MiCA Knowledge and Competence: AMF Applies ESMA Criteria to CASP Staff

ByRegReportingDesk
RegReportingDesk card: ESMA, European Securities and Markets Authority, European Union

On 26 March 2026 the AMF announced that it applies ESMA’s guidelines on the criteria for assessing knowledge and competence under MiCA, document ESMA35-24871704-2922 dated 28 January 2026. The MiCA knowledge and competence guidelines have applied in France since 28 July 2026, and the AMF states that they cover every authorised crypto-asset service provider (CASP), whether authorised under MiCA or operating through the notification procedure.

The stakes sit with individual employees. Under Guideline 4, a staff member without the necessary knowledge and competence cannot give clients information or advice on crypto-assets except under the supervision of a qualified colleague, and supervised status has a four-year ceiling unless the competent authority sets a shorter period. Paragraph 12 does not require CASPs to report whether they comply with these ESMA guidelines. This does not remove separate MiCA authorisation or notification obligations, including staff competence evidence required under Article 60(7)(i) where applicable. The guidelines expect the CASP to give the AMF, on request, records showing how each in-scope employee meets the criteria.

Related reading: MiCA CASP Wind-Down: What Unauthorised Providers Must Do as the Transitional Period Ends on 1 July 2026

Dates behind the AMF position

  • 28 January 2026: ESMA guidelines ESMA35-24871704-2922 dated and adopted.
  • 26 March 2026: the AMF announces that it applies them and publishes position DOC-2026-03.
  • 1 July 2026: end of the French transitional period for pre-MiCA digital asset service providers (PSANs) without a MiCA authorisation (AMF reminder of 5 February 2026).
  • 7 July 2026: ESMA’s compliance table (ESMA35-24871704-3058) lists the AMF as complying.
  • 28 July 2026: the guidelines apply in France (ESMA’s text sets six months after publication in all official EU languages). This is also the reference date for the one-year test for existing staff.

Who the MiCA knowledge and competence criteria reach inside a CASP

The guidelines apply to CASPs as defined in Article 3(1)(15) of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA), for every crypto-asset service listed in Article 3(1)(16). ESMA based them on Article 81(15)(a) of MiCA and Article 16(1) of the ESMA Regulation, and they give effect to two Level 1 provisions. Article 68(5) requires every CASP to employ personnel with the knowledge, skills and expertise their responsibilities need. Article 81(7) requires CASPs providing advice to ensure that people giving advice or information on their behalf have the necessary knowledge and competence.

Although Article 81(7) specifically addresses CASPs providing advice, ESMA also applies the guidelines to staff giving information at non-advising CASPs, including exchanges and custodians, on the basis of Article 68(5). The guidelines’ “relevant services” cover giving information as well as advice, and “giving information” means providing it directly to clients, on request or at the CASP’s initiative, in the context of any Article 3(1)(16) service. On that definition, platform support staff may be in scope where they directly provide clients with information about crypto-assets or crypto-asset services in the context of a MiCA-listed service.

The annex lists who falls outside: staff who only point clients to published information, hand out brochures or pass on documents without commenting or providing follow-up services, and back-office staff whose work has no direct relevance for clients and who have no direct client contact. Footnote 13 pulls one group back in: staff who draft and publish client-relevant information, such as recommendations to buy crypto-assets available on the platform, are in scope without ever speaking to a client. Where information or advice is automated, paragraph 17 reaches the staff who decide its content and set its parameters.

Information staff and advisers measured side by side

Guideline 1 sets a higher standard for advisers. The information baseline in paragraph 18 is crypto-specific: product risks, how the protocols used work (consensus, validation, scalability, governance, interoperability, use case, token economics), costs including gas fees, price effects of social media and large holders, market abuse and AML/CFT, and how MiCA investor protection differs from MiFID II.

Element Staff giving information Staff giving advice
Knowledge baseline Paragraph 18 Paragraph 18 plus paragraph 23: total costs, Article 81 suitability duties, unsuitability, portfolio basics, valuation
Example routes, after passing an assessment by the CASP or an external body Qualification of at least 80 hours plus 6 months’ supervised experience, or 1 year’s supervised experience Three-year relevant degree, secondary degree plus 3 years’ professional formation, or 160 hours’ formation, each plus 1 year supervised; or 2 years’ MiFID II or IDD advice plus 6 months supervised
Annual CPD Set by the CASP; example of 10 hours for the least complex range Set by the CASP; example of 20 hours for the least complex range, covering the 10
Existing staff at 28 July 2026 1 year giving information, full-time equivalent 1 year giving advice, full-time equivalent

The hour figures are the easiest part to misread. Paragraphs 19 and 24 introduce the routes with “for example”; the common requirement is a passed assessment.

The CPD figures describe the simplest case. Paragraph 21 leaves the CASP to set the annual minimum from the crypto-assets and services involved, its staff’s existing knowledge, and regulatory, market and technology change, and footnote 11 says advisers on complex portfolios may need more. The AMF’s March announcement frames it the same way: the CASP fixes the minimum annual training hours. CPD can be external or in-house, and either way includes an examination.

Grandfathering PSAN-era staff: the one-year test at 28 July 2026

Paragraphs 20 and 25 let a CASP treat existing staff as competent if they successfully gave information (or advice) on a full-time equivalent basis, with or without supervision, for at least one year before the guidelines applied. Footnotes 7 and 10 count work for virtual asset service providers under a pre-MiCA national framework. In France that framework is the PSAN regime, so client-facing work for a French PSAN can count toward the year.

Three points in the wording matter. “May be considered” makes this the CASP’s own determination, which it has to evidence. The text does not say how part-time service converts to full-time equivalent, so my reading is that a CASP counting part-time tenure needs a documented method. The test is role-specific: paragraph 25 asks for a year of advice before an adviser is treated as competent, and a year spent giving information does not meet it.

Grandfathering settles initial competence only. Paragraphs 20 and 25 give no exemption from annual CPD or the paragraph 28(b) annual review, and the annex says ongoing development is required to hold the appropriate qualification.

Timing also differs across the EU. ESMA’s compliance table lists the AMF as complying, while Denmark’s Finanstilsynet intends to comply with the quantitative elements by 1 July 2027 because they need national legislation there.

Working under supervision: the four-year ceiling and the sign-off

A staff member lacking the appropriate qualification, experience or both may provide relevant services under supervision, meaning under the responsibility of a colleague who holds both. Paragraph 28(d) scales supervision to the person’s qualification and experience, and says it could include supervision during client meetings, calls and emails. The ceiling is four years unless the competent authority sets a shorter period.

Paragraph 28(e) to (g) expects the supervisor to hold the required knowledge and competence plus the skills and resources to supervise, and makes the supervisor responsible for the service as if providing it, including signing off the suitability report where advice is given. Paragraph 27 asks CASPs, where relevant to their services and internal organisation, to draw a clear distinction between advice and information roles in the description of staff responsibilities. My reading is that this written split is what makes each person’s four-year clock and sign-off chain traceable.

Records the AMF can request under paragraph 28(c)

Paragraph 28(c) expects CASPs to submit to their competent authority, on request, staff knowledge and competence records detailed enough for the authority to verify compliance. The compliance notification to ESMA under paragraph 10 falls on competent authorities, and paragraph 12 confirms that CASPs are not required to report whether they comply.

Two reviews feed those records. Under paragraph 15, the management body should assess at least annually whether the CASP’s policies and procedures under Articles 68(5) and 81(7) and the guidelines are effective, and fix deficiencies. Under paragraph 28(b), an internal or external review at least annually should cover staff development needs, regulatory developments and CPD.

On status, paragraph 8 repeats Article 16(3) of the ESMA Regulation: competent authorities and CASPs shall make every effort to comply.

Notified banks and investment firms: two competence frameworks for one adviser

Article 60 of MiCA allows certain regulated entities, including credit institutions and investment firms, to provide crypto-asset services through prior notification, subject to the service-specific limits in that Article. The notification must be submitted at least 40 working days before the services are first provided and must be complete before the provider begins those services, under Article 60(8). Where advice or portfolio management is proposed, Article 60(7)(i) also requires evidence that the relevant personnel have the necessary knowledge and expertise.

Footnote 4 says the guidelines apply without prejudice to other knowledge and competence guidelines, such as the MiFID II guidelines ESMA71-1154262120-153, so an adviser covering both financial instruments and crypto-assets is assessed against both. Route (d) in paragraph 24 credits at least two years of MiFID II or IDD advice, but still requires six months of supervised crypto-asset experience and a passed assessment, and paragraph 18 adds crypto-specific knowledge.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a French investment adviser (CIF) that discusses crypto-linked funds fall under these guidelines?

The guidelines apply to CASPs, so a CIF falls under them only if it is also a CASP. Updating position-recommendation DOC-2006-23 on 27 July 2026, the AMF said advice on financial instruments does not require CASP status even where the underlying assets are crypto-assets, and that crypto-asset advice now requires a specific authorisation. A CIF providing personalised recommendations on crypto-assets, or on the use of crypto-asset services, needs the relevant MiCA CASP authorisation; CIFs cannot use the Article 60 notification procedure. The AMF distinguishes this regulated advice from non-personalised public information about crypto-assets, which does not itself require CASP status.

Has the AMF named recognised external training bodies?

Paragraphs 21 and 26 allow competent authorities to publish such a list. The AMF’s published summary of DOC-2026-03 does not identify any recognised external training bodies. In-house CPD remains an option if it includes an examination.

What has to happen before a CASP lists a new kind of token or launches a new service?

Paragraph 28(b) asks for specific training in advance of any new type of crypto-asset or service. Because paragraph 18 ties the baseline to the protocols used, my reading is that a newly supported network adds its protocol mechanics to what staff must know before launch.

Key Takeaways

  • Identify staff performing relevant information or advice activities. Distinguish these roles in written responsibilities, while excluding activities expressly outside scope under the ESMA annex. Apply the corresponding competence criteria, CPD expectations and existing-staff provisions to each in-scope role.
  • Put grandfathered staff on the same CASP-set CPD and annual review cycle as newly qualified staff.
  • For someone first placed under supervision on 28 July 2026, the four-year ceiling, unless the competent authority sets a shorter period, runs to 28 July 2030 (my calculation); later starters run separate clocks.
  • Assess staff who draft and publish information directly relevant to clients, even without client contact, alongside staff who determine the content of automated information or advice. Ensure that staff setting automated delivery parameters have sufficient knowledge and competence. Apply the scope test to content and research writers based on their actual responsibilities rather than job title alone.
  • Group CASPs: check each authority’s entry in ESMA compliance table ESMA35-24871704-3058 before applying one set of hour benchmarks across entities.

Sources and References

  • ESMA, Guidelines for the criteria on the assessment of knowledge and competence under MiCA, ESMA35-24871704-2922, 28 January 2026: PDF
  • ESMA, Final Report on the Guidelines for the criteria on the assessment of knowledge and competence under MiCA, ESMA35-1872330276-2380, 11 July 2025: PDF
  • ESMA, Guidelines compliance table, ESMA35-24871704-3058, 7 July 2026: PDF
  • AMF announcement, 26 March 2026: amf-france.org
  • AMF, Position DOC-2026-03: amf-france.org
  • AMF, PSAN transitional period ends 1 July 2026, 5 February 2026: amf-france.org
  • AMF, CIF doctrine update on crypto-asset advice, 27 July 2026: amf-france.org
  • Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA), Articles 3, 60, 68 and 81: EUR-Lex
  • Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 (ESMA Regulation), Article 16: EUR-Lex
  • ESMA, MiFID II Guidelines for the assessment of knowledge and competence, ESMA71-1154262120-153: PDF

The first annual review cycle after 28 July 2026

Paragraphs 15 and 28(b) each call for a review at least annually without fixing a start date, so counting from the 28 July 2026 application date puts the first management-body assessment and the first staff review by 28 July 2027 (my calculation). For group CASPs with a Danish entity, the same window also holds Finanstilsynet’s 1 July 2027 target for complying with the quantitative elements of the guidelines.

Disclaimer: The information on RegReportingDesk.com is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, or compliance advice. Always consult your compliance officer, legal counsel, or the relevant supervisory authority for guidance specific to your institution.

Similar Posts