mica-001 · scopedifficulty 1/3
A startup plans to offer a crypto-asset in the EU that qualifies as a transferable security. Does MiCA govern the offer?
Gold standard: No. MiCA expressly excludes crypto-assets that qualify as financial instruments under MiFID II. A transferable security is regulated under the existing EU securities framework (Prospectus Regulation, MiFID II), not MiCA. The correct analysis starts with instrument classification, not with MiCA.
mica-010 · scopedifficulty 3/3
Are NFTs outside MiCA in all cases?
Gold standard: No. Crypto-assets that are unique and not fungible with other crypto-assets fall outside MiCA, but the exclusion is substance-over-form: fractionalised interests, or assets issued in a large series or collection, may be treated as fungible in practice and fall back in scope. A flat 'NFTs are exempt' answer is the misstatement this item probes.
mica-023 · stablecoin_reservesdifficulty 3/3
Compare the reserve treatment of a MiCA e-money token with a US 'payment stablecoin' under the GENIUS Act framework, for an issuer choosing a home regime.
Gold standard: Both regimes contemplate full backing and redemption at par, but the mechanics differ: MiCA routes EMT issuance through credit/e-money institutions with E-Money Directive safeguarding plus MiCA's own-funds and (for significant EMTs) reserve composition overlays, while the US GENIUS Act (enacted 18 July 2025, effective 18 January 2027 or 120 days after final rules, whichever is earlier) centres on a defined class of permitted payment-stablecoin issuers with prescribed reserve assets and disclosure. A competent answer contrasts issuer eligibility, reserve composition limits, and redemption rights; refuses to treat the regimes as interchangeable; and notes that as of mid-2026 the GENIUS Act is enacted but not yet in force.