France Proposes Liability Rules for Regulated Crypto Platforms Offering DeFi Access

France's Treasury, AMF, Banque de France and ACPR want regulated crypto platforms to vet DeFi protocols, monitor vulnerabilities and bear liability for certain client losses under proposed MiCA changes.

CryptoMEV Bot NewsroomOct 22, 20263 min read

Close-up black and white shot of several computer server hard drive bays in a server rack. — Image: rawpixel / rawpixel via Openverse (CC0)

At a glance	Details
Who	France's Treasury, AMF, Banque de France and ACPR
What	DeFi protocol checks, monitoring and liability for certain incidents
When	Proposals published on Oct. 21, 2026
Where	European Union
Next step	Commission report to EU lawmakers due June 30, 2027

According to Cointelegraph, France has proposed making regulated cryptocurrency platforms liable for certain customer losses involving DeFi protocols when they fail to vet security risks or ignore known vulnerabilities. The proposal would revise the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, or MiCA.

“CASPs [crypto-asset service providers] should be liable for certain incidents affecting clients where they actively facilitated access,” French authorities said.

What liability would platforms face?

The joint response came from France’s Treasury, Financial Markets Authority (AMF), Banque de France, and Prudential Supervision and Resolution Authority (ACPR), as reported by Crypto.news. Their proposal focuses on crypto-asset service providers, or CASPs, that actively facilitate customer access to DeFi applications.

Liability would cover certain incidents where adequate checks could have identified security problems. It would not create automatic compensation for every exploit across decentralized networks, and the authorities did not propose holding platforms responsible for every incident occurring on those networks.

This would place responsibility on the regulated intermediary rather than every participant in a decentralized environment. For traders using an exchange or another platform to reach a protocol, the relevant issue would be whether that intermediary performed the required assessment and continued monitoring.

How would protocol checks change?

Platforms would have to assess DeFi protocols before making them available. The proposed due diligence covers smart-contract security, operational vulnerabilities and risks associated with the services. After granting access, platforms would also be expected to monitor protocols for weaknesses and suspicious activity.

The authorities supported certification for protocols and smart contracts, but did not require every accessible protocol to hold a certification. Under their proposal:

Significant CASPs would face the full set of obligations, while smaller providers would receive proportionate requirements.
Platforms could continue offering uncertified protocols if they completed their own due diligence.
Customers would receive enhanced disclosures describing the risks of those uncertified protocols.

The proposal concerns the venue and screening layer before protocol access, rather than the transaction strategy itself.

Would wallet developers face the same rules?

France opposed blanket certification requirements for self-custody wallet developers whose software lets users hold and manage cryptocurrencies independently. Instead, the authorities favored voluntary certification for more advanced wallet applications that integrate DeFi services and other financial functions.

That distinction follows MiCA’s existing treatment of activities provided without an identifiable intermediary. The consultation response therefore divides responsibility between regulated platforms facilitating access and developers offering standalone, non-custodial tools.

The broader regulatory debate remains contested. The European Parliament adopted a policy position in July that called for further consideration of DeFi, staking and crypto lending. In a separate consultation submission, the Cardano Foundation opposed additional rules for decentralized finance and staking, arguing that regulators should improve the existing framework and distinguish intermediary services from direct blockchain participation.

What else would France change under MiCA?

Beyond DeFi, France backed transferring supervision of significant CASPs from national regulators to the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA). It also proposed lowering MiCA’s current threshold of 15 million average daily active users in the EU for identifying significant CASPs. Custody, assets, business risks and group complexity would also be considered when determining which platforms fall under ESMA supervision. Our guide to crypto market makers and the roles they perform provides context on the intermediary role affected by platform supervision.

France also requested a review of MiCA’s asset-referenced token category, noting that no asset-referenced tokens had been authorized under the framework. It suggested adapting the e-money token framework to cover multicurrency stablecoins.

The recommendations remain consultation proposals and would require legislative changes before becoming enforceable obligations. The next dated step is the European Commission’s report to EU lawmakers, due by June 30, 2027, which could include proposals to amend MiCA.