Removal from the AMF crypto blacklist under MiCA

An regulatory blacklisting can damage credibility and halt essential partnerships. Despite MiCA’s stricter transparency rules, it remains an administrative measure that can be legally challenged. Navigating appeals before the Council of State (conseil d’Etat) requires specialised expertise.

The Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) publishes a blacklist identifying entities that illegally offer crypto-asset investments in France. This administrative listing carries significant weight, leading to a loss of credibility, the termination of technical partnerships, banking restrictions, and even a total freeze on development.

Removing a project from the blacklist requires specialized expertise in administrative appeal procedures and an exhaustive understanding of the law applicable to financial and crypto-asset services. ORWL supports both French and foreign projects facing this risk, managing everything from initial legal analysis to the effective removal. Under the MiCA framework, while blacklisting serves as a public information tool, it often functions as a precautionary measure intended to prevent serious harm to clients and the stability of the financial system. We ensure that such measures remain proportionate and do not constitute disguised administrative penalties without due process.

ORWL’s expertise in AMF blacklist removal

ORWL is a law firm specializing in crypto-asset law, recognized for its ability to handle high-stakes regulatory matters. Our team brings together lawyers experienced in financial regulation, crypto-compliance, and regulatory litigation.

This multidisciplinary approach allows us to handle blacklist removals with three distinct competencies: technical and regulatory understanding of projects, a direct line of communication with authorities, and the ability to challenge blacklisting measures before the courts. We have assisted various projects, including leading industry players, both French and foreign, in their removal procedures. Our methodology relies on determining a tailored, multi-level strategy that includes litigation, mastery of the regulatory framework, and the use of all available procedural levers.

What is the legal framework for AMF blacklists?

In accordance with its general regulations, the AMF maintains an updated blacklist of entities offering digital asset services in France without the necessary authorization or registration. This practice enables the AMF to publish the names of entities suspected of ignoring applicable regulations.

With the entry into application of the MiCA Regulation, requirements for transparency and the framework for the offer to the public of crypto-assets have been significantly strengthened. Consequently, blacklist entries may target illegal token offers, the solicitation of French clients without crypto-asset service provider (CASP) registration, or the unauthorized use of French media.

However, these listings do not technically constitute sanctions. Instead, they are considered public information measures that can be contested through standard administrative law remedies. It is notably possible to file an informal appeal, an application for interim relief, or an action for annulment before the Council of State (conseil d’Etat), depending on the nature of the decision and the urgency of the situation. Rights to reputation, adversarial principles, and the rights of the defence are fully applicable.

Our step-by-step support

Audit of the legal basis

We analyze the legal grounds for the listing, the nature of the targeted services, the communication channels used, and the actual compliance status of the project at the time of the listing. We evaluate whether the listing constitutes an administrative penalty or a supervisory measure under Article 94 to determine the most effective path.

Tailored legal strategy

We develop a strategy to demonstrate that the initial grounds for the listing no longer exist. This often involves initiating formal compliance, such as notifying a MiCA-compliant crypto-asset white paper to the competent authority. Where required, we assist our clients in preparing a robust litigation case to challenge the administrative decision.

Dialogue with the AMF

Where appropriate, we engage in direct discussions with the relevant departments to obtain the justifications for a listing, submit written observations, highlight evidence of good faith, or negotiate an amicable removal.

Litigation procedure

We bring cases before the competent administrative courts, typically the Council of State, via an action for annulment often accompanied by an application for interim relief. We argue based on procedural irregularities, a lack of legal basis, or the disproportionate nature of the measure.

Post-removal follow-up

Once removal is secured, we assist our clients with their communication efforts, the reactivation of third-party services like KYC and compliance providers, and the prevention of future re-listing risks.

Case studies

Strategic defense for a leading international crypto protocol

The challenge

A decentralized finance project based outside the EU was blacklisted for allegedly soliciting the French public via a French-language interface. This listing created an immediate reputational crisis and threatened its access to the European market.

Our solution

Regulatory analysis: We conducted a deep-dive analysis of the protocol’s flows and interface to assess the absence of specific targeting of French territory.
Legal argumentation: We drafted a robust argument proving that the protocol did not constitute a regulated financial service under French law, based our operational understanding of the regulation and the crypto industry.
Strategic remediation: We advised the product team on the rapid implementation of corrective measures and technical “best practices” to reach and anticipate the supervisor’s expectations.

Business impact

Rapid removal: The project was removed from the blacklist within weeks of our referral.
Market de-risking: Our intervention provided a clear legal opinion that reassured global partners and secured the project’s long-term growth.

Regularization during CASP registration

The challenge

A French company was blacklisted while its application for VASP (PSAN) registration was actively being processed by the authorities. This unexpected listing halted the compliance process as banking and technology partners refused to continue their engagement with a listed entity.

Our solution

Regulatory pulse: Leveraging our close proximity to French regulators, we immediately engaged with the supervisors to identify the core concerns leading to the listing.
Compliance regularization: We provided an end-to-end framework to regularize the entity’s status, ensuring all operational policies regarding AML/KYC and solicitation met the required standards.
Partner reassurance: We acted as a technical mediator, providing the legal clarity necessary for partners to resume their support during the registration phase.

Business impact

Registration recovery: The entity was successfully removed from the blacklist, allowing the VASP registration process to resume toward final approval.
Ecosystem restoration: By securing the project’s regulatory standing, we enabled the company to re-establish vital institutional relationships and continue its roadmap.

FAQ – Removal from AMF blacklists

What are the strategic and operational consequences of an AMF blacklist listing?

A listing triggers immediate operational paralysis.

Beyond severe reputational damage, it often leads to the termination of essential contracts with payment processors and identity verification (KYC) providers. Legally, the supervisor may request domain name blocking within French territory and the removal of applications from app stores. Failing to address these regulatory norms creates a high risk of sanctions from the ACPR or AMF, effectively freezing the project’s development.

Can international projects based outside of France contest a listing?

Yes. The right to defense is not limited by geography. Entities established outside the European Union have the same legal standing to request a removal from the blacklist as French or European companies. Our role is often to demonstrate a lack of active solicitation on French territory or to regularize the service’s legal characterization.

How long does the regulatory removal process typically take?

The timeline is determined by the chosen strategy. An amicable resolution, centered on rapid compliance remediation and transparency with the supervisor, can take a few weeks. Conversely, a judicial appeal necessarily takes several months, although emergency procedures (référé) can be initiated to mitigate immediate business harm in the interim.

Is technical remediation sufficient to guarantee a removal?

Not always. The AMF exercises broad discretion and may maintain a listing if it considers that past actions justify a continued warning to the public. However, rapid regularization and the provision of a formal legal opinion demonstrate a commitment to compliance and significantly strengthen the argument for removal.

What are the costs associated with a removal procedure?

Fees are tailored to the complexity of the case, the need for litigation, and the level of urgency. A preliminary regulatory audit to map risks and qualify services can be conducted relatively quickly. A full contentious procedure involving a judicial appeal represents a strategic investment in the project’s long-term “license to operate”.