Picture a mid-sized German issuer trying to raise capital without printing a single certificate. No paper share register. No wet signatures. Just a line entry on a registry that the law treats as the security itself.
That’s not sci‑fi. It’s Germany’s electronic securities regime, where issuers can choose a traditional central register or a blockchain-like crypto-securities register. And BaFin sits in the middle, watching the plumbing.
The punchline: platforms are live, volumes are real, and the details matter if you don’t want a compliance headache later.
Why Germany Built Crypto Securities Rules
Germany’s Electronic Securities Act (eWpG) replaced paper certificates with legally recognized registry entries. Two paths exist: central electronic registers and crypto-securities registers (Kryptowertpapierregister). The goal is to speed issuance and settlement while keeping investor protection intact.
Germany didn’t legalize any token with a ticker. It legalized specific, regulated securities whose legal existence lives in a supervised register.
Timing-wise, it fits a broader European push to dematerialize assets and open the door to tokenized market infrastructure, without abandoning licensing and audit trails. Issuers, fintech platforms, banks, and investors are all touched by this: who can run the register, how transfers settle, what disclosures apply, and how corporate actions work.
What Counts as an Electronic Security under the eWpG
Under the eWpG, a security can be created electronically by entering it into a designated register instead of issuing a paper certificate. The twist is the crypto-securities register option, which uses a tamper‑proof, chronologically ordered recording system. Section 16 eWpG literally spells out the integrity requirements and the protections against deletion or later modification (Gesetze im Internet — eWpG (German Electronic Securities Act)).
Two registers, two operational models
To keep it straight, here’s how the central electronic register compares with the crypto-securities register in practice:
| Feature | Central Electronic Register | Crypto‑Securities Register |
|---|---|---|
| Legal basis | eWpG central register provisions | eWpG §16 Kryptowertpapierregister integrity rules |
| Record storage | Centralized database maintained by authorized institution | Tamper‑resistant chain‑style system logging entries in order |
| Operator authorization | Supervised firm per German financial law | Operation requires specific BaFin authorization as a financial service under KWG |
| Transparency | Access via intermediaries; not typically public | Register logic can be public or permissioned with auditability |
| Settlement feel | Familiar CSD‑like workflows | Programmable transfers and corporate actions are possible |
| Investor interface | Banks/brokers maintain beneficial positions | Wallets or accounts mapped to legal owners; intermediaries can still sit in the loop |
One thing that doesn’t change: someone must be legally responsible for running the register. The industry association for electronic securities is very direct about this: operating a crypto-securities register is an authorization‑required financial service under §1 Abs. 1a Nr. 8 KWG, and BaFin grants the permit (Bundesverband für elektronische Wertpapiere (EWPG)).
How a BaFin‑supervised Crypto Securities Register Works
Stripping out the buzzwords, the mechanics look like this.
Roles you’ll actually deal with
Issuer: the company raising capital and responsible for disclosures. Registrar: the BaFin‑authorized operator of the crypto-securities register. Placement partner: bank or platform that onboards investors and runs the book. Custody/broker: holds investor assets or maps wallets to owners. Technology provider: the infrastructure behind the register and smart‑contract logic.
From term sheet to tokens: a realistic sequence
- Choose the register route. Decide central register vs crypto‑securities register based on control, programmability, and investor reach.
- Line up authorization. Either partner with a BaFin‑authorized crypto‑securities registrar or, if you’re brave and qualified, seek your own permit. The activity is licensable under KWG per the industry association’s guidance (EWPG).
- Draft the terms. Structure the security, define rights, and ensure the terms fit eWpG and general securities law. Public offers or listings trigger EU prospectus and MiFID II considerations. Private placements can be lighter but still documented.
- Get identifiers. Obtain an ISIN and other identifiers so brokers and reporting systems can recognize the instrument.
- Deploy the register logic. For a crypto register, the registrar stands up the tamper‑proof, chronological recording system as required by eWpG §16 (eWpG text).
- Integrate KYC/AML. Investors are onboarded via the platform or placement bank; wallets or accounts are linked to verified identities.
- Issue into the register. The initial entry creates the electronic security. Allocations are posted to investor addresses or intermediary accounts.
- Post‑trade care. The registrar and placement partner coordinate transfers, corporate actions, and investor communications. If there’s trading, brokers and venues handle suitability and reporting.
Under the hood, the “crypto” element is about the register’s data structure and audit trail, not about trading on a public crypto exchange. The legal life of the instrument is still defined by the eWpG entry and the applicable securities rules.
Who’s Live in 2026: Platforms, Volumes, and Use Cases
This isn’t just a whitepaper economy anymore. A few German platforms publish real numbers.
NYALA’s easyRaise page lists 10,000+ investor wallets, 120+ digital securities issued, and more than €160 million in total issuance volume, stating that its tokens are entered into a BaFin‑supervised crypto‑securities register (NYALA (easyRaise product page)).
ONINO says it runs 8+ live issuance platforms and shows over €35 million in tokenized capital via an eWpG‑compatible stack, citing Cashlink as the BaFin‑supervised crypto‑securities registry integration (ONINO (company blog)).
What these platforms suggest
Primary issuance dominates for now: think tokenized debt, revenue‑linked notes, and structured funding for growth companies or real‑asset vehicles. Secondary liquidity is emerging more slowly, mostly within brokered or permissioned environments where suitability and reporting are manageable.
Investor Experience: Wallets, Keys, and Reporting
Investors care about two things: how they hold the asset and how they get paid.
Self‑custody vs. intermediated holding
Some crypto‑securities registers allow direct wallet holding with on‑chain addresses mapped to verified identities. Others route through a bank or broker account that mirrors holdings in the register. The trade‑off is control versus convenience. Self‑custody feels modern but raises key‑loss and support issues; intermediated custody looks familiar and plugs into tax and reporting rails more easily.
Transfers and settlement feel fast
Because the register is the legal source of truth, a transfer recorded there settles the right itself. You’re not “awaiting a paper certificate.” The registrar’s tamper‑proof, chronological system is built to prevent later modification and unauthorized deletion, honoring the eWpG §16 standard (eWpG).
Coupons, dividends, votes
Corporate actions can be streamlined. With wallet mappings to verified owners, paying agents can automate distributions. Voting can be cleaner when address lists are current and provable. Still, brokers and registrars usually mediate the last mile to make sure payments, withholding, and statements line up with the law in each investor’s jurisdiction.
‘Built & Supervised in Germany’ badge from NYALA’s easyRaise page — visually indicates the platform’s claim that issued tokens are entered in a BaFin‑supervised register (useful evidence of market‑level implementation of eWpG/BaFin supervision). — Source: NYALA Digital Asset AG (site image)
Cross‑Border Reality and the EU Context
Marketing across borders still triggers local rules. In the EU, MiFID II governs investment services, and the EU Prospectus Regulation frames offers to the public and admissions to trading. MiCA is a separate regime for crypto‑assets that are not securities, so it generally doesn’t replace eWpG for instruments that are clearly securities.
In practice, issuers lean on private placements, professional investors, and passporting where available. For regulated trading venues, architecture ranges from CSD‑integrated models to permissioned chain setups, depending on how the register and venue coordinate finality and reporting.
Risks & What Could Go Wrong
- Smart‑contract or register logic bugs that freeze transfers or mis‑assign balances.
- Key management failures for investors opting into self‑custody, leading to lost access.
- Operational downtime at the registrar that delays corporate actions or settlements.
- Regulatory misclassification in cross‑border offers, triggering prospectus or licensing problems.
- Sparse secondary liquidity, especially for smaller private placements, leading to wide bid‑ask spreads.
- Data privacy conflicts if wallet‑to‑identity mappings leak or are mishandled.
- Vendor concentration risk if many issuers depend on one registrar or one tech stack.
- Governance uncertainty in the rare event of a chain fork or necessary data corrections.
A crypto‑securities register is still market infrastructure. When it breaks, it breaks loudly, and usually on a deadline day.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is any blockchain token a “crypto security” under German law?
No. The eWpG framework recognizes specific securities that are issued by entry into a supervised register. If a token isn’t created and maintained in such a register with the right authorizations, it doesn’t gain eWpG status just because it sits on a chain.
Who can operate a crypto‑securities register?
Only a firm with the required authorization. Operating a Kryptowertpapierregister is an authorization‑required financial service under the KWG, with BaFin as the competent authority for the permit, as noted by the industry association (EWPG).
What makes the register “tamper‑proof” in legal terms?
Section 16 eWpG requires a recording system that logs data in chronological order and protects against unauthorized deletion or later modification. That’s the legal test, regardless of whether the technology looks like a public or permissioned chain (eWpG §16).
Do investors need a wallet, or can they use a broker?
Both models exist. Some platforms let investors hold directly in wallets mapped to their identities; others keep positions through a broker or bank account. The legal ownership still hinges on the register entry. Choose based on your support needs and reporting obligations.
How are corporate actions processed?
The registrar and paying agent rely on the register’s current owner list. With wallet mappings, distributions and votes can be automated, but standard controls remain for tax, anti‑money‑laundering checks, and investor communications.
Can issuers switch from a central register to a crypto‑securities register later?
Potentially, but it’s a project. You’d need to follow the legal migration process defined by the register terms and applicable law, coordinate with the registrar, and notify investors. Expect operational work and regulatory review.
What does the market look like today?
Primary issuance is active. Publicly shared figures include NYALA’s report of 10,000+ investor wallets and €160M+ of issuance, and ONINO’s note of €35M+ tokenized across 8+ live platforms, with integrations into BaFin‑supervised registries (NYALA; ONINO).
