Client context
An international crypto exchange had beneficial owners who were tax-resident in Ukraine and was evaluating its operating footprint in Europe and the UAE.
Digital assets · Published scope only
Regulatory and banking architecture for a crypto exchange
Comparing regulated operating routes and banking dependencies for a digital-asset platform with Ukrainian beneficial owners.
Material challenge
European regulatory requirements, bank-account onboarding and lawful owner distributions needed to be addressed as one operating model.
Publication note
Client and counterparty identifiers are withheld. This publication covers the agreed context, scope and approach only; it does not claim an independently verified outcome.
01 / Scope
What is delivered
- Map products, customer markets, transaction flows and responsible entities
- Compare European and UAE regulatory routes
- Assess banking and payment-partner onboarding dependencies
- Review ownership, governance and distribution considerations
02 / Method
Our approach
Separated regulated, operating, treasury and holding functions
Compared Lithuanian, Estonian and UAE routes without presuming approval
Defined evidence, governance and banking workstreams for specialist validation
Related capability
Money Secure
A clear next step
Start with a short, non-confidential brief.
Include the relevant jurisdictions and the decision you need to make. The team will identify the appropriate direction and reply by email.