Insights / Infrastructure

Licensed partner network or your own licence: choosing a programme model for stablecoin and payment services

How exchanges, fintechs and licensed institutions can launch accounts, conversion and payments under two different programme models, who carries which regulatory responsibility, and why EU/EEA end users need an EU-authorised provider.

When an exchange, wallet, payment platform or fintech adds accounts, stablecoin conversion or cross-border payments, the first decision is usually not about features. It is about permissions. Who holds the permission for each service, and whose name is on the customer agreement? Who approves the customer, and who answers to the supervisor?

Technology access does not, by itself, give anyone a financial permission. The answer depends on the programme model.

Two ways to run a programme

Licensed partner network. The client brings its brand, its users and its distribution. Services that need a permission, such as accounts, conversion, digital-asset services and payments are provided by a named operator or provider that holds the required permission, under that provider's own terms. The provider approves end users and runs its own controls for those services. The client designs the experience and serves its customers within what the provider has approved.

This model suits businesses that want to launch without holding every permission themselves, or that want to test a market before applying for their own authorisation.

Independent institution programme. The client itself holds a licence or registration in its home market, such as a payment institution, money services business or virtual-asset service provider. It uses the technology for its own licensed activity. It keeps its own customer relationships, accounts and eligible inventory, and its own compliance obligations. The technology supports the workflow, but the responsibility stays with the institution.

This model suits licensed institutions, OTC desks and brokers, and established exchanges that already hold the permissions for their markets.

The EU/EEA is different

In the European Union, the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) requires crypto-asset service providers to be authorised. Since 30 December 2024, MiCA has applied to crypto-asset service providers. The transitional period that some Member States allowed for existing providers ended on 1 July 2026 at the latest. The European supervisory authorities' consumer warning of October 2025 tells EU consumers to check that a provider is authorised in the EU.

The practical consequence for programme design is simple: a licence held outside the EU does not cover EU/EEA end users. An independent institution model built on a non-EU licence covers non-EU customers only. For EU/EEA end users, crypto-asset services must come from an EU-authorised provider. Through the licensed partner network, that means a separately authorised EU provider, under its own customer terms; the services actually available are shown when the end user applies. Which services are available to a given EU customer is shown when they apply. Some stablecoins are not available to EU customers.

A responsibility map

Before choosing a model, map each service to the party responsible for it:

QuestionLicensed partner networkIndependent institution
Who holds the permission for the service?The named operator or permission-holding providerThe institution
Who approves end users?The provider, under its own termsThe institution
Whose compliance programme applies?The provider's, with client cooperationThe institution's
Who owns the customer relationship?Shared, set out in the programme agreementThe institution
Where do EU/EEA end users go?A separately authorised EU provider onlyOnly an EU-authorised arrangement; a non-EU licence alone is not enough

Two further points tend to come up in due diligence:

  • Programmes do not share. One programme's accounts, balances, liquidity and approvals are not available to another programme.
  • Approval is service by service. Being approved for one service, such as conversion, does not mean approval for another, such as collecting payments from third parties.

Questions to settle early

  1. Which markets will your end users live in? Draw the EU/EEA boundary first.
  2. Will you serve individuals, businesses or both? Business programmes add KYB, ownership checks and, where offered, collections from and payouts to third parties. Third-party flows are typically more restricted than own-name flows.
  3. Do you already hold permissions for these services in your home market? If yes, the independent model may fit for that market. If no, the licensed partner network may be the starting point.
  4. Who handles complaints, disputes and supervisory requests for each service?
  5. What evidence will your own partners and auditors expect to see?

Where Axora fits

Axora is a financial technology platform. It supports both programme models with its Local Accounts & Collections, Fiat & Stablecoin Conversion, Global Payments, and API & White-label modules. A white-label app and operations dashboard are available. Programmes through the licensed partner network, and their services, are set up on approval. Independent institution programmes, API access and institution liquidity are available by qualification. There is no fixed timeline for either.

Next steps

Sources

  1. European Securities and Markets Authority, "Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA)" (page last updated 7 October 2026) · European Securities and Markets Authority · checked 10 October 2026
  2. EBA, EIOPA and ESMA, "EU Supervisory Authorities warn consumers of risks and limited protection for certain crypto-assets and providers", 6 October 2025 · EBA · checked 10 October 2026
  3. European Banking Authority, "The EBA issues 'travel rule' guidance to tackle money laundering and terrorist financing in transfers of funds and crypto assets", 4 July 2024 · European Banking Authority · checked 10 October 2026

Related reading