The newly introduced Investment Firms Act (WpIG) is intended to simplify matters for financial service providers with regards to the supervision in the future. What effects does the new regulatory regime have for crypto-related business models?
BaFin informs supervised service providers via MaComp about the minimum requirements it places on the implementation of compliance obligations. But is MaComp also applicable to regulated crypto service providers?
Service providers that only provide technical services within a crypto business model, may be able to provide their services without prior BaFin authorization in specific cases. Nevertheless, in some scenarios technical service providers may be subject to supervisory obligations anyways.
Business models with regards to crypto assets often trigger authorization obligations in accordance with German supervisory law for the providers. But at what point are foreign providers obligated to obtain authorization?
The provision of trading signals that are based on algorithmically analyzed trends offering buy or sell recommendations is typical for the crypto market. But what are the regulatory pitfalls that these signal providers have to consider?
The Lightning Network promises to solve a fundamental problem of the Bitcoin blockchain. Not only the increase of transactions per second, but also the decrease in power consumption for updating the blockchain is supposed to be material. The financial privacy of the users is also supposed to be enhanced. But what does this mean for a commercial use of the Lightning Network?