La transizione a MICA tra framework armonizzato, misure transitorie e clausole di salvaguardia. Il caso dei prestatori di servizi per le cripto-attivita di diritto nazionale -The transition to MICA between harmonized framework, transitional measures and grand-fathering clause. The case of crypto-asset service national law providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il contributo si propone di evidenziare alcune problematiche del MICA che potrebbero ostacolare l’applicazione efficace e convergente del nuovo quadro armonizzato a livello europeo. Il processo di transizione al MICA diventa quindi disomogeneo e differenziato a causa di misure transitorie, dedicate agli enti normativi nazionali (già operanti nel mercato domestico), lasciate alla discrezionalità degli Stati membri, in assenza di criteri decisionali univoci. Tali misure includono, in particolare, la previsione di una clausola di grand-fathering che consentirà ai fornitori di diritto nazionale di continuare a fornire servizi per cripto-asset sulla base della regolamentazione nazionale per 18 mesi dopo la data di applicazione del MICA (vale a dire, da dal 30 dicembre 2024 al 1° luglio 2026). Tuttavia, il variegato spettro di opzioni previste dalle misure transitorie, già oggetto dell’attenzione dell’ESMA, rischia, da un lato, di introdurre una coesistenza forzata tra i regimi nazionali e il regime europeo MICA e, dall’altro, di favorire forme di condizioni di parità tra i fornitori di servizi. Alcuni fornitori, soggetti a discipline diverse, potrebbero quindi beneficiare di trattamenti normativi favorevoli che permetterebbero loro di consolidare la propria posizione sul mercato a scapito di altri fornitori. L'intervento dell'ESMA non sarà decisivo, in assenza di specifici poteri al riguardo, ma la definizione di best practices o linee guida da osservare nei casi sopra indicati potrebbe favorire una maggiore convergenza delle autorità nazionali nel processo di transizione al MICA. The paper aims to highlight some issues of MICA that could hinder the effective and convergent application of the new harmonized framework at the European level. The transition process to MICA thus becomes uneven and is varied due to transitional measures, dedicated to national law providers (already operating in the domestic market), which are left to the discretion of member States, in the absence of unambiguous decision criteria. These measures include, in particular, the provision of a grand-fathering clause that will allow national law providers to continue to provide services for crypto-assets on the basis of national regulation for 18 months after the date of application of MICA (i.e., from 30 December 2024 to 1° July 2026). However, the varied spectrum of options under the transitional measures, which has already been the subject of ESMA's attention, risks, on the one hand, introducing forced coexistence between national regimes and the European MICA regime and, on the other hand, encouraging forms of a unlevel playing field among service providers. Some providers, subject to different disciplines, could thus benefit from favorable regulatory treatments that would enable them to consolidate their position in the market at the expense of other providers. ESMA's intervention will not be decisive, in the absence of specific powers in this regard, but the definition of best practices or guidelines to be observed in the above cases could encourage greater convergence of national authorities in the transition process to MICA.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".