PayTechTalk 46 – Crypto custody business: Amendments to the KWG in connection with the implementation of the fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive

PayTechTalk 46 | Kryptoverwahrgeschäft | PayTechLaw
Please click here and accept cookies to load the SoundCloud player.

At first glance, the “Act implementing the Amending Directive of the fourth EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive” does not sound particularly exciting, but in fact, it is. Anti-money laundering issues have, contrary to what the name of the act might suggest, hardly made it into the headlines of our FinTech & crypto bubble. What was trending on the other hand, were “Lex Apple Pay“ and “crypto custody business”. The Lex Apple Pay, which will also be the subject of our next PayTechTalk, has already been looked into by my colleague Susanne. Today, we are talking about “crypto custody business” as a new financial service in the German Banking Act (KWG).

What happened so far

At the end of July 2019, the German government presented its first draft law, which has since been the subject of some discussion, along the lines of: Crypto regulation is a step in the right direction. Germany is on the verge of “crypto heaven”. This type of “rushed regulation“ in a national solo effort will only spark disputes. Banks will soon have a whole new area of business. Consumer protectors warned against new “distribution models to the detriment of consumers”. We at PayTechLaw also added our bit to the discussion. In our PayTechTalk No. 44, we criticised Germany’s unilateral approach to crypto regulation as well as the nonsensical separation requirement.

Fortunately, as we know today, the separation requirement did not make it into the final legal text. This is probably due to a recommendation by the second chamber of Parliament, the German Federal Council, so we would like to take this opportunity to say thank you very much, German Federal Council!

Crypto custody business as a new financial service – what now?

The headlines of recent weeks, as well as the adoption of the final text of the law, have prompted us to take another close look at what has actually changed compared to the first draft of the law. Among other things, we consider the question as to why banks (with only a few exceptions) so far do not directly offer crypto values to their customers or keep crypto values for their customers, although they have (always) been legally allowed to do so.

We also dare to make a little prediction as to how the new law will change market conditions and how market participants will react.

I will discuss this and more with our guest today, Hartmut Giesen from Sutor Bank, in what is our 46th episode of PayTechTalk – enjoy!

 

Further information and links:

 

About Hartmut Giesen

Hartmut Giesen: Hartmut has been implementing digital business models for Sutor Bank since 2012. His tasks include Business Development Fintech, digital partners and Crypto/Blockchain, the development and expansion of the Sutor Banking platform as well as the support of internal digitisation projects.

Sutor Bank is the banking-as-a-service partner of successful FinTech companies such as Zinspilot, Growney, Fairr.de and Fintiba. Currently, more than 180,000 customers of digital partners use this banking platform. In addition to platform banking, Sutor Bank is also active in the areas of private banking, foundation management and B2B banking for financial product distributors.

 

Cover picture: Copyright © PayTechLaw



By continuing, you accept our privacy policy.
You May Also Like
Virtuelle IBANs im Visier Was die neue Bafin-Aufsichtsmitteilung für Banken und Zahlungsdienstleister bedeutet Virtual IBANs under BaFin scrutiny: New AML expectations for banks and payment service providers
Read More

Virtual IBANs under BaFin scrutiny: New AML expectations for banks and payment service providers

Virtual IBANs have become an established component of modern payment models. With Supervisory Notice 06/2026, BaFin now clarifies its expectations for credit institutions and payment service providers regarding transparency, anti-money laundering compliance and risk management in complex virtual IBAN structures.
Read More
PFOF-Verbot
Read More

The PFOF ban comes into force: What the new BaFin supervisory statement means for brokers and neobrokers

Since 1 July 2026, the ban on Payment for Order Flow (“PFOF”) has also been in force for purely domestic business relationships in Germany. On 22 July 2026, BaFin published a supervisory statement on this matter, in which it sets out in concrete terms for the first time which business models it considers to be compliant with the rules - and which are not.
Read More
FIU-Jahresbericht 2025 – Wesentliche Entwicklungen im Überblick FIU Annual Report 2025 – Key Developments at a Glance
Read More

FIU Annual Report 2025 – Key Developments at a Glance

Germany's FIU recorded a historic number of suspicious activity reports in 2025, while the number of analytical reports declined significantly. Alongside new regulatory requirements and a stronger international focus, neobanks have emerged as a key pillar of reporting activity. This article analyses the most important developments and highlights the questions that remain unanswered in the annual report.
Read More
EuGH schafft Klarheit: Nicht jede Weiterleitung von Geldern Dritter ist ein Zahlungsdienst im Sinne der PSD2 ECJ Clarifies the Scope of PSD2: Not Every Transfer of Third-Party Funds Constitutes a Payment Service
Read More

ECJ Clarifies the Scope of PSD2: Not Every Transfer of Third-Party Funds Constitutes a Payment Service

The ECJ has further clarified the distinction between payment services and other business models. The judgment confirms that merely receiving and forwarding third-party funds does not automatically trigger licensing requirements under PSD2. The decision provides greater legal certainty for FinTechs, platform operators and other businesses handling payment flows, while emphasising that the specific business model remains decisive.
Read More