All news is rigorously fact-checked and reviewed by leading blockchain experts and seasoned industry insiders.
- The ECB and EU national central banks want MiCA’s mandatory bank-deposit floor for stablecoin reserves removed.
- Central banks argue large stablecoin redemptions could turn issuer deposits into a source of sudden funding stress for commercial banks.
- Their alternative would put greater emphasis on highly liquid assets that mature or can be converted into cash within one to five working days.
Europe’s central banks want to rethink one of MiCA’s main stablecoin safeguards before euro-denominated tokens become large enough to create a new source of stress for the banking system.
The European Central Bank and the national central banks of all 27 EU member states are calling for the removal of mandatory minimum bank-deposit requirements for stablecoin issuers, according to a joint position reported by Reuters on September 22.
Under the current Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, issuers of e-money tokens generally must keep at least 30% of reserve assets as deposits with credit institutions. For significant e-money tokens, that threshold rises to 60%.
The requirement is intended to ensure issuers have readily available funds to meet redemptions. Central banks are now questioning whether forcing such a large share of reserves into commercial banks simply moves liquidity risk from the stablecoin issuer to the banking system.
A Stablecoin Run Could Become a Bank Funding Shock
A stablecoin issuer holding billions of euros in bank accounts can look like a valuable source of deposits during normal market conditions.
That relationship can reverse quickly during a run.
If token holders redeem in large numbers, the issuer needs cash to repay them. Drawing down its reserve deposits then removes funding from the banks holding those balances, potentially at the same time that broader financial markets are under stress.
ECB research has highlighted the unusual characteristics of these deposits. Unlike conventional retail balances, stablecoin reserves can move rapidly in response to issuance and redemptions and may be concentrated among relatively few banks.
The result is a direct transmission channel between digital-asset markets and bank funding.
MiCA’s existing structure reduces one risk for the issuer. With 60% of reserves already held as deposits, a significant stablecoin can meet substantial redemptions without immediately selling securities into falling markets.
But the same liquidity buffer becomes a potential liability for the receiving bank when those deposits are withdrawn.
That is the trade-off the ECB and national central banks now want EU policymakers to reconsider.
Central Banks Want Liquidity, Not a Deposit Quota
Their alternative changes the emphasis from where reserves are held to how quickly they can become cash.
Rather than requiring a predetermined share to remain in commercial-bank accounts, the central banks favor greater use of highly liquid assets that mature or can be made available within one to five working days.
That could give issuers more room to hold short-dated securities instead of concentrating reserves in bank deposits.
The difference is significant.
Bank deposits provide immediate liquidity and reduce the need to sell assets when redemptions accelerate. Short-dated securities can reduce stablecoin issuers’ dependence on individual banks, but they introduce their own market and liquidation considerations if cash is required before maturity.
A revised framework would therefore still need to define which assets qualify, how quickly reserves must mature and how much immediately available liquidity an issuer must maintain.
The proposal is not an argument for smaller reserves. It is an attempt to change their composition and maturity profile.
Why the ECB Is Acting Before Euro Stablecoins Get Bigger
The immediate exposure remains relatively small.
ECB data put the capitalization of euro-denominated stablecoins at around €450 million in January 2026, compared with approximately €50 million at the beginning of 2024. Dollar-denominated stablecoins were already worth roughly $300 billion.
The difference means the current banking impact of euro stablecoin reserves is limited. But the existing MiCA formula becomes much more consequential as issuance grows.
Consider a significant euro stablecoin with €1 billion in reserve assets. Under a 60% minimum, at least:
- €1 billion × 60% = €600 million
would need to sit with credit institutions.
At €10 billion, that becomes:
- €10 billion × 60% = €6 billion
in mandatory bank deposits.
Those balances could make a large stablecoin issuer an important wholesale depositor for the banks holding its reserves. Unlike conventional deposits, however, the money could leave rapidly if token holders redeem at scale.
ECB is therefore focusing on the structure before euro stablecoins reach a size where reserve movements themselves become material to individual banks.
Changing MiCA Would Require EU Lawmakers
The central banks cannot remove the requirement on their own.
The existing MiCA thresholds remain applicable unless the European Union changes the legislation. The joint position instead gives policymakers a central-bank argument for revisiting the framework as MiCA undergoes review.
Any replacement would have to balance two competing objectives: ensuring stablecoin issuers can honor redemptions quickly while preventing their reserves from becoming a volatile source of funding for commercial banks.
That shifts the next regulatory debate toward the details.
EU policymakers would need to determine which short-dated assets can qualify as reserves, how much liquidity must mature within one to five working days and what portion should remain immediately accessible.
For issuers, the consequences could be substantial. A large euro stablecoin could move billions of euros away from commercial-bank deposits and toward short-dated liquid securities if the current minimum is removed.
The central banks are therefore not asking Europe to weaken stablecoin reserves. They are challenging the assumption that liquidity must predominantly take the form of bank deposits.
For a €10 billion stablecoin, that distinction could determine whether €6 billion remains parked inside commercial banks or is distributed across a broader portfolio designed to turn into cash within days.
