Cheatography
https://cheatography.com
Fifty crypto-licensing regimes side by side: licence model, capital basis, application window, year-one cost band, EU passporting and retail access. Built from the first open release of the Crypto Licensing Jurisdictions dataset (release 2026-09-05, CC BY 4.0).
This is a draft cheat sheet. It is a work in progress and is not finished yet.
Key findings
Finding |
Figure |
Licence models |
16 authorisations, 14 licences, 14 registrations, 5 registration + licence, 1 no regime (Panama) |
Capital |
19 of 50 regimes set no fixed minimum |
Timeline |
Median window 4 to 9 months; 9 regimes run to 18 months or more |
Cost bands |
14 low, 11 moderate, 11 high, 13 very high, 1 unbanded (Dominica) |
Cheap and fast |
13 of the 14 low-cost regimes complete within six months |
Retail |
43 regimes permit retail clients; 7 do not |
FATF |
48 of 50 clear of the FATF lists on the release date |
|
Column key
Field |
Meaning |
Licence model |
Authorisation, licence, registration, or registration + licence |
Capital basis |
Fixed tiers, tiered by activity, no fixed minimum (risk-based test), net tangible assets, or a bespoke formula |
Months |
Application window: statutory clock where one exists, otherwise observed practice |
Year-1 cost |
Publisher's band: low, moderate, high or very high; no numeric range |
EU passport |
Whether the permission passports across the EU under MiCA |
Retail |
Whether retail clients may be served |
FATF grey list |
Marked after the name; status on the release date |
|
Source
Jagelski & Partners, Crypto Licensing Jurisdictions open dataset, release 2026-09-05, CC BY 4.0.
Full fields and field dictionary: {{link:"https://jagelski.com/data/"}}jagelski.com/data
Live comparator: {{link:"https://jagelski.com/compare-crypto-licensing/"}}jagelski.com/compare-crypto-licensing
Dataset, all versions: {{link:"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22334372"}}doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22334372 |
|
