tl;dr
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has raised concerns about the potential market abuse related to Maximum Extractable Value (MEV) tactics used by some crypto miners. MEV involves blockchain operators reordering user transactions to maximize their own profits, which ESMA has flagge...
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has raised concerns about the potential market abuse related to Maximum Extractable Value (MEV) tactics used by some crypto miners. MEV involves blockchain operators reordering user transactions to maximize their own profits, which ESMA has flagged as potentially suspicious.
While some argue that MEV has a positive role in improving blockchain network efficiency, others worry about its impact on market integrity and potential for market abuse. ESMA and the European Banking Authority (EBA) are consulting on measures and guidance under the Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) framework, seeking more clarity on rules and scenarios involving MEV.
ESMA's regulatory proposals under MiCA have highlighted concerns about MEV, a tactic used by some crypto miners, which involves manipulating user transactions to maximize profits. While some view MEV as beneficial for blockchain network efficiency, others worry about its potential to compromise market integrity and lead to market abuse. ESMA and EBA are actively seeking industry feedback and clarity on how to address MEV within the regulatory framework of MiCA, recognizing the need for clear guidelines on identifying and preventing potential market abuse related to MEV tactics.
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) flagged a technique employed by some crypto miners as a potential form of market abuse in its latest regulatory proposals under MiCA. Crypto policy watchers want the regulator to clarify that reordering transactions to maximize profits, known as MEV, is not all bad. The European Union markets regulator flagged maximum extractable value (MEV), whereby blockchain operators reorder user transactions to maximize their own profits, as a potential form of market abuse, a stance that is worrying some industry watchers who say the case is not clear-cut.
In regulatory proposals published last week by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) under the digital assets law known as MiCA, the watchdog referred to MEV as potentially suspicious. MEV is broadly defined, but generally encompasses trading strategies where blockchain operators – the companies and individuals that add blocks to the chain – preview the network's transaction queue to extract extra profits for themselves. Frequently, such tactics involve reordering user transactions – shifting how they're ordered into blocks, or frontrunning them with new transactions – just before the trades are written to the chain's ledger. MEV is often called an "invisible tax" on users, since certain methods for extracting it, like sandwich attacks and frontrunning, can eat directly into end-user profits.
While MEV is a controversial topic even within the industry, some industry advocates argue that MEV plays a positive role in general since it can help to improve blockchain network efficiency. “MEV by itself should not at all be considered as a market abuse and should not have a negative connotation," Anja Blaj, a policy expert at the European Crypto Initiative (EUCI), said in an interview over WhatsApp. "There are very limited scenarios and tactics that have similar effects to those of market abuse. This should be emphasized over and over again as MEV's purpose in the first place is to compensate the good actors for the validation work they do.”
Some crypto policy watchers have argued that MEV is not even within MiCA’s scope, and EUCI has warned that applying MiCA to MEV could lead to overregulation. While it's true the MiCA text does not mention MEV, ESMA's consultation on proposals to tackle market abuse notes that the legislation extends the EU’s existing market abuse rules to include reporting suspicious activity resulting not just from transactions but also “the functioning of the distributed ledger technology such as the consensus mechanism.”
“MiCA is clear when indicating that orders, transactions, and other aspects of the distributed ledger technology may suggest the existence of market abuse e.g., the well-known maximum extractable value," it said. ESMA also noted that MiCA doesn’t require crypto service providers to report activity such as “scams, payments fraud or account takeover.” Peter Kerstens, an adviser to the European Commission on financial sector digitalization and cybersecurity, said MEV is neither good nor bad but may lead to questions about market integrity. Investors have a legitimate expectation that transactions on the blockchain will be validated in the order they were submitted, and MEV reordering can lead to frontrunning, where the "validators" that operate blockchains can move their own transactions ahead of others to ink an extra profit, according to Kerstens.
The legislation, whose full name is Markets in Crypto Assets, was finalized last year and made the EU the first major jurisdiction to comprehensively regulate the burgeoning digital assets sector. ESMA and the European Banking Authority (EBA) have been consulting on measures and guidance they’re required to issue under MiCA, with industry watchers engaging with the watchdogs to improve clarity on the rules
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers at Grow My Bag are their own and do not reflect the official stance of Grow My Bag. The content provided on our site is not intended as investment advice, and Grow My Bag is not an investment advisor. We do not endorse buying or selling any cryptocurrencies or digital assets mentioned in our articles. High-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, and digital assets require thorough due diligence, and all transfers and trades made are at your own risk. Grow My Bag is not responsible for any potential losses and participates in affiliate marketing.