The rollout of Europe’s landmark crypto regulatory framework is entering a decisive phase in France, where enforcement risks are rapidly replacing regulatory ambiguity. As YourDailyAnalysis observes, the transition from permissive registration regimes to full licensing under MiCA is now exposing structural weaknesses among smaller and less prepared crypto firms.
France’s markets regulator warned that nearly one-third of crypto companies operating without an EU-wide MiCA license have yet to inform authorities whether they intend to comply or exit the market before the July deadline. Under MiCA, crypto asset service providers must obtain authorization from a national regulator to continue operating across the European Union, marking a fundamental shift from fragmented national oversight to a harmonised supervisory regime.
From an analytical standpoint, the silence of roughly 30% of firms is not a procedural oversight but a signal of deeper market stress. According to disclosures by the French regulator, only around 30% of unlicensed firms have submitted MiCA applications, while another 40% have already decided not to pursue licensing. The remaining cohort has neither engaged with regulators nor articulated an orderly wind-down strategy, raising concerns over consumer protection and market integrity – issues YourDailyAnalysis has repeatedly highlighted as fault lines during regulatory transitions.
European regulators have made clear that inaction is no longer an option. Firms without MiCA authorization are expected either to secure approval or execute structured exit plans by the end of national transition periods, which vary across member states. Failure to do so could result in forced shutdowns, enforcement actions, or reputational damage that may extend beyond domestic borders.
At the same time, the regulatory divergence within the EU remains unresolved. France has openly criticised the “passporting” of licenses from jurisdictions perceived to apply lighter supervisory standards, arguing that uneven enforcement risks undermining MiCA’s credibility. This tension has fed into broader debates over centralising crypto supervision at the EU level, including proposals to expand the role of ESMA – an approach that continues to divide member states and industry participants alike, as Your Daily Analysis notes in its broader coverage of European financial governance.
The market response has been bifurcated. Large, well-capitalised players have moved quickly to secure MiCA licenses, reinforcing their regulatory moat and accelerating consolidation. Smaller firms, by contrast, are increasingly squeezed between rising compliance costs and shrinking operational flexibility. For many, the choice is no longer strategic growth but survival versus exit.
What ultimately matters is that MiCA is no longer theoretical. In France, it is becoming an active filter reshaping the crypto landscape by forcing clarity, accountability, and scale. For investors, counterparties, and regulators alike, YourDailyAnalysis sees this moment not as a crackdown, but as the beginning of a structurally different European crypto market – one where opacity is priced out, and regulatory readiness becomes a competitive advantage.
