Blockchain
How Blockchain builds trust and competitive advantage
We help create, launch, and grow blockchain-based products. We advise Web3 startups, DeFi protocols, fintechs, digital asset platforms, and infrastructure providers serving the financial sector. We support clients in designing new solutions, selecting jurisdictions, entering the market, scaling their operations, and expanding internationally.
We start every project by understanding how the product works in practice. We determine whether the model is subject to regulations governing crypto-assets, financial instruments, investment services, payment services, or electronic money. We then help translate the regulatory conclusions into a specific product structure, partner agreements, user documentation, and risk management rules. Our work includes, among other things, staking models, airdrops, stablecoins, vaults, on-ramp and off-ramp services, custody, and blockchain infrastructure for institutional clients. We also advise on MiCA and obtaining CASP authorization.
How can we help you?
We analyze whether a token, protocol, or service is subject to regulations governing crypto-assets, financial instruments, securities, electronic money, investment services, payment services, or other areas of regulated activity. We translate our legal conclusions into specific, workable product and business model options.
We advise on the authorization of crypto-asset service providers, including organizational and capital requirements, internal governance, safeguarding client assets, and relations with supervisory authorities. We also support businesses operating in jurisdictions that apply separate regulatory regimes for VASPs.
We assess staking models, token farming, airdrops, token-burning mechanisms, utility tokens and yield-generating products. Among other things, we analyze the source of the user’s expected benefits, the role of the issuer or operator, the ecosystem’s maturity, and the impact of communications and marketing activities on regulatory risk.
We support the development of lending protocols, vaults, decentralized financial services and other smart contract-based products. We help define the scope of duties and responsibilities of individual participants in the ecosystem, including operators, interface developers, infrastructure providers and users.
We advise on the design of stablecoins, related yield-generating solutions, custody infrastructure and blockchain systems intended for institutional clients. Among other things, we analyze licensing requirements, reserve management rules, redemption mechanisms, governance and the liability of technology providers.
We conduct multi-jurisdictional analyzes and help select the markets best suited to a product launch. Among other things, we compare legal classifications, licensing requirements, supervisory expectations, compliance costs and potential distribution restrictions.
We design cooperation models with exchanges, wallet providers, on-ramp and off-ramp service providers, custody providers, payment institutions and AML/KYC service providers. We prepare and negotiate documentation that clearly defines each party’s regulatory, operational, and technological responsibilities.
We prepare terms and conditions, platform terms of use, information documents, risk warnings, whitepapers and agreements with partners. We also advise on cooperation with influencers.
We support businesses in the event of attacks on protocols, loss of assets, user claims and other incidents requiring coordinated legal, regulatory and communications action.
Examples of our experience
Staking across multiple jurisdictions: we analyzed planned changes to a staking model, including whether the service could be classified as a product subject to regulations governing securities, financial instruments, investment services and crypto-assets. The recommendations were used in the further design of the product and its go-to-market strategy.
Credit Vaults and Yield Vaults: we supported the development and launch of blockchain-based products combining digital assets with lending and investment features. Our advice covered regulatory classification, the Vault-as-a-Service model, user documentation, risk disclosures, and the allocation of responsibilities between the platform, vault operators, and third-party providers.
Token farming and multi-airdrops: we assessed innovative token distribution and acquisition mechanisms under European Union and United States regulations. The analysis covered, among other things, token utility, profit expectations, users’ reliance on project developers’ efforts, marketing communications, and token-burning mechanisms.
Yield-generating stablecoin: we prepared a regulatory map for a planned stablecoin issuance combining a fiat currency peg with on-chain yield-generating features. The project covered more than a dozen jurisdictions and compared the possible classification as a crypto-asset, electronic money, or security, as well as licensing, capital, and governance requirements.
On-ramp and off-ramp services: we conducted a regulatory analysis of a planned gateway for converting fiat currencies into crypto-assets and vice versa across more than a dozen jurisdictions. We also developed a matrix of licensing, AML, and compliance requirements and compared the implementation costs of the individual options.
CASP authorizations: we advised a global provider of custody services and digital asset infrastructure on the possibility of obtaining CASP authorization in Poland. We also represented a DeFi protocol project in proceedings before a foreign supervisory authority concerning allegations of conducting VASP activities without the required registration.
Attacks on a DeFi protocol: we supported a project after the loss of digital assets resulting from two major security incidents. Our advice covered potential asset recovery routes, liability toward users in different jurisdictions, an analysis of the protocol’s terms of use, and the possibility of using on-chain dispute resolution mechanisms.
Institutional blockchain infrastructure: we advised on designing a strategic partnership to create dedicated blockchain infrastructure for institutional clients. The project covered the joint venture structure, technology licensing, intellectual property protection, revenue-sharing mechanisms, exclusivity and business continuity safeguards.
Derivatives on a crypto-asset platform: we prepared the legal framework and documentation for a futures trading service, covering margin mechanisms, settlement rules, risk warnings, user protection and dispute resolution procedures.
Crypto-asset marketing: we developed a compliance framework for influencer campaigns. Our advice covered the content of communications, transparency of commercial relationships, risk warnings and internal procedures for approving and monitoring published materials.
SAFT agreement: we drafted an agreement obliging the issuer to deliver final, operational ERC-20 tokens to the purchaser at the time specified in the agreement (SAFT), valued at USD 2.5 million.
Application to the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF): we prepared an application to the KNF for an interpretation and legal classification of an f-NFT token with the potential characteristics of a security and represented the client in the administrative proceedings.
FAQ
No. Whether MiCA applies to a particular project depends primarily on the nature of the token or service offered and the roles of the individual participants in the business model. In some cases, regulations governing financial instruments, investment services, payments or electronic money may also apply. Before launching a project, we therefore analyze how it operates and, on that basis, determine the applicable regulatory framework.
The requirement to obtain CASP authorization depends on the type of crypto-asset services provided and the business model adopted. At Lawarton, we analyze the scope of the planned activities, asset flows, and the roles of the participants, and determine whether, and to what extent, the activities require CASP authorization, cooperation with a licensed entity, or a different model structure.
The choice of jurisdiction should take into account not only taxes or the cost of incorporating a company, but above all the product’s legal classification, required authorizations, the local supervisory authority’s approach, capital and compliance requirements, and the markets in which the product will be offered. In our work on international projects, we compare several jurisdictions and help select a structure suited to the planned operating model.
A token’s name or technology alone does not determine its legal classification. Relevant factors include the rights attached to the token, its economic function, the method of distribution, users’ expected benefits, and the way the project is communicated to the market. Our lawyers analyze these elements against the applicable regulations and identify the consequences that a particular legal classification may have for the issuance, distribution, and continued operation of the product.
It is best to contact us before the business model is finalized and the project’s commercial implementation begins. An early analysis makes it possible to assess whether the planned solution involves licensing obligations or other regulatory restrictions and, if necessary, to adjust its structure accordingly. For projects that are already operational, we support our clients, including with international expansion, changes to the business model, proceedings before supervisory authorities and crisis situations.
