Italy CONSOB CASP Authorisation 2026 — Practitioner Guide

The Italian split-supervisor model

Italy designed its MiCA implementation around a split-supervisor model. Legislative Decree 129/2024 amended the Italian Consolidated Financial Act (TUF) to assign CASP supervisory responsibility to:

• CONSOB — the Italian securities market regulator. Supervises conduct, consumer protection, market integrity, marketing communications, conflicts of interest, and the operation of crypto-asset trading platforms.
• Banca d’Italia — the central bank and financial-stability regulator. Supervises prudential matters including own-funds requirements, governance arrangements, ICT risk management, and AML/CFT compliance.

The two authorities coordinate. CONSOB chairs the authorisation process and is the formal counterparty for the application file. Banca d’Italia reviews the prudential and AML components in parallel. The two supervisors meet on each material file and produce a joint supervisory recommendation that informs CONSOB’s authorisation decision.

The model echoes Italy’s broader financial-supervision architecture — Banca d’Italia supervises banks, CONSOB supervises securities markets, and they coordinate on overlap points like investment firms. The same logic applies to CASPs.

The OAM pre-MiCA register and its wind-down

Italy operated a substantive pre-MiCA crypto-asset register through the OAM (Organismo degli Agenti e dei Mediatori), an Italian regulatory body that historically supervised financial agents and brokers. The OAM crypto-asset register, established in 2022, required registration of all crypto-asset service providers operating in Italy, with an AML-focused supervisory framework.

The register absorbed a sizable portion of the Italian crypto-asset industry — by mid-2024 several hundred providers were on the register. When MiCA took effect, the OAM register was given a sunset date of 30 December 2025. Registered entities had until that date to file a CASP application with CONSOB; those that did not file lost the right to keep operating.

By mid-2026 the OAM register has wound down and CONSOB is in steady-state MiCA mode. New entrants file fresh CASP applications.

What CONSOB and Banca d’Italia expect

CONSOB has published its application guidance and Banca d’Italia has published its prudential and AML guidance. The combined picture:

Governance. A management body sized for the planned business. Independent directors expected for larger files. Three-lines-of-defence framework. Clear separation between business management and risk-and-control functions. The TUF’s investment-firm-style governance expectations apply.

Substance in Italy. Registered office in Italy. At least one senior manager resident in Italy. Italian-speaking compliance and conduct contacts. The CONSOB and Banca d’Italia have both been clear that letterbox arrangements are not acceptable.

Prudential rigour. Banca d’Italia’s prudential review draws on its banking-supervision experience. Capital calculation under MiCA Article 67 is reviewed in detail; ICT risk-management framework expected to align with DORA expectations; outsourcing arrangements scrutinised against Banca d’Italia’s outsourcing guidance.

Consumer protection in Italian. Client-facing materials in Italian for Italian-targeted services. CONSOB’s 2023 communication on crypto-asset marketing remains effective under MiCA and supplements Article 7. Italian Consumer Code overlays apply.

AML aligned with UIF expectations. Suspicious-transaction reporting to UIF (not directly to Banca d’Italia or CONSOB). UIF is one of the more demanding EU FIUs on STR volume and quality. CASPs design their transaction monitoring with UIF expectations in mind.

The realistic Italian timeline

The split-supervisor model adds time. A clean first-time application:

• Pre-filing preparation including Italian translation: 8-12 weeks
• CONSOB pre-screen and Banca d’Italia preliminary review: 6-10 weeks
• Active five-month clock (CONSOB-led, with Banca d’Italia parallel review): 20-22 weeks
• Joint supervisory recommendation and CONSOB decision: 3-5 weeks

Seven to ten months end-to-end is a working assumption. Smaller and simpler files sometimes complete faster, particularly for Class 1 services with limited scope. Class 3 trading-platform files routinely use the full statutory window and add coordination time.

The Italian market — who chooses Italy

Italian CASPs typically focus on the Italian consumer base. The language, the Italian payments infrastructure (SEPA Instant adoption, the PagoPA system), and the close UIF AML relationship favour Italy-based service to Italian consumers over wide cross-border passporting. The cross-border footprint for Italian-headquartered CASPs tends to be limited to neighbouring markets — Switzerland, Austria, San Marino — rather than full pan-EU expansion.

Conversely, CASPs authorised elsewhere in the EU often passport into Italy to access the Italian retail market. Italy is one of the higher-volume passport-receiving jurisdictions because the local consumer demand is strong and Italian retail investors actively use crypto-asset services. The Article 65 passport notification — sent by the home NCA to CONSOB — gives the inbound CASP operating right.

For a CASP weighing Italian authorisation versus passporting in, the principal trade-offs:

In favour of Italian authorisation:

• Direct relationship with CONSOB on consumer-protection matters affecting Italian clients
• UIF relationship for AML — easier to engage when STRs originate from Italian operations
• Italian banking access marginally easier with a CONSOB authorisation than with a foreign passport

In favour of passporting in:

• Single home-supervisor relationship is administratively lighter
• Authorisation can be obtained in a faster jurisdiction (Lithuania, Estonia) and extended via passport
• No Italian-language application requirement; client-facing materials in Italian are still required but the supervisory file is in the home language

When Italy is the right home supervisor

Italy is a strong fit for CASPs with a substantial Italian customer base, for businesses with Italian-language operational capacity, and for groups that want to engage with a serious split-supervisor regime. It also works for CASPs that value supervisory expertise — both CONSOB and Banca d’Italia bring substantial financial-services supervisory depth to the MiCA implementation.

Italy is a weaker fit if the goal is the lightest-touch or fastest EU authorisation. The split-supervisor model is heavier than single-supervisor jurisdictions. CASPs that want to operate in the Italian market without taking on Italian authorisation typically choose another EU home and passport in.