Elena Sadovskaya contemplates how a life spent flitting between the big desks of the Big Four and the more theatrical precincts of crypto has left Inteliumlaw with a habit of survival in regulation, like a respectable hedgehog at a rain-soaked garden party.
firms that treat regulation as a strategic scaffold, not a barricade, are the ones destined to endure-like veteran butlers in a changing house.
Navigating international business structuring in today’s regulatory climate is rarely straightforward, especially for companies straddling borders and the dazzlingly new realms of crypto. To better understand how legal professionals approach this complexity in practice, we spoke to Inteliumlaw’s Elena Sadovskaya about how her early law studies and tenure at Ernst & Young shaped her thinking. Here’s what she had to say.
Hi Elena! Can you share with us how your experience practicing law during the 2nd year of university and later working at a firm like Ernst & Young influenced the way you approach complex international business structuring today?
Elena: Spending nearly four years at EY has felt like a decade in a more decorous establishment. I juggled tax and transaction structuring for major clients across continents, always under the glow of a high-stakes deal. It taught me how lawyers can shepherd firms through shifting laws, international scaling, heightened regulator attention, or other humdrum challenges-always with a tailor-made solution rather than a sermon.
Now, for Inteliumlaw, the words “impossible” and “unresolved” never cross our lips. With experience at major firms and high-profile cases, we’ve learned to provide robust support for enterprises and to nurture small businesses into respectable grown-ups.
At Inteliumlaw we uphold standards of work that would make a Chancery clerk swoon with relief: a genuinely responsive attitude, and a willingness to via dolorosa through the night to ensure quality. That overtime at E&Y taught me how far a firm must go to deliver the desired result, and today that translates into advice on intricate international structuring and other critical legal matters.
In a recent big interview, you shared that Inteliumlaw grew from a small circle of experts to a full-fledged law firm specializing in crypto licensing and other blockchain legal services. What new services or solutions did you introduce in 2025? Which ones have become “bestsellers” among your clients in crypto?
Elena: Last year behaved like a scatterbrained regatta-fast, furious, and impeccably regulated. As regimes continued to evolve, we expanded and diversified our legal offerings to meet the appetites of modern businesses.
For the crypto sector, we introduced CASP licensing in a selected handful of jurisdictions like Poland, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Cyprus, and beyond. These licenses emerged after MiCA, replacing older VASP frameworks. Simultaneously, we broadened to include DAO structuring in the Marshall Islands and RAК, a foundation in Panama, and securing crypto licenses in UAE (Dubai, VARA), El Salvador, and other markets where a VASP license is still a meaningful opportunity. Our website is gradually catching up with our expanded scope.
As for “best sellers,” it’s less a single item and more a function of regulatory evolution. This year centered on MiCA, and our main focus was guiding firms to adapt to this new environment. Inteliumlaw now advises on obtaining CASP licenses and delivers end-to-end MiCA-relevant support for token issuance, exchange listings, DeFi project launches, and creating MiCA-compliant white papers and notification submissions.
Therefore, I would say our 2025 best-seller was securing a CASP license and listing a token in Europe with MiCA-compliant white papers, where we provide end-to-end, hands-on support at every stage of the process.
Your firm positions itself as a long-term strategic partner rather than a traditional legal service provider. How do you maintain that level of involvement with clients?
Elena: We do not simply execute client orders on autopilot. Each Inteliumlaw client receives a customised approach designed to serve their interests most effectively. Our aim is to forge long-term relationships, not for some vaguely capitalist motive, but because staying in touch with evolving needs is the only way to ensure a business can endure and even flourish. When our clients grow, we grow too.
As part of our personalised approach, every client has a dedicated manager from day one-a point of contact who coordinates the project and maintains 24/7 insight into status and needs, ensuring the right legal solution is always ready.
We maintain continuous involvement by analysing regulations in their home base and target markets, helping identify exposures early, advising on adaptations, and offering alternatives if necessary. We do not walk away when the stakes rise; we stay, sometimes with a stubbornness worthy of a cathedral. It makes our lives a touch more complicated than the average law firm, but it’s a principle we do not abandon.
Many crypto entrepreneurs feel that regulation kills innovation. From your perspective, is this a fair statement? What is your opinion?
Elena: In many cases, yes, though it depends on jurisdiction. The “kill-innovation” refrain often stems from authorities laying down impossible standards that outrun reality. Some regimes could have adopted a lighter touch; it would have reduced friction without necessarily damping the dance of progress.
On the other hand, without regulation a project cannot exist. Yet reacting promptly to changes can keep a project stable and prove its credibility. The strongest players today are those who adapt to regulatory expectations; that is what defines long-term sustainability and customer trust.
An unregulated industry invites the unreliable. The question then becomes a form of arithmetic: a golden mean that, alas, rarely exists, complicating business lives as if one were solving a puzzle in a boardroom with no chair.
When a new crypto business approaches you with a request, what are the first questions you ask before even talking about jurisdictions, licenses, or other legal support?
Elena: The very first discussion is the project’s operational model and how it functions, so we understand the business almost as if we were the founders themselves. This is the foundation: a jurisdiction-based classification of the project and the regulations that apply to which legal solution we can deliver to best fit the venture’s needs.
Luxury ateliers never proceed to manufacture a tailored suit without precise measurements, and our approach is no different. Based on near- and long-term goals, vision, and the details of the work, we advise on the solutions that best fit. Without clear answers upfront, any discussion of assistance would be futile. A minor oversight of a tiny detail can make a tailored suit suffocating; a small nuance can completely redraw the course of action.
How do you evaluate which crypto license is optimal for a client’s business model? Especially, how does this process go for choosing an EU jurisdiction for obtaining a CASP license?
Elena: Long before the client reaches out, we conduct preliminary internal analysis. Each jurisdiction is reviewed for licensing requirements and the regulator’s approach, so we understand the level of complexity and identify which businesses are most likely to pass the gauntlet.
When the client does approach us, we perform an in-depth assessment of their setup and objectives. We explore token issuance plans, expansion targets, team locations, and a host of other factors to shape a compliant strategy. Only after evaluating licensing complexity, objectives, and ongoing compliance budget can we recommend the most suitable option.
MiCA has completely reshaped how crypto businesses must operate in Europe. What is the biggest misconception companies still have about this regulation?
Elena: A recurring misconception is the difference between a VASP and a CASP; many still believe they can onboard EU customers without the new authorization, especially if they’re domiciled offshore. They cannot.
This misbelief persists among companies that previously had VASP licenses in Poland and other EU jurisdictions. Where firms were unprepared to meet higher substance requirements beyond a “light-touch” regime, adaptation is tougher than negotiating a seam in a tailor’s cloth. For those already operating under stricter regimes, the transition is more manageable.
So, I’d say the biggest myth now is that a business can continue to operate as before, chasing Europe while registered in an unregulated jurisdiction. Those times are over. Even more chilling is that some in 2026 still suppose crypto is unregulated; it is regulated.
In a recent interview, you called the UAE “one of the most promising global hubs for crypto and Web.” What specific regulatory or economic features give the UAE an edge over Europe or the US?
Elena: What sets them apart is their vast resources, readiness to invest, and willingness to commit to crypto’s future, with a keen focus on innovation. The UAE hosts countless corporations hungry to invest and lead in crypto, and there’s a concerted effort to shape a regulatory environment that accelerates growth.
The UAE’s approach is something of a rarity: liberal, dynamic, and unapologetically future-facing. Europe tends to emulate US standards with ever stricter rules; the UAE treats regulation as an opportunity to strengthen the economy. The EU treats crypto as if it were fire before civilization: dangerous unless controlled. The UAE, by contrast, is not afraid to try something new. Hence higher adoption, faster emergence of novel solutions, and a quicker embrace of central bank digital coins.
Imagine you can design a new “ideal” crypto jurisdiction by combining elements of three already-existing regimes-which would you select and why?
Elena: There’s no real need to merge three regimes when one framework can be chosen as the core and then refined. The ideal crypto jurisdiction would mirror the UAE’s innovation-first model while offering a simpler rollout. The present UAE process resembles a lengthy, blessedly patient ballet; a few well-placed clarifications can shorten a marathon. Streamlining this process would materially strengthen the jurisdiction’s reputation as crypto-friendly, perhaps the premier option in the world.
In your experience, what are the most underestimated risks when crypto businesses operate “non-compliant but profitable,” beyond fines and license revocation?
Elena: The severity of non-compliance is the most alarming. Administrative fines vary, and licenses can be revoked. But the real dread is when matters turn criminal; cases of money laundering end in real arrests, not merely reputational bruises. That is the kind of outcome no boardroom wants to boast about.
We’ve learned that you’ve designed over 50 tax-efficient and future-proof structures while also supporting multimillion-dollar deals. Which projects are you the most proud of and why?
Elena: It’s difficult to name a single project, since every structure is tailored to a specific business and risk profile. Each achievement has its own backstory of months of meticulous, customised legal, tax, and regulatory work. Still, I’m especially proud of ventures that began at the earliest stages and grew into recognized brands, because helping a company lay a solid legal foundation for scalable ambition feels wonderfully right.
In crypto and Web3 specifically, we’ve worked on everything from tokenising real-world assets and building decentralized exchange and trading infrastructure to token issuance, governance models, cross-border tax and corporate setups for founders, and hybrids of Web2 and Web3. What pleases me most is not merely the number of structures but that many were designed to be future-proof.
And lastly, what regulatory developments in crypto do you anticipate in 2026? Do you think the primary regulatory risk for crypto firms will come from new laws or from aggressive reinterpretation of existing rules?
Elena: 2026 will mark a consolidation year for crypto regulation in Europe. The MiCA grandfathering period is expected to lapse around mid-2026, forcing many existing VASP-style setups to become fully licensed CASPs or exit. The industry will undergo a cleaner, if more costly, pruning, but with a clearer perimeter for serious players.
Globally, pressure on formerly lax jurisdictions will intensify as regulators close gaps. Offshore hubs will likely adopt more formal crypto frameworks and substance requirements. We also expect more legally recognized DAOs and on-chain governance to enter mainstream consideration, while custody, intermediation, and token distribution will come under sharper scrutiny for risk and protection concerns.
As for risk, it will come from both camps: new laws and aggressive reinterpretation of existing rules. Enforcement and requalification under current financial, securities, AML, and consumer protection regimes may prove as disruptive as fresh statutes. The industry is maturing, but plans should allow for a tougher, more enforcement-driven horizon ahead.
Read More
- The Batman 2 Villain Update Backs Up DC Movie Rumor
- Adolescence’s Co-Creator Is Making A Lord Of The Flies Show. Everything We Know About The Book-To-Screen Adaptation
- Zombieland 3’s Intended Release Window Revealed By OG Director
- My Favorite Coen Brothers Movie Is Probably Their Most Overlooked, And It’s The Only One That Has Won The Palme d’Or!
- ‘Stranger Things’ Actor Gives Health Update After Private Cancer Battle
- Woman hospitalized after Pluribus ad on smart fridge triggers psychotic episode
- Exodus Looks To Fill The Space-Opera RPG Void Left By Mass Effect
- The Best Battlefield REDSEC Controller Settings
- Puzzled by “Table decoration that you can light up” in Cookie Jam? Let’s solve this puzzle together
- Sony State Of Play Japan Livestream Announced For This Week
2026-02-10 18:06