Authorisations Recorded as Withdrawn

Entries whose authorisation ESMA's register records as ended, newest first. The register gives the fact and the date. It does not give a reason, and neither do we.

A withdrawn authorisation is a record, not an allegation. An authorisation can end because a firm merged, wound itself up, surrendered a permission it no longer used, or because the authority decided it should. The register does not record which, so nothing on this page distinguishes between them and no inference is available from the fact of appearing here.

It is also not a fraud list. Nothing on this page is joined to the enforcement or fraud records elsewhere on this site, and no firm here is being reported for anything. ESMA publishes that a firm is authorised. That is a record of a permission, not a recommendation, and not a statement that the firm is safe. The BSP publishes that a provider holds a virtual-asset service licence. That is a record of a permission, not a recommendation, and not a statement that the provider is safe. Many holders also hold a separate electronic-money licence and the two sets of permissions must not be merged. ESMA publishes that a provider is authorised under MiCA for the services listed. That is a record of a permission, not a recommendation, and not a statement that the provider is safe. MiCA does not cover lending, staking or 'earn' products. The AMF publishes that a provider is registered or authorised for the activities listed, and when and why a registration ended. That is a record, not a recommendation and not a statement that the provider is safe. A PSAN registration was an anti-money-laundering registration, not a full licence.

2,320 of 75,735 entries · 33 jurisdictions · most recent date on the record 31 December 2500 · 2 carries no withdrawal date · largest by state: Germany 450 · France 276 · Luxembourg 206 · Spain 193 · Poland 146 · France 123

Why These Are Published At All

Because the alternative is worse. A register page that showed only current authorisations would answer “is this firm authorised?” with silence for every firm that once was, and silence reads as “never heard of them”. A reader who was given a licence number by a firm needs to be able to see that the number existed and that the register now records it as ended.

The date matters for the same reason. An authorisation that ended in 2013 and a firm still quoting it in 2026 are two different facts, and only the first of them is on this page.

The register’s two fields can disagree, and we show both. One entry carries a withdrawal date with no status recorded against it, and one is marked withdrawn with no date. Neither is resolved by us into the reading that looks tidier — how we handle a source that contradicts itself.