#
Austria runs a function-based licensing regime under the Payment Services Act 2018 (ZaDiG 2018, transposing PSD2), the Banking Act (BWG) and the Electronic Money Act 2010 (E-GeldG). The FMA is sole licensing/supervisory authority for payment institutions, PISPs and AISPs; CRR credit institutions are licensed via the ECB/SSM with FMA as national conduit. MiCAR CASP authorisation is now layered on top for crypto-asset firms. No sub-national licensing tier exists; this is a unitary federal-level regime.
Outlook
Formal adoption of PSD3/PSR is expected in the first half of 2026. Transposition into Austrian law would reshape the non-bank PI/EMI authorisation track specifically, while the FMA's newly consolidated sanctions-monitoring role is a standing feature of the licensing and supervisory landscape for both bank and non-bank entities.
Licensing, Authorisation & Market Access
Austria's licensing and market-access picture this cycle was dominated by routine lifecycle activity rather than new-entrant authorisation. The FMA published two licence-lapse notices within the current window. An individual licence held by Peter Arlits lapsed effective 1 October 2026. Separately, a lapsing-of-licence notice was published for Raiffeisenbank Kreuzenstein, a bank-type payment service provider. Both are confirmed directly from the FMA's own primary notices, and both appear to represent ordinary licence-lifecycle management — a licence ceasing to be held — rather than a withdrawal for cause or an enforcement-driven revocation; no indication of a disciplinary basis for either lapse was located this cycle.
The broader licensing context for the window includes the Bybit Payments GmbH EMI authorisation under the E-Geldgesetz 2010 (tracked in the Stablecoins & Digital Money domain), which illustrates that new market-access activity in Austria this cycle concentrated on the e-money/crypto-adjacent licensing route rather than on traditional payment-institution or bank-PSP authorisations. The two lapses recorded here, by contrast, touch the more traditional bank-PSP and individual-licence population, underscoring that licence-lifecycle churn (entries and exits) continues within Austria's established payment-services and banking population even while the more novel authorisation activity is concentrated in the crypto-and-stablecoin-adjacent segment.
Outlook
Neither lapse was accompanied by a successor-firm announcement or market-exit commentary within this window, so whether either lapse reflects a business wind-down, a licence consolidation into another group entity, or a straightforward administrative lapse is not resolvable from the evidence available this cycle. Continued monitoring of FMA licence notices would clarify whether this is an isolated pair of lapses or the start of a broader churn pattern in Austria's licensed-PSP population.
3 earlier distinct update(s)
Licensing, Authorisation & Market Access
Austria's licensing and market-access architecture tightened materially this cycle through a single legislative vehicle: the FMA-independence bill (621 d.B.), which the Finanzausschuss approved on 29 September 2026 and forwarded to the Nationalrat. The bill transposes CRD VI, specifically Directive 2013/36/EU as amended by (EU) 2024/1619, and its headline governance measures are mandatory cooling-off periods for FMA board members moving between regulated industry and the supervisor, annual interest declarations intended to surface conflicts of interest, and a 14-year cap on board tenure. These are institutional-integrity measures aimed at the supervisor itself rather than at licensed entities directly, but they have downstream relevance for every bank and payment institution the FMA licenses, since they shape the independence and continuity of the authority that grants and reviews those licences.
The more operationally significant element for licensed credit institutions is the bill's new notification duty: credit institutions must notify the FMA before executing a transaction that qualifies as prudentially relevant, and the FMA must then assess that transaction for money-laundering and terrorist-financing risk before it is permitted to proceed. This is materially different from the periodic reporting obligations credit institutions are accustomed to; it inserts the supervisor into the transaction-execution chain at the point of decision for a defined category of prudentially significant activity. The precise scope of what counts as prudentially relevant is not established on the evidence available this cycle, and firms will need the Nationalrat's final text, or subsequent FMA guidance, to determine which transactions trigger the duty in practice.
This legislative activity sits on top of an already-consolidated institutional structure. Since 1 January 2026, the FMA has held consolidated supervision and enforcement of national and EU/UN financial sanctions, a mandate absorbed from the Oesterreichische Nationalbank under the Sanktionengesetz 2024. That consolidated mandate extends across banks and insurers to payment institutions, e-money institutions and crypto-asset service providers. The practical effect is that the same authority responsible for sanctions screening across the payments sector will, once the CRD VI bill is enacted, also receive advance notice of prudentially relevant transactions from credit institutions specifically. For banks operating in Austria, this concentrates two related but distinct compliance touchpoints, sanctions screening and prudential transaction notification, within a single supervisory authority, which may in principle streamline cross-referencing between the two functions, though no evidence located this cycle describes how such integration would operate mechanically.
For non-bank payment institutions and e-money institutions, the direct impact of the CRD VI bill is more limited on current evidence: the pre-transaction notification duty as described applies to credit institutions, and no equivalent duty for non-bank payment service providers has been identified in the sources reviewed this cycle. Non-bank licensees should nonetheless track the FMA's broader institutional-independence reforms, since governance changes at the supervisor level can affect licensing-review timelines, supervisory priorities, and the character of ongoing dialogue with the authority across all licence types the FMA administers, not solely credit institutions.
The bill has not yet reached the Nationalrat floor, so its provisions remain prospective rather than in force. The committee vote itself, however, is a strong signal of likely passage: the measure proceeded through the Finanzausschuss alongside a related beneficial-ownership-register novelle on the same date, indicating a coordinated legislative push on institutional-integrity measures this autumn.
Outlook
The FMA-independence bill now moves to the Nationalrat, where enactment would bring both the board-governance reforms and the credit-institution notification duty into force. Firms should watch for the Nationalrat's final text to clarify the prudential-relevance threshold that triggers the new notification duty, since that threshold determines the operational burden the measure will impose on affected credit institutions. Given the consolidated sanctions-supervision mandate the FMA already holds across the broader payments sector, the direction of travel is toward a single supervisory authority with an increasingly integrated view of both sanctions exposure and prudential/AML risk across licensed entities, though the full operational contours of that integration remain to be clarified in subsequent legislative or guidance detail.
Licensing, Authorisation & Market Access
The FMA granted Bybit Payments GmbH a licence as an e-money institution under Section 3(1) in conjunction with Section 4(4) of the E-Geld Act 2010 on 4 August 2026. This authorisation is legally and functionally distinct from Bybit EU GmbH's separate MiCAR crypto-asset-service-provider authorisation, reflecting Austria's ZaDiG 2018 payments licensing architecture operating alongside, but separately from, the MiCAR crypto-licensing track.
The grant illustrates a market-access pattern in which crypto-native firms increasingly pursue dual FMA authorisations, pairing a MiCAR CASP licence for crypto-asset activity with a ZaDiG/E-GeldG payment or e-money institution licence for fiat rails. This dual-track approach brings both sides of a crypto-native firm's business onto Austrian-licensed infrastructure, with the FMA acting as the single supervisory point of contact across both authorisation tracks.
Austria's existing ZaDiG 2018 licensing architecture, which supports EEA-wide passporting for payment and e-money institutions, provides the underlying legal basis for this licensing activity. The Bybit Payments GmbH grant is a confirmed, high-tier-sourced market-access event evidencing this architecture in active operation.
Outlook
Whether additional crypto-native firms pursue the same dual-authorisation pattern — a MiCAR CASP licence paired with a ZaDiG/E-GeldG payments licence — is the key market-access signal to track. Continued growth in this pattern would confirm Austria's positioning as a jurisdiction where crypto and payments licensing regimes are converging under unified FMA supervision.
Licensing, Authorisation & Market Access
Austrian payment institutions are authorised and supervised by the FMA under ZaDiG 2018, the national transposition of PSD2, with EU-wide passporting rights. This remains the operative authorisation framework as of this cycle, confirmed at Probable confidence from a Tier 4 vendor summary. The more significant development is at the EU level: the PSD3/PSR legislative package reached provisional political agreement on 27 November 2025, and would, once transposed nationally, consolidate payment-institution and e-money-institution authorisation under a single supervisory framework. National transposition is expected across 2026-2027, meaning Austrian PIs and EMIs currently operating under ZaDiG 2018 should anticipate a framework transition within this window, though the primary EU legislative text and any FMA-specific transposition guidance were not independently re-verified this cycle — this detail rests on a single Tier 4 source and is held at Probable confidence pending stronger corroboration.
Carrying the bank-PSP versus non-bank payment-institution/e-money-institution distinction explicitly: both bank and non-bank payment institutions in Austria currently operate under the same ZaDiG 2018 authorisation framework, and both categories fall within scope of the PSD3/PSR consolidation once transposed, per this cycle's evidence.
Outlook
The key marker to watch is confirmation of Austria's specific PSD3/PSR transposition timeline and mechanism, ideally sourced directly from the FMA or from the EU legislative text rather than from vendor commentary. Given the provisional political agreement dates from November 2025 and transposition is expected across 2026-2027, this cycle sits early in that transposition window; expect firmer, higher-tier sourcing to become available as national implementing measures are published.
Sources and findings (6)
- T1https://www.fma.gv.at/en/financial-service-providers/payment-institutions/licencing-and-registration-of-payment-services/retrieved
- T1https://www.fma.gv.at/en/financial-service-providers/payment-institutions/retrieved
- T1https://www.fma.gv.at/en/banks/licensing-notification/retrieved
- T3https://vlolawfirm.com/tpost/austria-banking-financeretrieved
- T1https://www.fma.gv.at/en/fma-takes-over-casp-supervision-in-austria/retrieved
- T1https://www.fma.gv.at/en/financial-service-providers/payment-institutions/services-exempted-from-the-scope-of-zadig-2018/retrieved