Which tax reporting obligations apply to my entity?
A licence is not a reporting test. The same legal entity can be CRS only, CARF and DAC8 only, both, or neither — and the answer turns on what it does for customers, not what its authorisation is called. Thirty-one entity and activity combinations, each with the fact that decides it.
Amended CRS · CARF · DAC8 · 31 combinations · the deciding fact, not just the answer · nothing stored
Find your combination
Runs in your browser · nothing uploadedFilter by what the entity is and what it does. Where a row is marked fact-dependent, the reason column carries the qualification — that is the honest state of the rule, not a hedge. Each row links to the tool that settles it properly.
Scope is the first question. The file is the recurring one. The tax transparency modules cover CRS, DAC2, FATCA and CARF/DAC8 from one data layer, with separate regulator-ready outputs — and a free tier to start.
Create free account →Ask what it does, not what it is called
Both frameworks are activity tests wearing entity labels. Reading the licence instead of the activity is how firms arrive at the wrong answer confidently.
Is it a Reporting Financial Institution?
Depository, custodial, investment entity or specified insurance company. A MiFID authorisation does not answer it, and an entity can satisfy the test with no banking permission at all.
Does it effect crypto transactions for users?
Exchange between crypto and fiat, between crypto-assets, or transfers for customers. Holding crypto on your own account is not service provision, and being unlicensed does not put you outside the test.
Both can be true at once
The frameworks were designed as separate but complementary, and some entities report under both. The anti-duplication rules matter precisely because dual status was expected, not treated as an edge case.
An exclusion is often a redirection
Specified e-money and CBDCs are excluded from CARF because they sit in the amended CRS instead. Reading that exclusion as an exemption produces a firm that reports nothing and should report something.
Reviewed 25 August 2026 · source: OECD consolidated CRS text and amended definitions; CARF rules and commentary; Council Directive (EU) 2023/2226 (DAC8), Annex VI; OECD CRS and CARF FAQs
Where the frameworks hand assets to each other
These four rules move a product or a proceed from one framework to the other. They are the part most scope assessments miss, because each looks like an exemption from where you are standing.
| Item | CARF position | CRS position | Practical effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Specified electronic money | Excluded | Within Depository Account concepts where the product qualifies | An e-money issuer reads “excluded from CARF” and concludes it reports nothing. It may have become a CRS reporter instead. |
| Central bank digital currency | Excluded | Within CRS where the account criteria are met | CBDC was allocated to the account framework deliberately. It is not a gap between the two. |
| Tokenised security that cannot be transferred disintermediated | Generally not a crypto-asset for CARF | Reported through the Financial Asset framework | The transferability question decides the framework, not the fact that the instrument is tokenised. |
| Gross proceeds reported under CARF | Reported as disposals | CRS gross-proceeds reporting may be switched off | Optional and jurisdiction-dependent. Requires the two engines to see each other, so the check belongs in the shared layer. |
Reallocation runs in both directions and is the main source of double reporting and of missed reporting in dual-regime entities.
What this matrix does
It is a scope framework, not a classification engine. It narrows the question and tells you which test settles it.
It doesNarrow the question and name the deciding fact
- Sets out thirty-one entity and activity combinations across the amended CRS and CARF or DAC8.
- States the fact each row turns on, rather than only the outcome.
- Marks rows as determinate or fact-dependent, so a soft answer is visible as one.
- Handles the reallocation rules that move e-money, CBDCs and tokenised assets between frameworks.
- Links each row to the decision tool that resolves it.
- Covers DAC8’s reach over operators outside the EU serving EU users.
It does notClassify your entity or apply local law
- Classify a legal entity under Section VIII, or decide Reporting CASP status.
- Resolve a fact-dependent row — those need entity-specific analysis.
- Apply any jurisdiction’s implementing legislation, deadlines or filing mechanics.
- Cover FATCA, DAC7 or CESOP obligations that may apply to the same entity.
- Account for activities carried on by other entities in the same group.
- Constitute tax advice.
Found your row? Settle it properly
The classification tests and the Reporting CASP test are where the answer is actually made. The matrix points; those tools decide.
Nothing you select here leaves your browser
The filters run entirely in your own browser. No selection is sent to REGREP, written to a log, saved to a database, or passed to any analytics tool.
Reload the page and everything is gone. Classification, due diligence and file generation happen inside your account, under our data processing agreement.
About scope across the two frameworks
Does a MiCA authorisation mean we report under CARF?
Not by itself, and the reverse also holds. CARF and DAC8 turn on whether the entity effects exchanges between crypto-assets and fiat, exchanges between crypto-assets, or transfers for customers, as a business. An authorised firm doing none of those has no CARF reporting, and an unauthorised operator doing them is not outside the framework because it lacks a licence.
We are a CASP. Do we also report CRS?
Only if a separate product or activity makes the entity a Reporting Financial Institution. Exchange service alone does not, and the amended CRS was drafted to avoid treating it as Investment Entity activity. Where the same entity also takes deposits, holds financial assets for others, or manages portfolios, the CRS tests are answered on that activity independently.
Our product is excluded from CARF. Are we done?
Check where the exclusion sends it. Specified electronic money and CBDCs are excluded from CARF because the amended CRS covers them instead. Reading the exclusion as an exemption is the most common way a firm concludes it has no obligation at all when it has acquired a new one.
We hold crypto on our own balance sheet. Does that create reporting?
Being a crypto-asset user is not being a reporting service provider. A corporate treasury buying for its own account, or a fund holding its own portfolio, is not providing a relevant service to customers. The CRS question can still arise separately, through the Investment Entity tests.
We are outside the EU but have EU customers. Does DAC8 reach us?
It can. DAC8 extends beyond MiCA-authorised EU providers to crypto-asset operators with the relevant nexus to the Union, subject to registration rules. Being established elsewhere is not on its own an answer, and the registration mechanics are set at Member State level.
Why are so many rows marked fact-dependent?
Because they are. Staking and lending platforms, discretionary crypto managers and payment processors handling crypto all turn on the service model rather than the entity label, and a matrix that presented them as settled would be misleading. The reason column carries the qualification, and the linked tool works the test through properly.
Do you store what I select?
No. The filters run in your browser and nothing is recorded when you close or reload the page.
Scope decides once. The filing repeats.
Create a free account and run CRS, DAC2, FATCA and CARF from one data layer, with separate outputs for each regime that applies.
No card required · free tier on core modules · nothing stored from this matrix