Before you issue. Before you tokenise. Before the regulator asks.

Run the pre-issuance compliance pathway on a tokenised real-world asset. Pick the asset class, jurisdiction, investor scope, token mechanics, disclosure regime, and custody tier. The lab returns a definitive classification (security / asset-referenced token / EMT / utility / commodity), a regulatory pathway (registered / exempt / unauthorised), and a per-line findings list the issuer's counsel can use as the pre-mortem before going on-chain.

Zero PII · Client-side Heuristic model · not legal advice. Counsel review required. Last Reviewed · 2026-05-13

MiCA · Howey · MAS · FINMA — multiple framings converge

Tokenised RWA sits across four distinct legal framings. EU MiCA (Regulation (EU) 2023/1114) splits crypto-assets into asset-referenced tokens (ART), e-money tokens (EMT), and a residual category — but Title II carves out financial instruments under MiFID II, which absorbs most tokenised securities. The US SEC applies the Howey test (SEC v. W.J. Howey Co., 1946) and Reves/family-resemblance for notes; recent enforcement against Coinbase (2023), Binance (2023), Kraken (2024), and BlockFi (2023) underline that crypto-wrappers do not change the underlying economic substance. Singapore MAS distinguishes Capital Markets Products (under SFA) from Digital Payment Tokens (PSA); Swiss FINMA classifies into payment / utility / asset tokens (2018 ICO guidelines).

Sources: EU 2023/1114 (MiCA) · MiFID II Annex I · SEC v. Howey 328 U.S. 293 (1946) · MAS SFA + PSA · FINMA Guidelines on ICO (Feb 2018) · UK FCA Crypto-Asset Guidance (PS19/22)

Value at risk · pre-issuance compliance failure

SEC enforcement: Coinbase 2023 ($100M+ NYDFS+SEC), Kraken 2024 ($30M staking), BlockFi 2023 ($100M) — issuance shutdowns + customer refunds

Tokenised-RWA enforcement plays out across two distinct exposures. Civil penalties: under Securities Act §5 / §17(a), an unregistered offering exposes issuers to disgorgement of proceeds + civil penalties (Section 20(d)); under MiCA Article 92 the ceiling is €5M or 12.5% of total turnover, whichever is higher. Operational shutdowns: SEC cease-and-desist orders typically force the issuer to wind down the offering, refund investors, and re-register or qualify for an exemption — multi-quarter delays that often kill the product economics. The mandate binds the pre-issuance pathway determination so the issuance runtime cannot proceed beyond a flagged-bad pathway without explicit override.

Securities Act §5, §17(a), §20(d) · MiCA Art. 92 · SEC v. Coinbase (Jun 2023) · SEC v. Kraken / staking (Feb 2024) · BlockFi SEC settlement (Feb 2022) · NYDFS / Coinbase consent (Jan 2023)

§1 · Asset Class —

What is being tokenised

The underlying-asset class drives the baseline classification and which exemption pathways are even available.

§2 · Issuing Jurisdiction —

Where the issuer is regulated

Multiple jurisdictions can apply (issuer / listing / investor); this selects the primary regulator whose framework anchors the pathway.

§3 · Investor Scope & Token Mechanics

Who buys, how the token moves

Investor scope

Token mechanics

Blacklist / freeze controls

§4 · Disclosure & Custody

Offering form and backing-asset safekeeping

Disclosure regime

Backing-asset custody

§5 · Pathway Determination — / 100

Classification & route

Pathway · pending

—

Readiness

—

composite

Penalty exposure

—

if pathway breached

Findings

AP2 v1.0 · valid · @ainumbers.co/rwa-readiness-v1

Compose with

Pair with #8 — Stablecoin Issuer Readiness (every tokenised RWA touches the issuer's stablecoin redemption surface) or #15 — VASP Travel Rule (RWA transfers between VASPs still trigger R.16). The mandate emitted here is consumable by #27 — Agentic Mandate Sandbox via custom-schema paste. Position: Tool Chain Composer, T63 / T66 in the DLT & Tokenization cluster.