Creating a memecoin can take a few minutes; offering it legally to the public may involve a very different process. The Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets, or AFM, said on 6 November that the ease of token-launch tools does not set aside the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR). Its warning was directed at people creating and promoting crypto assets, including memecoins, and at consumers susceptible to exaggerated claims of easy profits. The distinction matters to exchanges, token listing platforms and crypto brokers assessing the issuers whose instruments they make available.[1][2]
For a crypto asset within the relevant public-offer rules, the AFM says the person making the offer must generally be a legal entity rather than a private individual. A whitepaper will normally need to be prepared, notified and published. Advertising must be accurate, clear, not misleading and consistent with that document; social-media promotion is not a separate, less regulated channel. The exact treatment depends on the classification of the asset and any applicable exemptions, so this is not a statement that every technical token creation requires the same filing.[1][2]
Verified record, scope and limitations
| Item | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Announcement | AFM press release dated 6 November 2026 |
| Public offer | Relevant MiCAR duties may apply to an offer, not to mere code creation |
| Issuer identity | A legal entity is generally required for offers in scope |
| Disclosure | Whitepaper normally prepared, notified and published; scope and exceptions matter |
| Promotion | Website and social-media statements must be fair, clear and non-misleading |
| Regulatory outcome | AFM can issue warnings, directions or financial penalties |
What exchanges and brokers need to distinguish
A whitepaper notification should not be mistaken for an AFM endorsement of the token’s value or a guarantee that the issuer’s business is sound. That is an important point for intermediary due diligence. A broker deciding whether to distribute an instrument still needs to understand who controls the contract, how the tokens are issued, what holders can actually claim and whether the sales copy matches the terms. A logo, trending price chart or influencer campaign is not evidence of an approved investment.[1][2]
The operational failure mode is straightforward: a launch platform can make token creation almost frictionless while placing the legal responsibility for the public offer elsewhere. Issuers may interpret technical availability as permission to solicit buyers. Intermediaries may then inherit exposure through listing reviews, marketing campaigns or customer complaints if they fail to identify the offeror and its disclosures. The AFM says it may respond to non-compliance with warnings, directions or fines, depending on the circumstances.[1][2]
For investors, the authority recommends checking the issuer’s identity and legal form, the availability and substance of the whitepaper, and the risks stated there. For broker compliance teams, the more useful question is whether those checks can be evidenced at the point of onboarding or listing rather than reconstructed after a customer dispute. The 6 November notice is a supervisory warning about existing legal obligations; it is not an announcement that every memecoin is automatically illegal or that a new MiCAR licensing category began today.[1][2]
Sources & further reading
- Crypto lanceren is makkelijk geworden, voldoen aan de regels niet Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets · 6 Nov 2026 · Accessed 6 Nov 2026
- White papers for crypto assets AFM · 6 Nov 2026 · Accessed 6 Nov 2026