Netherlands CASP License (MiCA)

A Netherlands CASP license is a full regulatory authorization issued under the EU Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) that allows a company to provide professional crypto-asset services to clients within the European Union. The license applies to companies providing crypto services professionally to clients. This authorization is issued under the AFM CASP authorization framework.

Licensing and market conduct supervision are carried out by Authority for the Financial Markets, while prudential supervision, including capital adequacy, governance, and financial soundness, is performed by De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB). This split supervisory model reflects the Dutch regulatory approach, where investor protection and market integrity are overseen separately from financial stability.

A CASP license covers regulated crypto-asset services such as operating trading platforms, executing orders on behalf of clients, exchanging crypto-assets for funds or other crypto-assets, providing custody and administration of crypto-assets, and offering crypto-asset advisory services. Authorization is activity-based, meaning a company is licensed only for the specific services listed in its application rather than receiving a blanket approval for all crypto activities.

Once authorized in the Netherlands, a CASP may provide its approved services across the European Union through MiCA passporting. Cross-border activity remains subject to home-state supervision by the AFM, while host member states may apply local conduct-of-business rules in limited areas defined by MiCA.

MiCA uses an activity-based approach to CASP licensing. This means that a company applies only for the specific crypto-asset services it intends to provide, and its regulatory obligations depend on the scope and risk profile of those services. The Netherlands applies this model directly, without local deviations.

CASP licenses are divided into three capital tiers. The class is determined by the most risk-sensitive activity included in the application, not by company size or expected turnover.

Class 1 — Advisory and Order-Related Services

Minimum capital: €50,000

This class applies to CASPs providing lower-risk services that do not involve holding client funds or crypto-assets. Typical activities include:

• crypto-asset advisory services,
• reception and transmission of orders,
• execution of orders on behalf of clients without custody.

Class 1 is generally suitable for brokerage models, advisory platforms, and intermediaries that route transactions to third-party venues.

Class 2 — Exchange and Brokerage Activities

Minimum capital: €125,000

Class 2 covers services where the CASP directly facilitates transactions between clients or between crypto-assets and fiat currencies, but does not safeguard client assets on an ongoing basis. This class commonly includes:

• exchange of crypto-assets for funds or other crypto-assets,
• operation of trading platforms without custody,
• brokerage models with transactional involvement.

Most exchange and trading platforms without custody fall into this category.

Class 3 — Custody and Safekeeping

Minimum capital: €150,000

Class 3 applies to CASPs that hold or control client crypto-assets or private keys. Because custody services present the highest operational and consumer-protection risks, they are subject to the highest capital threshold and stricter ongoing supervision. Covered activities include:

• custody and administration of crypto-assets on behalf of clients,
• safeguarding of cryptographic keys,
• wallet services with client asset control.

Any application that includes custody automatically triggers Class 3 requirements, even if other services are also provided.

How to Choose the Correct CASP Class

When determining the appropriate CASP class, Dutch regulators assess the actual activities performed, not marketing descriptions or internal labels. If a business model combines multiple services, the highest applicable class determines the minimum capital requirement.

Importantly, a CASP may start with a narrower license scope and later apply to extend its authorization to additional services. In such cases, capital requirements and internal controls must be adjusted before the expanded activities commence.

The cost of obtaining a CASP license in the Netherlands is not defined by a single fixed fee. Instead, it is formed from several components, including regulatory review fees, professional and legal preparation, and the setup of a compliant operational structure. Dutch regulators apply a time-based review model, meaning the final cost depends on the complexity of the business model and the quality of the application materials.

Applicants should budget not only for the regulatory assessment itself, but also for the preparatory work required to meet MiCA standards. This includes corporate structuring, internal policies, governance arrangements, and fit-and-proper documentation for key individuals. The table below provides a realistic breakdown of the main cost components typically involved in a Netherlands CASP licensing project.

Although MiCA sets a statutory review period, the actual CASP licensing timeline in the Netherlands depends on how quickly an application moves through preparation, regulatory review, and final authorization.

In practice, the process consists of three factual phases:

• Preparation phase — internal scoping, governance alignment, and application drafting. Delays at this stage are the most common cause of extended timelines later.
• Regulatory review phase — formal assessment by the AFM, including written questions and clarification rounds. The number of follow-ups directly affects total duration.
• Authorization phase — internal approval and issuance of the CASP license once all regulatory issues are resolved.

For most applicants, the practical end-to-end timeline falls within 5 to 8 months, assuming:

• no material changes to the business model during review,
• timely responses to regulator queries,
• consistent and complete documentation at submission.

Applications involving custody services, complex trading infrastructure, or late changes to management or ownership typically require longer review periods due to increased supervisory scrutiny.

Crypto companies previously registered in the Netherlands under the pre-MiCA AML framework must transition to full CASP licensing in order to continue operating legally. The transition deadline is June 30, 2025. This transition requirement is confirmed in the official Dutch government guidance on CASP licensing.

This requirement applies to entities registered with De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) prior to MiCA. After the deadline, AML registration alone is no longer sufficient to provide crypto-asset services within the EU.

What the Deadline Means in Practice

• DNB registration does not convert automatically into a CASP license.
• Companies must submit a complete CASP application and obtain authorization under MiCA.
• Operating after June 30, 2025 without a CASP license exposes the business to enforcement actions, including cease-and-desist orders and administrative penalties.

Key Risk Considerations

• Submitting an application close to the deadline does not guarantee the right to continue operations while the review is ongoing.
• Companies that fail to transition in time may be forced to suspend services to EU clients.
• Re-entry into the market after non-compliance can be significantly more complex than a timely transition.

For DNB-registered companies, early preparation is critical. The transition to CASP licensing should be treated as a regulatory migration, not a formal update or extension of the existing registration.

Gofaizen & Sherle is an international consulting and legal advisory firm supporting regulated business models across crypto-assets, digital finance, fintech, payments, and tokenization. The firm operates in more than 50 jurisdictions and has advised on the structuring and licensing of over 800 regulated projects globally, including crypto-asset service providers subject to complex EU and cross-border regulatory frameworks.

In the context of MiCA, Gofaizen & Sherle advises international clients on CASP authorization in the Netherlands, supporting projects from regulatory scoping and service classification through authorization and post-licensing supervision. The firm’s advisory approach is tailored to the Dutch regulatory environment, with a strong emphasis on governance quality, operational substance, and alignment with the supervisory practices of the Authority for the Financial Markets and De Nederlandsche Bank.

Rather than treating MiCA as a formal compliance exercise, Gofaizen & Sherle focuses on building licensing structures that are sustainable under ongoing supervision. This includes aligning management responsibilities, compliance frameworks, and operational decision-making with Dutch regulatory expectations, particularly for CASPs intending to scale their activities across the EU through MiCA passporting.