The FMA's first final MiCA penalty targets white paper timing and marketing disclosure failures. The €70,000 fine arrives as post-transition enforcement begins across the EU.
Alpha Score of 31 reflects weak overall profile with poor momentum, weak value, poor quality, weak sentiment.
Austria has fined Bitpanda €70,000 ($82,000) for breaches of the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, marking the Austrian regulator’s first published final penalty under MiCA.
The Austrian Financial Market Authority said Friday that Bitpanda failed to submit a required crypto-asset white paper at least 20 working days before publishing it. Separate violations involved marketing material released before or without disclosures required under the EU rules.
Under the FMA’s findings, one violation concerned the timing of Bitpanda’s crypto-asset white paper. MiCA requires the document to be submitted to the relevant national regulator at least 20 working days before it is made public. Bitpanda did not meet that deadline, according to the authority. The company also distributed a marketing communication before the required white paper had been published.
Marketing requirements formed another part of the case. The regulator said a separate communication did not contain mandatory wording making clear that the material had not been reviewed or approved by a competent authority. The same communication also failed to state that the crypto-asset provider was solely responsible for its contents, according to the FMA. Required contact information was incomplete as well, with both a telephone number and email address missing.
The €70,000 penalty was handled through an expedited procedure, and the FMA said the resulting decision is final. The published action puts the regulator’s enforcement powers under MiCA into use after the EU completed the transition from national crypto registration systems to its common framework.
MiCA requires companies and issuers covered by its disclosure rules to provide investors with prescribed information about crypto assets and to follow specific standards when advertising them. White papers and related marketing communications form part of those requirements, alongside rules governing authorized crypto service providers.
The penalty comes after Bitpanda had already secured regulatory approvals that allow it to provide crypto services across the European Union.
Germany’s Federal Financial Supervisory Authority granted Bitpanda a MiCA license in January 2025, giving the Vienna-founded company access to the EU passporting system. The framework allows a company authorized in one member state to provide covered services in other EU countries without obtaining a separate crypto license in every jurisdiction. Bitpanda said at the time that the approval would support its retail and institutional operations across the bloc.
By May 2025, Bitpanda was also operating with MiCA licenses in Germany and Malta while supplying crypto infrastructure to other financial companies. Its regulatory position was cited when IG planned to use Bitpanda for liquidity, trading connectivity and market data as part of its European crypto expansion.
The Austrian penalty concerns compliance with MiCA obligations tied to the white paper and marketing communications identified by the FMA. The regulator’s published notice said the proceedings were completed through an expedited process and the penalty decision had become final.
The action arrived weeks after the EU’s final MiCA transition deadline expired on July 1, moving firms that had operated under older national registration systems into the bloc’s common authorization regime. A June 29 MiCA report detailed how the end of the 18-month grandfathering period meant crypto firms could no longer rely on previous national registrations once their applicable transition windows had closed.
Under MiCA, exchanges, brokers, custodians and other covered crypto-asset service providers must meet requirements that include governance, safeguarding of client assets, IT security and disclosure standards. Authorization from one EU member state can then be used to provide services in other parts of the bloc through passporting.
Licensing data published after the deadline showed that a large number of companies had not completed the process. An August 11 analysis based on TRM Labs data found that only 281 of 1,343 crypto service providers identified across the European Economic Area had secured MiCA authorization by July 1, leaving 1,062 without approval in the dataset. TRM said firms without authorization would need to leave the market, restructure their operations or transfer customers to an authorized provider. Germany accounted for 55 authorizations in the dataset, while France and the Netherlands each had 29 and Malta had 20.
The data also showed how passporting separates the country where a company serves customers from the regulator responsible for its home authorization. Licensed providers including Bitpanda, Coinbase and Kraken have been able to operate across multiple European markets from different regulatory bases.
Austria’s FMA has also been dealing with applications from crypto companies seeking to establish a regulated base in the country. Bitget EU, for example, filed its MiCAR application in Austria on June 17, placing its planned European operation under review by the same regulator that issued the Bitpanda penalty. Bitget said its application was submitted under Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 and that the timing, scope and outcome remained subject to the FMA’s assessment. The company had selected Vienna as its planned European headquarters, with the office intended to handle compliance, governance and supervisory coordination for its EU operation. The filing had not constituted regulatory approval, and Bitget specifically said its announcement should not be interpreted as an endorsement or confirmation from the FMA. Austria’s regulator requires companies seeking authorization as crypto-asset service providers to submit their applications under Article 62 of MiCA.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.