Source: Crowdfund Insider
The European Union has begun a formal review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, with particular attention to its stablecoin provisions and how the framework applies to issuers based outside the bloc. The review, reported on August 8, 2026, focuses on parts of MiCA that govern asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens, the two categories that broadly cover what the market calls stablecoins.
MiCA is the European Union’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for crypto-assets, issuers, and service providers. It was designed to harmonise rules across member states and to bring issuers of digital assets under a single supervisory perimeter. According to Crowdfund Insider, EU officials are positioning the review as a necessary response to gaps that have become more visible since the framework began taking effect.
MiCA’s Stablecoin Framework
The stablecoin portions of MiCA began applying in mid-2024, with remaining requirements for issuers and service providers coming into force later that year. Under the regulation, issuers of asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens operating in or toward the EU market must seek authorisation from a competent authority in a member state. The framework imposes strict reserve, redemption, and disclosure obligations designed to ensure that tokens marketed as stable maintain a credible link between their circulating supply and the assets backing them.
Reserve, Redemption, and Disclosure Rules
The reserve requirements under MiCA are among the most detailed in any major jurisdiction. Issuers must hold liquid reserves that match outstanding token liabilities, segregate those assets from operational funds, and provide holders with redemption rights at par value under defined conditions. Disclosure obligations require regular reporting on reserve composition, custody arrangements, and the risks associated with the token, with the goal of giving investors and supervisors enough information to evaluate the instrument.
The Multi-Issuer Gap
According to Crowdfund Insider, one of the most concrete gaps identified in the current text concerns multi-issuer arrangements. In such structures, the same fungible stablecoin is issued in parallel by an EU-authorised entity and by one or more third-country entities. The article notes that the regulation as written does not explicitly address this configuration, leaving questions about how reserve backing, redemption flows, and supervisory accountability are coordinated across issuers operating under different legal regimes.
Multi-issuer models have become increasingly common as stablecoin issuers expand globally. When a single token trades across venues and wallets regardless of which legal entity minted it, users and counterparties typically assume uniform backing. Regulators, however, may face situations where a token circulating in the EU is partially backed by an EU-authorised issuer and partially by an entity in a third country whose reserve arrangements fall outside MiCA’s direct jurisdiction.
Third-Country Issuers and Market Access
The review is also sharpening attention on third-country issuers more broadly. Under MiCA, non-EU issuers can serve the EU market, but only through structures that meet the regulation’s authorisation, reserve, and disclosure standards. Crowdfund Insider reports that the review is being framed as a way to clarify how those requirements interact with issuers operating from jurisdictions outside the bloc, particularly where local rules differ in scope or enforcement intensity.
EU officials have signalled that the review will examine whether the current framework provides adequate tools for supervisors to oversee cross-border token arrangements without creating regulatory arbitrage. According to Crowdfund Insider, the review is not expected to unwind the authorisation regime but to refine how it applies in practice to non-EU participants.
What the Review Could Change
While specific amendments have not been published, Crowdfund Insider’s reporting points to several areas where the European Commission and European supervisory authorities are likely to focus. These include clarifying the treatment of multi-issuer arrangements, tightening coordination between national competent authorities, and potentially extending disclosure or reporting requirements to third-country issuers that distribute tokens into the EU through partner entities.
Any resulting changes would need to move through the EU’s ordinary legislative process, meaning amendments are unlikely to land quickly. Industry observers cited in the coverage suggest that even technical adjustments to MiCA can take many months once formally proposed, given the involvement of the European Parliament, the Council, and multiple supervisory bodies.
Broader Implications for Non-EU Stablecoins
For stablecoin issuers headquartered outside the European Union, the review introduces a period of regulatory uncertainty even if the underlying authorisation regime remains intact. Firms that have structured their EU presence through local subsidiaries will be watching for clarity on how parent-level operations are treated, while those distributing tokens into the bloc through unregulated channels may face greater pressure to formalise their arrangements.
The review also has implications for crypto-asset service providers that list or distribute stablecoins. Custodians, exchanges, and wallet operators subject to MiCA have spent the past two years aligning onboarding, disclosure, and reserve verification processes with the regulation’s requirements. Any tightening of the framework would likely flow through to those service providers and to the contractual terms they negotiate with issuers.
According to Crowdfund Insider, the formal review reflects a broader pattern in which the EU is treating MiCA as a living framework rather than a finished product. Supervisors have signalled a willingness to refine the regulation as market structures evolve, particularly where new issuance models challenge the assumptions embedded in the original text.
The coming months are likely to bring consultations with industry participants and academic experts, followed by any formal legislative proposals. For non-EU stablecoin issuers with ambitions to serve European users, the message from the MiCA review is that entry to the EU market remains available, but the conditions of that access are still being calibrated.