The EU\u2019s landmark crypto framework is entering its first recalibration phase, barely two years after implementation began.<\/p>\n
On Wednesday (May 20) the European Commission officially opened up to public and institutional comment<\/a> whether the 2024 Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation\u00a0(MiCA) policy framework is still \u201cfit for purpose\u201d as crypto markets evolve. That wording matters. Regulators do not typically reopen flagship frameworks so quickly, unless they believe either that the market moved faster than expected, competitive dynamics have changed, geopolitical pressure is forcing adaptation, or some combination of the three.<\/p>\n MiCA was developed in response to one of the more turbulent periods in crypto history. Between 2021 and 2023, the industry experienced a cascade of failures that reshaped political attitudes globally. The algorithmic stablecoin Terra\/Luna collapsed, the exchange FTX imploded, crypto lenders Celsius and Voyager entered bankruptcy, and billions of dollars in retail wealth evaporated around the globe in, if not one instant, the next. Criminal behavior was never far from the edges of the ecosystem, and crypto markets appeared to policymakers less as engines of innovation and more as vectors of financial instability.<\/p>\n Today, regulators are confronting a digital asset landscape that the industry wants them to view as closer to emerging financial infrastructure, and not the loosely supervised offshore casinos of yore. MiCA was designed for the crypto industry Europe thought it was getting. The commission\u2019s review suggests Brussels is beginning to sense it got a different market entirely.<\/p>\n See also: MiCA Forces Crypto Firms to Get Licensed or Get Out\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n The 2020s Crypto World MiCA Was Designed For<\/p>\n European regulators started laying the groundwork for MiCA in 2018, approaching crypto primarily as a high-risk speculative sector populated by lightly supervised offshore exchanges, unstable stablecoins, and retail investors vulnerable to fraud and manipulation.<\/p>\n Advertisement: Scroll to Continue<\/p>\n European regulators saw:<\/p>\n offshore exchanges using fragmented EU licensing systems Major crypto players such as the Binance exchange faced regulatory problems in EU member nations like France, the Netherlands, Belgium, the U.K. and Germany where authorities investigated money laundering allegations and unauthorized promotion activities.<\/p>\n The rising need for credibility and containment shaped MiCA\u2019s original structure, which focused on:<\/p>\n licensing requirements After all, at the time of MiCA\u2019s development and passage, crypto still sat largely outside institutional finance. Most major banks remained cautious about embracing blockchain, while stablecoins were viewed primarily as either trading vehicles or potential threats to monetary stability. Decentralized finance was influential rhetorically and ideologically but limited economically. As was most of the crypto sector.<\/p>\n One major factor behind the commission\u2019s revisiting of MiCA is that, when MiCA was written, tokenized finance<\/a> still sat at the edge of institutional markets. Today, large financial firms, including the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, have begun integrating blockchain infrastructure<\/a> as a part of the future plumbing of capital markets and moving equities on-chain.<\/p>\n PYMNTS explored the tokenization topic over this past summer in an interview with\u00a0Brett McLain<\/a>, head of payments and blockchain at cryptocurrency exchange\u00a0Kraken<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThe tokenization of real-world assets [has] long been a\u00a0holy grail for crypto<\/a>\u00a0\u2026 making those real-world assets more accessible globally to consumers,\u201d McLain said. \u201cWe want to see that grow into other things like real estate and other tangible assets.\u201d<\/p>\n See also:\u00a0Conditional Charters Pull Crypto Closer to Core of US Banking<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n Why Crypto Regulation Is No Longer Static in 2026<\/p>\n The\u00a0PYMNTS Intelligence<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Citi<\/a>\u00a0report \u201cChain Reaction: Regulatory Clarity as the Catalyst for Blockchain Adoption<\/a>\u201d found that blockchain\u2019s next leap will be shaped by regulation. MiCA initially gave Europe a significant first-mover advantage over other major markets. But fast forward to 2026, and the U.S. has been working to close that gap, aided by the about-face in digital asset policy<\/a> driven by the current U.S. administration.<\/p>\n PYMNTS covered<\/a> this spring how, as the Securities and Exchange Commission<\/a> reportedly<\/a>\u00a0readies a \u201cregulation crypto\u201d proposal, the White House\u2019s\u00a0Council of Economic Advisers<\/a> publishes a stablecoin report with findings that potentially land more on the side of crypto firms than traditional banks, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation<\/a> (FDIC) aligns with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency<\/a> on a\u00a0prudential framework<\/a> for FDIC-supervised, permitted stablecoin issuers, it appears that, at least by any historical measure, crypto\u2019s relationship with regulators in the U.S. has matured from adversarial to iterative.<\/p>\n Recent guidance from U.S. federal regulators\u00a0opens the door<\/a>\u00a0to products that have long been discussed but rarely implemented at scale: deposit tokens that move across internal blockchains, regulated stablecoins backed by bank balance sheets and tokenized assets that settle with the same confidence as traditional cash and securities.<\/p>\n See also: Crypto Embraces Regulator-in-the-Loop Strategy as Federal Rules Roll Out<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n In response, MiCA, which was designed to boost trust, reinforce financial stability, and, not incidentally,\u00a0elevate the euro\u2019s<\/a>\u00a0role in\u00a0digital finance<\/a>, is now entering a more muscular phase of implementation where Europe increasingly faces a strategic competitiveness question. Can it remain attractive for crypto innovation while maintaining one of the world\u2019s most prescriptive compliance regimes?<\/p>\n The concern is especially relevant in stablecoins, where Europe\u2019s ambition for digital financial sovereignty is colliding with market reality. Dollar-linked stablecoins continue to dominate globally, reinforcing the dollar\u2019s influence across digital finance. Euro-denominated stablecoins, by contrast, remain comparatively fragmented and underdeveloped.<\/p>\n Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, said earlier this month that rising use of dollar stablecoins in Europe posed a \u201clegitimate concern that risks entrenching dollar dependency,\u201d while expressing\u00a0some hesitancy<\/a>\u00a0about a euro stablecoin as well. And French Finance Minister Roland Lescure last month called on European banks to develop more\u00a0euro-based stablecoins<\/a>\u00a0to reduce the region\u2019s reliance on non-EU payment providers.<\/p>\n On Wednesday (May 20), news broke<\/a> that the euro-pegged stablecoin project Qivalis<\/a>\u00a0has reportedly picked up the support of 25 new banks.<\/p>\n MiCA was designed primarily around crypto-native market participants such as exchanges, custodians and token issuers. It was not necessarily designed for a future in which major banks issue tokenized assets directly or where conventional financial products migrate onto blockchain rails. The commission\u2019s consultation effectively acknowledges this reality.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The EU\u2019s landmark crypto framework is entering its first recalibration phase, barely two years after implementation began. On…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":89177,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[104],"tags":[211,210,47231,327,17333,29719,38,20025,35830,47232],"class_list":["post-89176","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-brussels","tag-belgium","tag-brussels","tag-crypto-regulation","tag-eu","tag-featured-news","tag-mica","tag-news","tag-pymnts-news","tag-stablecoins","tag-tokenization"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@dk\/116616336877599697","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89176","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=89176"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89176\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/89177"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=89176"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=89176"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/dk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=89176"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\ninsufficient KYC\/AML controls
\nsanctions risks tied to Russia and the Middle East<\/p>\n
\nreserve standards
\ngovernance rules
\ndisclosure obligations
\nconsumer protection safeguards<\/p>\n