Cross-border/passporting activities of ART issuers are mentioned in different articles of MICA Regulation:

First, regarding the data collection from national competent authorities (NCA) receiving ART issuers’ applications :

• Information regarding cross-border activities shall be provided to NCAs at authorization stage. Article 18(2)(r) explicitly states that “The application [of an ART issuer] referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain all of the following information (…) (r) where applicable, a list of host Member States where the applicant issuer intends to offer the asset-referenced token to the public or intends to seek admission to trading of the asset-referenced token.” However, this information does not seem to be standardized in the technical standards on information for authorisation as issuers of ARTs under MiCAR. 

• Templates for white papers published by ESMA (Annex II of ITS on standard forms and templates for the crypto-asset white paper) do not mention Member states where the ART is marketed (there no field on this topic in the templates). 

Second,  regarding the way the home NCA should transmit information on ART issuers’ cross-border activities: 

• MICA article 21(5) seems to provide for an obligation to notify host Member states, ESMA, EBA, ECB and competent national central bank in case of crossborder activities for ART issuers (“Competent authorities shall, within two working days of granting authorisation, communicate to the single point of contact of the host Member States, to ESMA, to EBA, to the ECB and, where applicable, to the central bank referred to in Article 20(4), the information specified in Article 109(3).”). 

However, it is not entirely clear whether this notification should be a stand-alone form -which is not mentioned in MICA or delegated regulations and whose format is not defined- or whether transmission of the sole white paper would be enough. As some information mentioned in article 109(3) do not seem to be  mentioned in white paper (namely points d) and f)), we infer that a notification additional to the white paper is necessary. 

• However, MICA only provides that changes in the white papers should be transmitted to host NCA, to ESMA, to EBA, to ECB and competent national central bank as per article 25.5, but not changes in the scope of cross border activities for example. This means that if the list of member states where an ART is marketed should be sent through a stand-alone notification, then MICAR does not provide for the obligation to send an updated list (both for issuers and home NCA) on an ongoing basis for authorized ART issuers (in case of change related to the passported activities)

Third, regarding publication of information related to passporting of ART issuers :

• No provisions in MICA foresee that national registers should mention passporting activities for ART issuers. All information transmitted according to article 21(5) and, by reference, article 109(3) shall however be published on the ESMA register as per the same article. Article 109(3)(d) of MICAR explicitly states that ESMA public register shall contain information regarding “[…] the list of host Member States where the applicant issuer intends to offer an asset-referenced token to the public or intends to seek admission to trading of the asset-referenced tokens