Bybit has become the second major exchange after Binance to restrict services for European Economic Area users ahead of the July 1, 2026 MiCA deadline. According to crypto.news, Bybit will gradually limit access to certain services on its global platform for EEA users as the exchange aligns operations with Europe's MiCA framework. The restriction covers EEA countries including Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Sweden and others, with Malta excluded because Bybit EU's licenses are not currently passported there. Affected users will receive clear notices before any measures start, including timelines for managing existing and new positions. The exchange emphasized that users will retain access to assets held in their accounts while they address open positions and balances, with the company stating that affected users will keep access "with the purpose of allowing users to remediate these positions and balances."
Dubai lawyer Irina Heaver reports receiving more than 120 inquiries per week from European founders seeking to establish operations in the UAE as MiCA approaches its July 1, 2026 deadline. As reported by CoinDesk, around half of these inquiries come from Europe, including Spain, Italy, Germany, as well as Switzerland and the U.K, with the pickup beginning about 18 months ago before MiCA's first rules took effect. Heaver noted that "The inquiries from European founders skyrocketed" as companies weigh the cost, timing and uncertainty of securing MiCA authorization in the European Union. The UAE's regulatory framework, built specifically for digital assets, allows companies to be established in days rather than months, providing faster access to markets across Asia, North Africa and the global south representing approximately 4 billion potential customers.
The European Union has issued 244 valid MiCA crypto-asset service provider licenses as of June 29, with Germany and France leading the rollout ahead of the July 1, 2026 deadline. According to Bits.Media, Germany leads with 57 licenses (23% of total), followed by France with 26 licenses (11% of total), with the two countries accounting for more than one-third of all EU MiCA authorizations. The ESMA interim MiCA register, which updates weekly, shows that five EU countries have issued no licenses: Greece, Hungary, Poland, Portugal and Romania. Poland remains a special case as its president has rejected the proposed law three times, with the country still lacking a full local system for licensing crypto exchanges under pan-European standards. One MiCA license from a national regulator can support access across all 27 EU member states through passporting, making these early approvals particularly valuable for major financial markets.
Only approximately 210 out of 1,200+ crypto firms have received a MiCA CASP license, meaning roughly 83% of previously registered exchanges are no longer legally allowed to operate after the July 1, 2026 deadline. According to Crypto University, this represents a massive market contraction where about 80% of the crypto platforms Europeans have been using are either leaving the market, changing how they serve EU clients, or simply going quiet. Erald Ghoos, CEO of OKX Europe, estimates that 80% of the crypto players won't survive after MiCA, citing the comprehensive regulatory burden that requires firms to obtain both MiCA licenses and additional Payment Institution or Electronic Money Institution licenses. Europe was thought to have had more than 3,000 registered virtual asset service providers (VASPs) as of 2024, with Poland alone accounting for over 1,400 registrations, making the current 211 MiCA-authorized crypto-asset service providers a dramatic reduction in market participants. Approximately 70% of EU-based crypto transactions now occur on MiCA-compliant exchanges, suggesting that despite the low firm count, volume has already concentrated around licensed platforms.
Several exchanges, including Binance, have announced changes to their European services ahead of the July 1 deadline, while others continue seeking MiCA authorization or adjusting their products. Binance withdrew its MiCA application in Greece last week and notified EU users it would suspend some services while seeking another regulatory route, though the company remains committed to Europe according to CoinDesk. Rivals are trying to capitalize, with OKX and Coinbase announcing bonuses of up to 8% of total deposits and transfers for new users amid some exchanges scaling back services in Europe. However, industry executives warn that incentives may persuade some customers to switch, but should not be the deciding factor when choosing a platform. As SwissBorg's Alex Fazel noted, "When a platform pulls back, users unfortunately absorb the shock, like a tenant being evicted by its landlord with no notice." The regulatory burden is particularly challenging in countries like Poland, where Mateusz Kara of Morphic Financial Group notes that around 2,000 VASP entities face closure, with only their company holding a MiCA license.
The regulatory costs of MiCA create significant barriers for smaller firms, with license fees potentially reaching €700,000 in year one and €250,000 annually for lean firms, or into the millions for large exchanges. According to Perpetuals.com Ltd. founder Patrick Gruhn, the locked capital needed for a MiCA spot license ranges between €50,000 to €150,000 by class, while compliance costs can add €100,000 in legal fees alone. MiCA costs depend on firm size, with additional licenses like electronic money institution (EMI) permits allowing firms to process payments across the EEA. Dubai lawyer Irina Heaver questioned whether traditional financial institutions had too much influence over MiCA's development, noting her experience before entering the crypto industry: "I spent 13 years writing laws for the largest oil and gas companies before I moved into crypto. When you get the foxes to write the laws about protecting chickens, you get MiCA." BitGo Europe is offering an alternative solution by allowing firms to move clients' wallets into its regulated custody rather than struggle with MiCA's regulatory burden.
