Guidance #1/2023 (N-Ware Kft.)

A service provider provides a service where the purchase price – automatically converted from fiat money to crypto-asset denominated based on exchange rates received via API, is transferred directly from the non-custodial crypto-asset wallet of a customer not registered with the service provider to the non-custodial crypto-asset wallet of the registered merchant using a smart contract – in the crypto-asset selected by the customer. Neither fiat money (including any central bank digital money) is not used in the process, nor fiat money-crypto-asset or crypto-asset-crypto-asset exchange takes place, and the application implementing the service does not store or manage the crypto-assets involved in the transaction. Therefore, such service is presumably not considered any financial service or an ancillary financial service under the CRD IV and domestic Hpt. regime, nor any crypto-asset service under Article 3(1)(16) of the MiCA.

Guidance #1/2024 (Blockchain Competence Center Kft.)

Financial market participants should consider that to be unique, NFTs should be considered non-substitutable. They should have clear distinct characteristics and/or rights compared to the other crypto-assets issued by the same (or any other) issuer. Financial market participants should not base the classification of a crypto-asset as unique and non-fungible solely on its technical specificities, such as the attribution of a unique identifier or the use of specific technical features and standards. To assess whether a given crypto-asset is non-substitutable market participants should apply the test set out by Guideline 8 of ESMA on the conditions and criteria for the qualification of cryptoassets, Chapter 2.3. of the FinTech and Digitalisation Report, November 2025.

Guidance #1/2026 (Lympid Labs Lda)

MiCA regime is not applicable to those crypto-assets that are financial instruments, but inter alia the MiFID II framework. Consequently, safekeeping such tokenised financial instruments shall be considered as Safekeeping and administration of financial instruments for the account of clients under point (1) of Section B of MiFID II. Such ancillary service shall only be provided as a regular occupation or business on a professional basis when authorized by the relevant national competent authority. Moreover, they shall not fall under the domestic validation regime as it covers crypto-assets under MiCA and not financial instruments. However, supervision and enforcement of the validation regime is beyond the remit of MNB, it is beneficial to seek the official regulatory position of Supervisory Authority for Regulatory Affairs. Considering the abovementioned, the database reconciliation (security token allocation) shall not be considered as any crypto-asset service, but a phase of a public offering, likely one or more investment services and activities (placement) requiring prior regulatory authorisation.