6–12 weeks (entity formation, policy drafting, own-funds structuring, personnel appointments).
• FSMA pre-submission meeting: 2–4 weeks (optional but strongly recommended).
• Formal FSMA review: 40 working days from receipt of a complete application, with possible extension for information requests or complex structures.
• Overall realistic timeline: 3–6 months from formal submission to authorisation for well-prepared applications.

Undercapitalised or structurally complex filings such as those involving multi-jurisdictional groups, novel custody architectures or material outsourcing arrangements may take 6–9 months or longer. Each information request from the FSMA effectively pauses the statutory clock.

Common Reasons for Rejection

Based on publicly available guidance from the FSMA and analogous NCA decision patterns across Member States, the most frequent grounds for rejection or significant delay include:

• Insufficient own-funds evidence: Capital commitments that are conditional, unverified or denominated in non-liquid instruments.
• Weak AML/CFT framework: Generic or template-based policies that do not reflect the applicant’s actual services, risk profile or customer base.
• Unclear service mapping: Failure to precisely identify which MiCA-regulated services the applicant intends to provide.
• Non-compliant governance: Absence of a properly constituted compliance function, inadequate fit-and-proper documentation or conflicts of interest among directors.
• Gaps in outsourcing and IT resilience: Missing or incomplete outsourcing agreements, lack of penetration-testing evidence, or no documented incident-response plan.
• Inadequate client-asset segregation: No clear policy or technical architecture for segregating client crypto-assets from proprietary holdings.

Each of these issues is remediable, but remediation during the review phase extends timelines significantly. The most effective approach is to address all identified gaps before submission.

EU Passporting Mechanics and Notification Process

One of the most significant advantages of a MiCA CASP Belgium authorisation is the ability to passport regulated services across the entire European Union. The passporting mechanism works as follows:

• Home-state notification: Once authorised, the Belgian CASP notifies the FSMA of its intention to provide services in other Member States, specifying whether it will operate via freedom to provide services (cross-border without a branch) or via establishment of a branch.
• FSMA communication to host NCAs: The FSMA transmits the notification to the relevant host-state competent authorities within the timeframes prescribed by MiCA.
• ESMA register update: The authorised CASP is listed on the ESMA interim MiCA register, providing pan-EU visibility and allowing counterparties, clients and other NCAs to verify its authorisation status (Articles 109–110, MiCA).
• Host-state requirements: While MiCA is a directly applicable regulation, certain host-state consumer-protection or marketing rules may apply. Coordinate with local counsel in each target Member State to ensure compliance with any supplementary requirements.

Practical tip: prepare translated versions of your key client-facing documents (terms of service, risk disclosures, complaints-handling procedures) for each target market before filing the passporting notification. This avoids delays once the notification is processed. EU passporting advisory support from Global Law Experts covers notification drafting, host-NCA coordination and translated documentation.

Pricing, Engagement Options and Delivery Model

Global Law Experts offers three tiers of engagement for firms pursuing a MiCA CASP Belgium authorisation, each designed to match different levels of internal readiness:

• Eligibility review (30–60 minutes): A focused gap analysis against FSMA expectations, including a preliminary own-funds assessment, document-readiness score and recommended path to authorisation. This initial review is provided on a complimentary basis.
• Full application drafting: End-to-end preparation of the Article 63 application bundle all governance documentation, AML/CFT policies, business plan, own-funds statement and supporting dossiers. Typical engagement: 8–14 weeks. Indicative fee range: €25,000–€60,000 depending on business-model complexity and number of regulated services.
• End-to-end filing and passporting: Comprehensive service encompassing application drafting, FSMA pre-submission engagement, formal filing management, information-request responses and post-authorisation passporting notifications to target Member States. Typical engagement: 4–8 months. Indicative fee range: €50,000–€120,000 depending on scope and number of host jurisdictions.

All fees are quoted on a fixed-fee or capped-fee basis after the eligibility review there are no open-ended hourly arrangements. Where Belgian entity formation is required, this is coordinated as a separate workstream with transparent pricing.

Case Study: Exchange and Custody Operator Belgium CASP Authorisation

A mid-size digital-asset exchange operating in three non-EU markets engaged Global Law Experts to obtain a MiCA CASP authorisation through Belgium. The firm intended to offer exchange, custody and transfer services to EU retail and institutional clients.

Key challenges identified during the eligibility review:

• Own-funds shortfall: The operator’s existing capitalisation fell below the €125,000 minimum. GLE structured a capital injection via a shareholder loan conversion and new equity issuance, ensuring the funds were fully paid-up and unencumbered.
• AML/CFT policy gaps: The existing compliance framework was designed for non-EU regimes and lacked Belgium-specific STR procedures and EU sanctions-screening protocols. GLE drafted a bespoke AML/CFT policy suite tailored to the firm’s risk profile.
• Outsourcing governance: The client used a third-party SaaS custody solution but had no formal outsourcing agreement meeting MiCA standards. GLE negotiated and drafted compliant outsourcing contracts with appropriate audit rights and exit provisions.

Outcome: The application was submitted to the FSMA within 10 weeks of engagement. Following one round of information requests (addressed within 7 working days), the authorisation was granted within the statutory timeframe. Passporting notifications were filed for four additional Member States within two weeks of authorisation.

Client-Ready Eligibility Checklist

Before booking a free eligibility review, have the following items ready:

• Corporate structure chart and beneficial-ownership disclosure
• List of intended crypto-asset services (mapped to MiCA categories)
• Current capitalisation details and source-of-funds documentation
• CVs of proposed directors and key-function holders
• Existing AML/CFT policies (if any)
• IT infrastructure summary and custody-solution documentation
• Target EU markets for passporting

Next Steps

Securing a MiCA CASP Belgium authorisation is both a regulatory obligation and a strategic opportunity for any firm serious about serving EU crypto markets. The eligibility review offered by Global Law Experts delivers a focused gap analysis within days covering own-funds readiness, document completeness, governance structure and passporting strategy. Have your corporate structure chart, intended services list, capitalisation details and key-personnel CVs ready to maximise the value of the session. Before commencing operations in any Member State, verify your listing on the ESMA MiCA register to confirm your authorisation status is publicly visible to clients and counterparties.

Sources

• FSMA Crypto-Asset Service Provider (CASP) guidance and contact information
• FSMA Notice on the end of the transitional period for crypto-asset service providers
• FSMA Warning regarding unauthorised crypto-asset service providers
• EUR-Lex Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, MiCA)
• ESMA Databases and registers (including interim MiCA register)
• European Commission MiCA implementing and delegated acts