The recommended route combines customer acceptance of the French service with a documented transfer or closure of the Turkish relationship. Each migration proceeds only after the receiving company accepts the customer, services and assets. France supplies the establishment and national-law reference; customers elsewhere in the EU need country-specific checks.
Executive Summary
- The French company’s MiCA authorisation must cover each service it will provide. Cross-border service requires the Article 65 notification procedure; incorporation and group membership confer no permission. (MiCA, arts 3(1)(16), 59, 65.)
- Customer contracts require their own transfer mechanism. Turkish-law contract transfers engage Article 205 of the Turkish Code of Obligations. French-law assignments require a written instrument and customer agreement, which can sometimes be given in advance. (Law No 6098, art 205; French Code civil, art 1216.)
- Crypto-assets require customer instructions, reconciliation and compliant custody. Cash needs a separate route: ordinary Turkish platforms cannot transfer foreign currency abroad. (SPK Communiqués III-35/B.1, art 49(1)(j), and III-35/B.2, arts 10, 51; MiCA, arts 70, 75.)
- The French company remains responsible for customer due diligence. Data sharing needs a lawful processing basis and the relevant international-transfer safeguards. (French Code monétaire et financier, arts L561-5 to L561-8; Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), arts 5–6, 13–14, 44–49; Turkish Law No 6698, art 9.)
- Customers who decline or fail onboarding need a lawful withdrawal or closure route. Preserve historic claims and assign responsibility through the transfer period; migration supplies no retrospective authorisation. (MiCA, arts 59, 61, 75; Law No 6362, art 35/C; French Code civil, art 1216-1.)
The Turkish and French companies retain separate responsibilities
The legal team should identify the company responsible for every existing service and the company that will replace it. The account screen, terms, custody agreement and payment instructions must consistently identify the responsible provider for each service. The French company must retain the resources and authority to oversee outsourced functions. A group services agreement cannot transfer its regulatory responsibility to Türkiye. (MiCA, arts 59(2), 66, 68, 73.)
Review the Turkish entity’s earlier EU business separately. MiCA’s maximum transitional period ended on 1 July 2026. A later French authorisation cannot retrospectively authorise services supplied by another entity. Continued Turkish service requires its own legal basis, including a properly evidenced Article 61 exception where its conditions are met. The separate assessment of existing EU accounts explains that decision. (MiCA, arts 59, 61, 143(3).)
In Türkiye, check the outgoing entity’s actual SPK status and applicable transition conditions. Appearance on the list of operating providers does not establish full operating authorisation. Moving an EU customer cohort also differs from surrendering every Turkish operating permission, which triggers a separate cessation procedure. (Law No 6362, art 35/B; SPK Communiqué III-35/B.1, art 51; SPK Decision 18/617 of 26 March 2026.)
Match the French permission to the services and countries
The receiving company’s compliance lead should approve a service and country schedule before invitations launch. Match custody, exchange, trading-platform operation, order execution, reception and transmission of orders, and transfers to the authorisation. A service outside the permission must remain disabled until the required extension is granted. Transfers embedded in another service still need assessment against MiCA’s transfer-service definition. (MiCA, arts 3(1)(16)–(26), 59(6), 59(8); ESMA Q&A 2071, Commission answer of 20 June 2024.)
For customers outside France, submit the intended Member States, cross-border services, starting date and other non-MiCA activities to the AMF. Service may begin when the company receives the AMF’s notification that the information was communicated, or at the latest on the fifteenth calendar day after submission. Article 65 does not require separate host-state approval or an automatic fifteen-day wait in every case. Keep the submission and receipt evidence with each country’s activation decision. (MiCA, art 65(1)–(4).)
Permission must be supported by operating controls. Test customer identification, asset segregation, withdrawal processing, complaints and the ability to recover from a failed migration. The French company must retain effective EU management and supervision of Turkish support providers. DORA applies to authorised CASPs from 17 January 2025, including its requirements for ICT risk, continuity and third-party arrangements. (MiCA, arts 59(2), 68, 70–73; Regulation (EU) 2022/2554, arts 2(1)(f), 5, 11–12, 28, 30, 64.)
Approve the asset list separately. Securities and derivatives cannot enter through a MiCA permission. For asset-referenced and e-money tokens, ESMA’s 8 October 2026 opinion expects cessation of services involving non-compliant tokens, including custody and transfers. Any temporary residual activity depends on closely supervised conditions agreed with the competent authority. The opinion expects remediation as soon as possible and no later than three months after its publication. A sell-only or custody-only setting is therefore no automatic migration solution. The opinion is a supervisory position, not an amendment to MiCA. (MiCA, art 2(4); ESMA Opinion ESMA75-113276571-1742, paras 12–14, 21–27.)
E-money-token payment functions require an additional permissions check. The ACPR treats specified EMT transfers and custodial wallets capable of third-party payments as payment services. A MiCA licence alone does not cover them. Establish the required payment-service authorisation or authorised-provider arrangement before enabling those functions. (MiCA, art 70(4); ACPR notice of 19 February 2026, section « Éléments de contexte ».)
The MiCA CASP authorisation requirements provide the wider application background. The migration decision turns on the permissions actually granted and the controls operating at transfer.
Obtain the agreement needed to change the contracting party
Start with the law governing each existing contract. A proposed French-law agreement does not determine how the Turkish agreement can be transferred or terminated. Where the business directs activities to an EU consumer’s country of habitual residence and the contract falls within that activity, a choice of law cannot remove the protection of that country’s mandatory consumer rules, subject to Rome I’s Article 6(4) exclusions. Preserve applicable consumer jurisdiction rights when changing dispute clauses. (Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (Rome I), arts 3, 6; Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, arts 17–19.)
For a Turkish-law contract, Article 205 provides for transfer through agreement between the outgoing party, incoming party and remaining customer. A transfer agreement between the companies can also operate with the customer’s valid prior permission or later approval. The transfer must satisfy the form required for the transferred contract. The legal team should verify the existing clause and acceptance evidence before relying on advance permission. (Turkish Code of Obligations, Law No 6098, art 205.)
Where French law governs, Article 1216 requires a written assignment instrument and customer agreement. Valid advance agreement can make notification of the assignment, or the customer’s acknowledgment, sufficient for effectiveness against that customer. Release of the outgoing party for future performance requires the customer’s express consent; otherwise joint liability continues unless agreed otherwise. French consumer law also presumes unfair a clause allowing assignment without agreement where customers’ rights could diminish. (Code civil, arts 1216–1216-1; Code de la consommation, art R212-2(5).)
The recommended documentation uses recorded affirmative acceptance of the French service and specific instructions for the assets to move. It should state whether the old agreement transfers or terminates, which obligations continue and when the new provider becomes responsible. If the parties choose novation under French law, identify the obligations extinguished and replaced: novation is not presumed. Preserve accrued claims expressly. (Code civil, arts 1329–1330.)
Deliver the applicable terms and disclosures before acceptance, on a durable medium where required. For new French distance contracts, the rules effective from 19 June 2026 require a service-specific withdrawal analysis. A fourteen-day right can apply, with exceptions and precedence for specific product rules. Do not treat every custody agreement as an immediately completed market trade. Where the right applies, provide the online withdrawal function if the contract is concluded through an online interface, and obtain the customer’s agreement before starting during the withdrawal period. (Code de la consommation, arts L222-5–L222-9, L222-13; Ordonnance No 2026-2, art 26.)
Transfer assets and records with responsibility attached
The operations teams should reconcile each customer’s cash, tokens, pending orders, unsettled trades, fees and withdrawal requests. Identify the network, receiving address, any lock or encumbrance, and the party responsible while movement is pending. Record outgoing debits and incoming credits against the customer’s instruction. A database entry alone cannot establish that control and the return obligation have moved. These controls implement the duties to maintain customer-level records and safeguard assets. (SPK Communiqué III-35/B.2, art 10(2); MiCA, arts 70, 75(1)–(7).)
The French custody agreement must cover the parties, service, custody policy, communications, security, charges and applicable law. Provide the Article 82 agreement where the French company supplies transfers. The receiving custodian must segregate client holdings and maintain each customer’s position. If it delegates custody, Article 75(9) requires another Article 59-authorised provider. Keeping an unqualified Turkish group company as subcustodian would leave that condition unsatisfied. (MiCA, arts 73, 75, 82.)
Cash requires different instructions. SPK Communiqué III-35/B.1 prohibits ordinary cryptoasset providers from transferring foreign currency abroad, with an exception for banks authorised for cryptoasset custody. Communiqué III-35/B.2 requires money transfers through customers’ own bank accounts. The proposed route should return cash through a lawful bank channel to the customer, who separately funds the French account. The bank must confirm that route before the group promises automatic cash migration. (III-35/B.1, art 49(1)(j), (2); III-35/B.2, arts 10(2)(b), 51(3).)
Crypto transfers require their own financial-crime checks. The EU Transfer of Funds Regulation applies where an EU CASP participates and requires originator and beneficiary information. Intragroup movement of customer assets does not become an exempt transfer of the companies’ own property. Missing required information calls for rejection, return or a request for that information before release, under risk-based procedures. (Regulation (EU) 2023/1113, arts 2–3, 14–17.)
Türkiye’s MASAK controls also affect scheduling. Specified self-hosted and foreign-provider withdrawals must wait at least forty-eight hours after purchase, exchange or deposit, or seventy-two hours for a first withdrawal. The foreign provider’s information-sharing obligations therefore affect the timetable. Stablecoin withdrawals face limits of USD 3,000 daily and USD 50,000 monthly, which can double where Article 24/A(1) applies. Classify each transfer before setting its date and amount. A customer migration is not itself the liquidity or market-making exception. (Measures Regulation, art 24/A(6)–(7); MASAK General Communiqué No 29, art 4(3)–(8).)
The French compliance team must accept each customer after satisfying its due-diligence duties. Turkish records can support that work; reliance on the outgoing provider requires the conditions of French law. The French company remains responsible. Where necessary identification or relationship information cannot be obtained, it must not establish the relationship or execute the transaction. (Code monétaire et financier, arts L561-5, L561-5-1, L561-7–L561-8.)
Neither company should delete its records simply because customers move. French AML records generally remain subject to five-year periods tied to closure, cessation of the relationship or execution of the transaction. Turkish platform records, including remote-identification material and specified communications, face ten-year retention; disputed records remain until the dispute ends. The Turkish provider must keep its required primary and secondary information systems in Türkiye; supplying lawful copies to France does not replace that obligation. Preserve complaints files and access arrangements for the responsible entity. (Code monétaire et financier, art L561-12; SPK Communiqué III-35/B.1, arts 40(4), 40(6), 41; SPK Communiqué VII-128.10, art 27(1), provisional art 1(1).)
The privacy team should map each disclosure and continuing access arrangement. Transfers from Türkiye need a valid domestic processing basis and a route under Article 9 of Law No 6698. For a Turkish standard-contract safeguard, notify the authority within five working days of signature. Customer agreement to change provider does not by itself supply every privacy permission. (Law No 6698, arts 5–6, 9–10.)
The French company needs its own GDPR basis, notices and security measures. Give customers the new controller’s identity, purposes, lawful bases, recipients, retention periods and rights. Information obtained from the Turkish entity engages Article 14, including its timing requirements. Later access by a separate Turkish group company can constitute an EU international transfer, even if the database remains in France. Establish the applicable Chapter V safeguard and assess the actual access risk before enabling it. (GDPR, arts 5–6, 13–14, 26, 28, 32, 44–49.)
Allocate liabilities in the customer documents and a separate agreement between the companies. Keep the Turkish entity responsible for its accrued breaches, fees and complaints; identify the French entity’s obligations from the effective transfer. Assign investigation, funding and customer contact for incidents spanning both periods. The intercompany allocation must preserve customers’ enforceable rights. Turkish law invalidates terms removing or limiting a provider’s liability to customers; MiCA separately governs attributable custody losses. (Law No 6362, art 35/C(1); MiCA, art 75(8); Code civil, art 1216-1.)
Sequence the migration and provide a route for customers who cannot move
Use the following stages as the group’s release conditions. They translate the legal requirements above into decisions for the responsible teams.
- Before invitation, legal and compliance approve the entities, permission schedule, eligible countries and assets, and the Turkish operating basis. Product staff disable unsupported services. Treasury confirms the distinct cash and crypto routes. Privacy staff approve the data-sharing arrangements. Any unlawful existing activity requires restriction without waiting for the migration launch.
- At invitation, identify both companies and the change proposed. Supply the new terms, custody and transfer information, fees, privacy notices and complaint contacts. Explain the response deadline, how to accept or decline, any service interruption, and the consequences of taking no action. The deadline must respect applicable notice and withdrawal rights. Turkish changes to the transaction environment or order-execution policy require at least fifteen days’ advance notice; that notice does not replace consent. (SPK Communiqué III-35/B.2, art 18(4).)
- Before transfer, obtain the required agreement and customer instructions, complete the French onboarding decision and resolve transfer restrictions. Operations reconcile the customer’s positions. Pending orders must be completed, cancelled or otherwise dealt with under an established contractual basis. Do not substitute a broad power of attorney for the customer’s required signatures and instructions. (SPK Communiqué III-35/B.1, art 49(1)(ğ), (ı).)
- At transfer and service commencement, release only the approved assets and functions. Record the effective time, the accepting custodian, the transfer identifiers and the matched customer balances. The company responsible for an incomplete movement must remain identifiable. Start any custody or transfer service only when its own legal conditions are satisfied; completion of the later trading activation cannot cure premature custody.
- After migration, send the closing and opening statements, preserve evidence of acceptance and reconcile exceptions. Route each complaint to the entity responsible for the relevant conduct. Test access to retained records and continue monitoring outsourced functions. Keep support available for withdrawals and unresolved balances.
Customers who decline cannot be treated as consenting merely because they continue to hold a balance. Offer a supported withdrawal to their own wallet or an accepting provider, subject to financial-crime controls and legal restrictions. If continued Turkish service has a valid legal basis, document its scope separately. Otherwise complete an orderly exit; refusal to migrate supplies no permission for indefinite service. (MiCA, arts 59, 61; Code civil, art 1216; Law No 6098, art 205.)
Customers who fail due diligence, hold unsupported assets or fall outside the French company’s permitted service countries must stay outside the migration batch. Establish a lawful return or closure process for each category. A freeze, sanctions restriction, dispute or unclaimed balance needs its own handling and records. Do not infer a forced-sale power from a migration deadline. If the Turkish platform surrenders all permissions, apply the additional notice, reconciliation, return and residual-asset procedures in Article 51. (Code monétaire et financier, art L561-8; SPK Communiqués III-35/B.1, arts 49, 51, and III-35/B.2, art 51.)
Scope the customer migration documents
Provide the existing terms, entity permissions, customer-country list and proposed asset flows. Scope customer-migration documentation to define the contract changes, customer notices, liability allocation and transfer conditions requiring review.