EU/EEA PassportingMiCA CASP authorisation

MiCA Crypto Licence in Lithuania

Lithuania is an EU MiCA CASP authorisation route supervised by the Bank of Lithuania. It fits regulated exchange, wallet, brokerage and custody-adjacent teams that need EU/EEA passporting and can support real substance, governance, AML, safeguarding, audit and banking preparation.

Processing time
From 6 months
Service price
17 300 EUR
Required share capital
From 50 000 EUR
State fee
2,500 EUR
Annual supervision fee
From 3 000 EUR
Banking difficulty
Medium to high
RegulatorBank of Lithuania

Regulatory status should be confirmed by local counsel before relying on this route.

What is Lithuania MiCA CASP authorisation?

Lithuania MiCA CASP authorisation is the Bank of Lithuania-supervised route for crypto-asset service providers under the EU MiCA framework. It is a regulated EU operating route for CASPs, not a fast offshore registration.

MICA
Jurisdiction
Lithuania
Regulator
Bank of Lithuania
Regime
MICA
Legal basis
Regime: MiCA CASP authorisation with the Bank of Lithuania as regulator.

Country-specific regulatory statements should be checked against current regulator guidance before relying on this route.

EU/EEA passporting from Lithuania

Lithuania can support EU/EEA passporting for approved MiCA CASP services, but passporting is not a blanket claim. The service perimeter, target markets and notification path should be planned before the application is positioned commercially.

  • Exchange

    Included

    Exchange operations fit within the permitted activities of this route.

  • Custody

    Conditional

    Custody may require separate review or additional controls.

  • Brokerage

    Included

    Brokerage or OTC activity typically fits within scope.

  • Wallet provider

    Included

    Exchange operations fit within the permitted activities of this route.

  • EU market

    Included

    EU/EEA passporting available.

  • Startups

    Excluded

    High setup complexity means significant budget is needed.

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Lithuania as a MiCA home member state

Lithuania fits teams that want a Baltic/EU base with Bank of Lithuania supervision, moderate commercial reputation and a more cost-conscious route than premium EU financial centres. The setup complexity is still high because local staff, office and audit are required.

  • Regulatory track record

    Positive

    High

  • Banking access for crypto firms

    Negative

    Medium to high

  • Regulatory risk

    Caution

    Low to medium

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Lithuania MiCA application bottlenecks

The highest-friction issues are usually not the forms themselves. Lithuania becomes harder when the business cannot defend service scope, substance, safeguarding, AML, governance, costs, timeline or banking assumptions.

  • Unclear CASP services or passporting plan across EU/EEA markets

    High

  • Local staff or office model that does not support real operational control

    High

  • Weak custody, wallet, safeguarding, reconciliation or technology resilience evidence

    High

  • Template AML, sanctions or travel-rule policies that do not match the business model

    High

  • Banking, EMI, PI or PSP package prepared too late

    High

  • A timeline sold as exactly 6 months instead of from 6 months, with no buffer for regulator questions or file remediation

    High

  • Payment, staking, DeFi or securities-like features added without perimeter analysis

    High

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Activity fit for this route

Review which crypto activities fit within the scope of this route.

Exchange
Suitable

Exchange operations fit within the permitted activities of this route.

Custody
Conditional

Custody may require separate review or additional controls.

Brokerage
Suitable

Brokerage or OTC activity typically fits within scope.

Wallet provider
Suitable

Exchange operations fit within the permitted activities of this route.

EU market
Suitable

EU/EEA passporting available.

Startups
Not suitable

High setup complexity means significant budget is needed.

Not sure if your model fits? Request a licensing assessment

Is Lithuania MiCA authorisation right for your project?

Best for

  • EU passporting and regulated CASP operations
  • EU/EEA market access

Not suitable for

  • Low-budget or fast offshore setup
  • Projects without a prepared banking strategy

Banking difficulty is high for this route. Prepare a banking strategy before committing to the Lithuania route.

Core requirements

Use this section to check the main regulatory and operational requirements before committing to a jurisdiction.

Required share capitalFrom 50 000 EUR
Required
Local staffRequired
Required
Physical officeRequired
Required
AuditRequired
Required

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Local substance, office, audit and governance

The CSV facts mark local staff, physical office and audit as required. Treat these as operating obligations, not checkboxes, because substance also affects regulator confidence, banking readiness and ongoing maintenance.

Local staff

Required

Required

At least one locally-accountable staff member or director is expected.

Physical office

Required

Required

A genuine office presence is expected, not a nominal registered address.

Audit

Required

Required

External audit is required for ongoing supervision compliance.

Planning notes

  • Define Lithuania-based decision-making, compliance ownership and reporting lines before submission.
  • Document outsourced group functions, board oversight, technology providers and incident escalation.
  • Budget share capital from 50,000 EUR, the 2,500 EUR state fee, annual supervision from 3000 EUR, audit, local office, staff and ongoing compliance separately from the 17,300 EUR application service fee.

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Cost breakdown

Budget for service price, regulatory fees, share capital and ongoing costs separately.

Service price (professional fees)Application preparation and professional services.
17 300 EUR EURFixed
State fee
2,500 EURFrom
Annual supervision feeRecurring annual cost after authorisation.
From 3 000 EURFrom
Required share capitalMust be held, not an expenditure.
From 50 000 EURFrom
High ongoing cost

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Cost breakdown — Lithuania

Budget for service price, regulatory fees, share capital and ongoing costs separately.

Cost itemAmount
Service priceApplication preparation and professional services.€17,300
State fee€2,500
Required share capitalMust be held, not an expenditure.€50,000

Summary

One-off costs
€69,800
Annual (year 1)
€0
Total year 1
€69,800

Adjust to convert to your base currency.

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Application process

The sequence below shows the usual project flow. Exact steps depend on the regulator, business model and application scope. Lithuania — From 6 months.

Total timelineFrom 6 months

  1. Pre-assessment and scope review

    1–3 weeks

    Define the activity scope, governance model and target markets before formal preparation.

  2. Company setup in Lithuania

    2–6 weeks

    Establish legal entity, appoint local staff and set up local operating structure.

  3. Documentation and compliance packBottleneck risk

    3–8 weeks

    Prepare AML/CFT policies, governance documents, controls framework and application materials.

  4. Application submission to Bank of Lithuania

    1–2 weeks

    Submit complete application with all required documentation.

  5. Regulator reviewBottleneck risk

    From 6 months

    Regulator reviews the application. May request clarifications. Incomplete files extend this phase.

    Depends on: File quality and completeness

  6. Authorisation or registration confirmation

    1–4 weeks

    Regulator confirms authorisation or registration. Commence operations.

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

What can delay or increase cost

These factors are most likely to affect timelines and budgets for this route.

High setup complexity
High

Setup complexity is rated high for Lithuania. Company setup, governance and documentation take longer than average.

Likely impactAdd 4–8 weeks to the preparation phase.
MitigationStart company setup and governance planning immediately after scope confirmation.
Banking difficulty
High

Banking difficulty is rated high. Opening accounts for crypto businesses in Lithuania requires extensive documentation.

Likely impactBanking can delay or block operations for 3–6 months after authorisation.
MitigationIdentify and pre-qualify banking partners before submitting the application.
High maintenance cost
Medium

Ongoing supervision, audit and compliance costs are above average. Budget for these separately from the application fee.

Likely impactRecurring annual cost significantly above the one-time service price.
MitigationModel annual compliance costs before committing to this route.
Application completeness
Medium

Incomplete files are the most common cause of delay. Regulator queries extend review by weeks or months.

Likely impactEach regulator query adds 2–6 weeks to the review phase.
MitigationUse a structured compliance pack. Review file completeness before submission.

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Banking and PSP readiness in Lithuania

Lithuania has a developed fintech environment, but the CSV risk profile still rates crypto banking as medium to high and PSP availability as medium. Banking and PSP work should run alongside the MiCA file, not after authorisation.

Banking difficulty
High

Reflects how challenging it is to open and maintain business bank accounts in this jurisdiction.

Medium PSP availability
Medium

Reflects availability of payment service providers willing to onboard crypto-licensed entities.

A licence or registration does not guarantee bank account or payment provider approval. Banking feasibility should be reviewed before the application strategy is finalized.

Preparation checklist

  • Prepare ownership, source-of-funds, flow-of-funds, client geography, token admission and transaction monitoring evidence.
  • Explain safeguarding, reconciliation, custody, fiat settlement and outsourcing before approaching banks, EMIs, PIs or PSPs.
  • Expect stronger due diligence for exchange, custody, cross-border fiat and high-risk client geography.

When Lithuania MiCA is not the right route

Lithuania should not be selected only because it appears cheaper than premium EU jurisdictions. It is still a regulated MiCA CASP route with high setup complexity and real operating obligations.

  • The project primarily wants a low-budget or fast offshore setup.

  • The team cannot fund local staff, physical office, audit, share capital and ongoing compliance.

  • The target market is outside the EU/EEA and MiCA passporting has limited commercial value.

  • The product is mostly DeFi, staking, payments or token issuance and needs a different regulatory analysis first.

Consider instead

  • Malta MICA — More established EU crypto regulator profile
  • Poland MICA — Central/Eastern EU comparison point for MiCA planning
  • Germany MICA — Strong EU reputation and banking narrative

Country-specific regulatory statements should be checked against current regulator guidance before relying on this route.

Business model fit — Lithuania

Assess how well this route covers your planned activities.

Fit score

Good fit
3/6
Partial fit
3/6
Poor fit
0/6

Lithuania covers some but not all planned activities

Some activities need additional licensing or separate review before committing.

Bank of Lithuania profile for crypto firms

Regulatory authority · Lithuania

Bank of Lithuania

The Bank of Lithuania route should be approached as a regulated financial services application. A credible file needs precise service scope, accountable management, AML and sanctions controls, safeguarding logic, technology resilience and a realistic banking package.

Likely areas of scrutiny
  • The application should show who controls Lithuania-based compliance, risk, AML, technology oversight and regulator-facing decisions.
  • Exchange and custody models need stronger evidence than a narrow brokerage or advisory model.
  • Generic policy packs are a weak fit unless they are adapted to clients, tokens, jurisdictions, fiat flows and outsourced systems.
Regulatory reputation
High

Strong international recognition and established supervision track record.

Setup complexity
High

Reflects documentation depth, governance requirements and expected review friction.

Regulatory risk
Medium

Reflects likelihood of delays, additional information requests or policy uncertainty.

Country-specific regulatory statements should be checked against current regulator guidance before relying on this route.

Compliance documentation

Most crypto licensing routes require a documented compliance framework before submission, not only after approval.

  • Required
    AML/CFT policy and risk assessmentDocument your customer risk model and control framework.
  • Required
    Customer due diligence (CDD) procedures
  • Required
    Enhanced due diligence (EDD) proceduresFor high-risk clients and jurisdictions.
  • Required
    Transaction monitoring system and rules
  • Required
    Sanctions screening procedures
  • Required
    Suspicious activity reporting (SAR) process
  • Required
    MLRO / Compliance officer appointmentLocal accountability may be required.
  • Recommended
    Board-approved governance charter
  • Conditional
    Outsourcing policy and monitoringRequired if functions are outsourced.
  • Recommended
    ICT / cybersecurity policy
  • Required
    Complaints handling procedure
  • Required
    Annual external audit engagementRequired for ongoing supervision compliance.

Country-specific regulatory statements should be checked against current regulator guidance before relying on this route.

Documents to prepare

Preparing these materials before filing reduces regulator questions and helps with banking or payment provider onboarding.

0 / 12 required
Required
Recommended
Depends on scope

Corporate documents

AML and compliance

Operational

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Risk assessment

Main risk dimensions for the Lithuania route.

Banking difficulty
High

Route risk rating — banking difficulty: Medium to high. Authorisation does not guarantee bank account opening.

Mitigation: Start banking outreach and compliance preparation before the application.

Setup complexity
High

Route risk rating — setup complexity: High.

Maintenance cost
High

Route risk rating — maintenance cost: High. Budget for ongoing compliance, fees and supervision separately.

Regulatory reputation
High

Route risk rating — regulatory reputation: High.

Regulatory risk
Medium

Route risk rating — regulatory risk: Low to medium. Weak compliance, vague scope or insufficient controls increase review risk.

Mitigation: Prepare an evidence-based compliance file before submission.

This content is for general orientation only. Crypto regulation changes quickly and the final scope should be confirmed through a jurisdiction-specific legal review before filing or incorporation.

Lithuania vs other crypto licensing routes

Compare Lithuania with Malta for a more established MiCA regulator profile, Poland or Estonia for other EU/Central-Eastern operating routes, Germany for a premium banking and reputation narrative, and Dubai VASP or other non-EU routes when EU/EEA passporting is not the commercial driver.

Current

Lithuania

MICA

Price
17 300 EUR
Timeline
From 6 months
Passporting
EU/EEA
Banking
Medium to high
Reputation
High

Malta

MICA

Price
20 700 EUR
Timeline
From 6 months
Passporting
EU/EEA
Banking
Medium to high
Reputation
High

+ More established EU crypto regulator profile

− Higher service and supervision cost than Lithuania

View route

Poland

MICA

Price
17 800 EUR
Timeline
From 6 months
Passporting
EU/EEA
Banking
Medium
Reputation
Medium

+ Central/Eastern EU comparison point for MiCA planning

− Route choice still depends on substance, banking and service scope

View route

Germany

MICA

Price
28 500 EUR
Timeline
From 6 months
Passporting
EU/EEA
Banking
Low
Reputation
High

+ Strong EU reputation and banking narrative

− Higher cost and more demanding supervisory expectations

View route

Dubai (VASP)

VASP

Price
22 300 EUR
Timeline
From 6 months
Passporting
No EU/EEA passporting
Banking
Medium
Reputation
High

+ Non-EU alternative for UAE-led operations

− Does not replace MiCA passporting for EU/EEA markets

View route

Fees, timelines and capital figures are indicative and may vary by business model, regulator feedback, application scope and third-party costs.

Lithuania vs other MiCA jurisdictions

Compare key parameters across MiCA-authorised jurisdictions.

Sort by:
LithuaniaCurrent
Price17 300 EUR
TimelineFrom 6 months
BankingMedium to high
ReputationHigh
Malta
Price20 700 EUR
TimelineFrom 6 months
BankingMedium to high
ReputationHigh
Poland
Price17 800 EUR
TimelineFrom 6 months
BankingMedium
ReputationMedium
Germany
Price28 500 EUR
TimelineFrom 6 months
BankingLow
ReputationHigh

Check your readiness for Lithuania MiCA authorisation

Documented AML/CFT policies, risk assessment, compliance officer.

Share capital

From 50 000 EUR minimum capital required.

AML/CFT framework

Documented AML/CFT policies, risk assessment, compliance officer.

Governance structure

Board, management, accountability chain defined.

Banking preparation

Banking strategy and identified partners.

Local substance plan

Local staff and office in Lithuania.

Readiness status

Answer the criteria on the left to see your readiness status.

Frequently asked questions

No. Lithuania can be more cost-conscious than some premium EU jurisdictions, but it is not a low-budget or fast offshore setup. Local staff, office, audit, share capital, governance, AML, safeguarding and banking preparation still need to be funded.

Lithuania MiCA CASP authorisation can support EU/EEA passporting for approved CASP services, subject to the relevant notification process. Passporting should be tied to the authorised service scope, not treated as automatic coverage for every future product.

The main friction points are unclear CASP service scope, weak local substance, generic AML policies, underdeveloped safeguarding or custody controls, late banking preparation and payment, staking or DeFi features that have not been scoped legally.

Lithuania is usually not the first choice when the business cannot support local substance and ongoing compliance, when EU/EEA passporting is not commercially important, or when the product needs a non-EU, payment, staking, DeFi or securities-token route instead.

No. Banks, EMIs, PIs and PSPs still assess ownership, source of funds, client geography, fiat flows, token policy, AML controls, safeguarding and risk appetite. Banking and PSP preparation should start before submission.

The page is not legal advice and should not be relied on as a substitute for advice from qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.

Your dedicated specialists

  • Enrico Kärvinen

    Enrico

  • Rein Tammik

    Rein

  • Jurata Žukaitė

    Jurata

  • Andrej Kazlauskas

    Andrej

  • Marta Värna

    Marta

  • Katrin Lepik

    Katrin

  • Inga Stankavičiūtė

    Inga

Request a Lithuania MiCA assessment

Share your planned activities, target markets and timeline. We will review which crypto licensing route is likely to fit.

Leave open if you want a country comparison.
Select every activity you plan to offer. The licence route may change if you include custody, exchange, trading platform or fiat flows.
Include service fees, regulator fees, share capital, local office or staff, audit and ongoing compliance.

By submitting this form, you agree to be contacted about your crypto licensing request. Do not include passwords, private keys or confidential customer data.