Europe Reopens Its Crypto Rulebook Less Than Two Years In

MiCA has applied across the European Union since December 2024 and was presented as a single rulebook that would replace a patchwork of national regimes. Less than two years later, the European Commission has reopened it. A targeted consultation on the review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation has been running since 20 May 2026, and the deadline for responses was extended to 30 September.

This is the first formal step in the review process anticipated under Article 140. The Commission is expected to report to the European Parliament and Council by 30 June 2027, potentially alongside a legislative proposal — the thing the market already calls MiCA 2. Any resulting amendments would still need to clear the ordinary legislative procedure, so new rules are unlikely to take effect before 2028.

The interest ban is the interesting question

MiCA prohibits issuers, offerors and service providers from granting interest or any interest-like remuneration on stablecoins. The ban sits in Article 40 for asset-referenced tokens and Article 50 for e-money tokens. The original policy logic was clear enough: an e-money token should be a means of payment, not a store-of-value product competing with bank deposits.

The side effect is that a euro stablecoin issued in the EU is structurally non-remunerated even when the reserves backing it are generating income. The Commission's consultation raises the competitiveness point directly — how EU-issued stablecoins stand against yield-bearing alternatives from other jurisdictions. Industry submissions, including a Blockchain for Europe joint report on reforming MiCA for euro stablecoins, argue the ban pushes users toward foreign-currency tokens or toward yield structures assembled outside the issuer entirely.

The multi-issuer gap

A second question is more technical and arguably more consequential for anyone operating across borders. MiCA's text does not explicitly address multi-issuer arrangements, where the same fungible stablecoin is issued both by an EU-authorised entity and by entities based in third countries. As things stand, non-EU issuers wanting to reach European users generally need to establish a local presence and meet MiCA standards in full.

The consultation asks whether an equivalence regime for third-country stablecoin frameworks should be introduced. Given that the United States is simultaneously building out the GENIUS Act, that is really a question about whether the two largest regulatory blocs will recognise each other's licences or force firms to hold both.

Scope creep, by design

The review is not limited to technical corrections. Stakeholders are being asked whether the perimeter should widen to cover activities currently outside the framework or only partially inside it:

• Staking-as-a-service, lending, and DeFi protocols
• Tokenised deposits and tokenised financial instruments
• Perpetual crypto derivatives and prediction markets
• The overlap between MiCA and the EU payment-services framework — a live commercial issue, since a crypto-asset service provider may find its activities regulated under both at once

Reserve and liquidity requirements, own funds, redemption rights and the significance thresholds that trigger enhanced supervision for stablecoins are all on the table as well.

What to actually expect

Not much, quickly. Responses close at the end of September, the Commission then publishes what it is cleared to publish, and the Article 140 report follows with input from the EBA and ESMA. Anyone promising imminent change is reading the calendar wrong.