The new cryptoasset promotions consultation: widening the perimeter of FCA regulation
The FCA assumed responsibility as the new Anti-Money Laundering / Counter Terrorist Financing (AML / CTF) supervisor for such firms on 10 January 2020. A year on, the deadline for existing firms to register with the FCA has now passed. Any firm now carrying out cryptoasset activities by way of business in the UK without registration is at risk of facing criminal or civil enforcement action by the FCA.
Cryptoasset activities, for the purpose of the FCA’s AML / CTF regime, are those defined in regulation 14A of the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017, as amended (MLRs). There are three principal categories of activity:
A firm engaging in any of these activities by way of a business in the UK is likely to require to be registered.
All firms carrying out cryptoasset activities by way of business in the UK have, since 10 January 2020, been required to comply with the MLRs. A key part of the MLRs is the requirement that such business be registered with the FCA (regulation 56).
Failure to register is a criminal offence under regulation 86, carrying a maximum sentence upon indictment of two years’ imprisonment and an unlimited fine. A defence is available to the effect that all reasonable steps were taken and due diligence exercised to avoid committing the offence. As an alternative to a criminal prosecution, civil penalties may be imposed for any breach. These include fines as well as suspensions or removals of FCA authorisation.
In addition to registration, the MLRs impose a wide range of obligations on cryptoasset businesses which, taken together, require firms to take a risk-based approach to understanding and mitigating money laundering and terrorist financing risk. Non-compliance with these requirements can expose the firm to the risk of criminal or civil enforcement action by the FCA.
The FCA is now the effective gatekeeper for businesses seeking to engage in cryptoasset activities in the UK; the registration process is the “door policy”. In essence, it is a process by which the FCA can satisfy itself that the firm has adequate systems and controls, and its key people are fit and proper, to carry out these activities.
The registration process is rigorous. Among other information, firms are required to provide their business and marketing plans and details of their organisational structure, governance arrangements, beneficial owners and key individuals, and IT systems and controls. Firms must also provide details of their AML and CTF frameworks and risk assessments and their customer on-boarding and transaction monitoring procedures.
Applications for registration are made via the FCA’s online system, Connect. A non-refundable fee, based on the level of UK cryptoasset income, is payable at the time the application is submitted. The FCA has three months to determine an application but it should be noted that the clock only starts to run when the FCA is satisfied that it has received all the information it requires: where further information has to be requested and provided, this can result in the process taking significantly longer.
The FCA refers to firms which were engaging in cryptoasset activities by way of business prior to 10 January 2020 as “existing businesses”. These firms were required to be registered no later than 9 January 2021.
Due to the volume of applications and the challenge of processing these by the 9 January 2021 deadline, the FCA put in place a Temporary Registration Regime (TRR). The purpose of the TRR was to allow existing firms to continue trading while their registration applications were being processed. Only those existing firms which applied for registration before 16 December 2020 were eligible for inclusion in the TRR.
Any existing business carrying out cryptoasset activity on or after 10 January 2021 deadline which is not either registered or accepted on the TRR may be committing an offence under regulation 86 of the MLRs.
“New businesses” is the term used by the FCA to describe those firms which were not undertaking cryptoasset activities by way of business prior to 10 January 2020. Such firms are not eligible for the TRR and have, since that date, been required to be registered prior to commencing these activities. Engaging in these activities while unregistered may constitute an offence under the MLRs.
New businesses must be registered prior to starting to trade.
The FCA expects existing businesses which are not either registered or included within the TRR to have ceased trading as from 10 January 2021. The FCA has also made it clear that it expects such firms to act in the best interests of their customers which may require, among other things, funds to be repaid. However, making a repayment to investors in circumstances where there has been a potential breach of the MLRs may in itself constitute an offence under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and therefore consideration needs to be given to all legal and regulatory implications before any such step is taken.
The FCA has updated its Enforcement Guide to set out its approach to potential enforcement action in respect of cryptoasset firms, which generally reflects its approach to enforcement in other areas. While it is expected that the FCA will reserve enforcement action for the most egregious cases, the risk is a real one and it is important that any firm in potential breach of the MLRs seeks to regularise its position as a matter of urgency.
Our team of specialist cryptoasset lawyers bring together legal expertise from multiple disciplines across the firm, including our corporate and commercial, regulatory, dispute resolution, criminal, family and employment practices. Please contact us if you require any further information or assistance, or read further blogs on cryptoassets here.
Jill Lorimer is a Partner in the Criminal Litigation team and has an extensive track record in advising firms and individuals facing regulatory and criminal investigations by the FCA. Jill has particular expertise in advising firms who are, or who may be, under the scrutiny of the FCA and in taking a proactive approach to head off potentially adverse action. Jill has written and spoken widely on cyber-crime and has a particular interest in the regulatory and criminal aspects of cryptoassets and Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs).
The English High Court, in Mr Dollar Bill Limited v Persons Unknown and Others  EWHC 2718 (Ch), has once again come to the rescue for victims of fraud – this time armed with a Norwich Pharmacal Order to be served outside the jurisdiction.
On 10 January 2020, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) became the anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CTF) supervisor for UK cryptoasset firms. Two years in, how effectively is it performing its role as the gatekeeper of the new registration regime?
With the price of crypto assets generally making a good recovery from the Covid-19 related decline of 2019 contrasted with the very recent volatility following issues with the adoption of the cryptocurrency as legal tender in El Salvador, investors in cryptocurrencies might be considering realising some of their gains to try to help minimise any further instability.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), in its annual business plan published today, sets out its areas of focus for the year ahead. It is, as ever, essential reading for all those in the regulated sector.
For the fourth year the FCA has published research on the changing relationship between consumers and cryptoassets. In spite of the pandemic, the strong upward trend in public engagement and media coverage has continued, with the FCA estimating 2.3 million adults now hold cryptoassets.
A Director at the National Crime Agency recently voiced concern about crypto assets being used to fund property purchases in the UK. The NCA’s Nigel Leary was quoted by The Times as saying: “Anything purchased with crypto assets I’d be slightly sceptical about. I’d like to see why they’re being done in that way and what the requirement is for that anonymity, and why it needed to be done in a crypto transaction.”
The price of Bitcoin and other crypto assets is notoriously unstable. Whether caused by a cryptic crypto related tweet from a billionaire inventor, or a crypto crackdown being announced by regulators of the world’s second largest economy, the rise and fall of crypto assets continues to prove that crypto can be risky business.
Despite the Covid-19 pandemic, 2020 was an incredible year for crypto assets. Largely driven by the increased demand from institutional investors, Bitcoin shattered its previous price records. However, its pseudonymous nature and the ease with which it allows users to instantly send funds anywhere in the world makes crypto assets appealing to criminals.
Hot on the heels of its consultation on bringing cryptoasset inside the scope of the financial promotions regime at the tail end of last year, the FCA has launched a further consultation on the UK’s regulatory approach to cryptoassets and stablecoins.
As of 10 January 2021, all cryptoasset firms are required to be registered with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) under the Money Laundering Regulations.
Research recently undertaken by the FCA has found that 5.35% of the UK population hold (or have previously held) cryptoassets where in 2019 this figure was 3%. For several years now the Government, the Bank of England and the FCA have been consulting on and considering how best to regulate this burgeoning market.
The year 2019 started with plenty of optimism regarding the growth of Security Token Offerings (STOs). Many articles at the start of the year suggested, like one on TokenMarket, that “it’s looking very likely that 2019 will be the year of the security token offering”. In this blog we look back on some of the key moments of 2019 with regard to STOs and consider whether 2019 really was the dawning of a new era worthy of the revolutionary hype back at the start of the year. However, if you would first like to take a step back and digest a user-friendly introduction to the concept of security tokens, please listen to our podcast or read our earlier crypto assets blog.
In just ten years, cryptoassets have become a £100 billion industry. We now face the alarming prospect that millions of pounds can be hidden behind a few lines of computer code without ever touching a bank account. If your soon-to-be ex-partner has made a fortune with Bitcoin, how do you get a share?
The tenth anniversary of the first ever BitCoin transaction will fall in April 2020. Not many people are using cryptoassets for everyday transactions, such as a takeaway pizza order and as such Satoshi Nakamoto’s vision of a stateless peer to peer electronic currency is yet to be realised, but in the last few years cryptoassets have certainly entered the public consciousness, even if that does mostly relate to the huge spike in the value of BitCoin in December 2017.
Security tokens are a digital representation of ownership rights in real world assets (such as property or shares) and have captured the curiosity of entrepreneurs, startups and investors. This blog summarises the potential benefits and pitfalls of security tokens and is part of our wider crypto assets blog.
The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) case of B2C2 Ltd v Quoine Pte Ltd  SGHC(I) 03 considers how the law relating to mistake could apply to contracts formed on an automated basis by computers using algorithmic software.
Whether you are in the market for short-term profit or making long-term investments, adequate planning is certainly a worthwhile (and small) investment of your time and money. If you’ve been savyy enough to successfully invest in crypto-assets, make sure you are smart enough to ensure your loved ones can benefit, should the worst happen.
“Cryptoassets have attracted significant and growing attention from consumers, markets, governments and regulators globally”, stated the FCA earlier this year in launching its consultation on its Guidance on Cryptoassests. Jill Lorimer has previously commented on the Cryptoassests guidance.
The aim of the Guidance is to “provide regulatory clarity for market participants carrying on activities in this space” and it appears to do just that.
The recent confirmation by the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) that it is investigating 18 firms involved in the sale of crypto assets, such as Bitcoin, indicates a ramping up of regulatory focus on the controversial sector.
The Treasury Committee’s inquiry into economic crime is one of the most wide-ranging of the committee’s current workstreams, and its conclusions are keenly awaited.
As well as assessing the effectiveness of the anti-money laundering regime in the UK, MPs have been examining the impact of economic crime on consumers.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility