AI Summary of Article 21 Grant or refusal of the authorisation
Competent authorities must, within 25 working days of receipt of the opinions under Article 20(5), take a fully reasoned decision to grant or refuse authorisation and notify the applicant within five working days; where an applicant issuer is authorised its crypto‑asset white paper is deemed approved. Within two working days of granting authorisation authorities must transmit the information specified in Article 109(3) to the host Member State single point of contact, ESMA, EBA, the ECB and, where applicable, the central bank, and ESMA shall publish that information in the register by the start of the offer or admission to trading.
Authorisation must be refused where objective and demonstrable grounds exist, including that the management body may threaten sound management, members fail Article 34(2) criteria, qualifying holders fail Article 34(4) good‑repute criteria, the issuer fails Title requirements, or the business model poses serious threats to market integrity, financial stability, payment systems, or AML/CTF. Authorities must also refuse if the ECB or central bank gives a negative opinion under Article 20(5) on threats to payment systems, monetary policy transmission or monetary sovereignty. EBA and ESMA shall jointly issue suitability guidelines by 30 June 2024, and competent authorities must notify EBA, ESMA, the ECB and the central bank of all refusals with reasons and any deviation from the opinions under Article 20(5).
Article 21 Grant or refusal of the authorisation
1. Competent authorities shall, within 25 working days of receipt of the opinions referred to in Article 20(5), take a fully reasoned decision granting or refusing authorisation to the applicant issuer and, within five working days of taking that decision, notify it to the applicant issuer. Where an applicant issuer is authorised, its crypto-asset white paper shall be deemed to be approved.
2. Competent authorities shall refuse authorisation where there are objective and demonstrable grounds that:
(a) the management body of the applicant issuer might pose a threat to its effective, sound and prudent management and business continuity and to the adequate consideration of the interest of its clients and the integrity of the market;
(b) members of the management body do not meet the criteria set out in Article 34(2);
(c) shareholders and members, whether direct or indirect, that have qualifying holdings do not meet the criteria of sufficiently good repute set out in Article 34(4);