When a first supervisory questionnaire arrives: what to do first
The first supervisory questionnaire is not a request you can defer. It requires you to log the exact date of receipt, identify the addressed entity and its officer, and open a controlled response file before drafting anything. The deadline set out in the covering letter starts running from receipt, not from your reading of it.
The obligation behind the questionnaire
For a crypto-asset service provider, the obligations a supervisor tests against sit in two instruments. Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA) sets the conduct, governance, and disclosure standards the file has to demonstrate. Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (TFR) sets the information that has to travel with a transfer of crypto-assets. A first questionnaire usually checks whether the answers your file gives to these two instruments match what the supervisor already holds from registration or from a prior filing.
The letter itself rarely names an article. It asks for documents, dates, and a narrative. The obligation behind each question still traces back to one of the two regulations above, and treating the questionnaire as unconnected to them is the first mistake teams make.
What changes once the letter is in your inbox
Before the letter, your file was a working record. After the letter, it becomes evidence. Every answer you submit is compared against what you filed earlier, and any gap between the two becomes the supervisor's next question, not yours to explain away later.
The practical consequence is speed, not scope. The questionnaire is usually narrower than a full audit, but the window to respond is short and the tolerance for internal inconsistency is low. A rushed answer that contradicts an earlier filing is worse than a late answer that matches it.
What to do, in order
| Step | Who acts | What it produces |
|---|---|---|
| Record the date of receipt and open the file | Compliance officer | A dated, single point of reference for the whole response |
| Read the full covering letter before drafting anything | Compliance officer | A list of what is actually being asked, separated from what you assume is being asked |
| Map each question to the obligation it tests and to the record that answers it | Compliance officer with counsel | A question-to-evidence map, not a narrative |
| Draft every answer from primary records, not from memory | Designated case owner | A draft that can be checked line by line against source documents |
| Have counsel review the draft before it leaves the building | Counsel | A reviewed version consistent with prior filings |
| Submit through the channel named in the letter and keep proof | Compliance officer | A timestamped submission record |
Who decides, and on what evidence
The supervisory authority that issued the letter decides, and it decides on the file it already holds together with the answers you submit. Draft correspondence, internal notes, or anything that never left your building carries no weight in that decision. If the answers close the gap the supervisor flagged, the file usually closes with them. If they open a new gap, the exchange continues, and the tone of the next letter tends to reflect how the first one was handled.
If your situation differs
- If the questionnaire arrived shortly after your licence was granted and asks you to fill gaps flagged at authorisation stage, treat it as a continuation of that file, not a fresh one — see When the application file is returned with questions: what to do first.
- If part of the questionnaire concerns technology you use under someone else's licence, the answer may depend on whether that licence was ever recorded as effective — see When a licence must be recorded to be effective.
- If the questionnaire touches intellectual property built into your product and a rival has since filed something similar nearby, do not answer the two issues in isolation — see When a competitor files a patent application next to your product.
- If the file also involves a customer contract under dispute over liability caps, keep that dispute separate from the supervisory answer — see When a customer demands unlimited liability.
What this page does not cover
This page does not draft your substantive answers, and it does not tell you whether a specific document satisfies a specific question — that depends on your file, not on a general sequence. It does not cover challenging the questionnaire itself, and it does not cover a group structure where several entities receive letters at once. It also does not replace whatever instructions the covering letter gives on format or channel; where the two conflict, the letter wins.
Related reading
If the pressure point in your file is not the questionnaire but a client relationship that has just failed a check, the same file discipline applies — see What to do first in this situation in practice.
Verified
Checked against the source texts on the date this page was last reviewed. Primary sources: Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA), in force from 30 December 2024, published at eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1114/oj/eng; Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (TFR), in force from 30 December 2024, published at eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1113/oj/eng.
FAQ
What is the first step when a first supervisory questionnaire arrives?
Log the exact date of receipt and open a controlled file before answering anything. The clock and the record both start on that date, and every later action is measured against it.
Which deadline is already running?
The deadline set out in the covering letter starts on the date of receipt, not on the date you begin drafting. The letter, not general practice, fixes the length of that deadline and any procedure for extending it.
Who decides, and on what evidence?
The supervisory authority that issued the questionnaire decides, on the file it already holds plus the answers you submit. Internal notes or draft correspondence that never left your building carry no weight in that decision.