EU Officials Plan MiCA Revisions to Regulate Non-EU Stablecoin Issuers

European Union officials are reportedly preparing revisions to the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulatory framework as they respond to growing pressure from the United States’ push for stablecoin legislation.

Euronews reported on Wednesday that EU regulators plan to reassess proposed MiCA changes in 2027, with particular attention on how non-EU companies that issue stablecoins could be brought within the EU’s rules. The reported shift also points to potential updates covering tokenized payments and deposits—areas MiCA has not yet fully detailed for cross-border implementation.

Key takeaways

• EU officials are considering MiCA revisions in 2027, including measures that could better address non-EU stablecoin issuers.
• The reported changes are framed as part of the EU’s response to the US GENIUS Act, which could alter regulatory expectations for stablecoins.
• MiCA’s cross-EU service requirement means crypto firms serving EU users must be licensed as Crypto-Asset Service Providers (CASPs) under one member-state regulator.
• MiCA is also expected to face scrutiny in adjacent areas, with regulators reportedly weighing rules that extend beyond stablecoins into tokenized payments and deposits.
• Separately, ESMA plans to review custody-related operational resilience for CASPs between July 2026 and the first half of 2027.

Why MiCA could be updated after the GENIUS Act

The reported EU review comes in the context of the US Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act. According to the coverage cited in the report, the US measure is influencing how EU authorities think about stablecoin oversight and cross-border regulatory alignment.

Under MiCA, crypto firms offering services to customers in the EU across its 27 member states must obtain authorization as CASPs—an approach designed to create a harmonized baseline for market participants. While the licensing requirement took effect on July 1, the EU has already been working on the regulatory mechanics around stablecoins and related services, including through earlier consultations.

Euronews’ report frames the 2027 revisit as a practical response: EU regulators want clearer guidance on how a US stablecoin issuer could be treated within member states, especially once US rules start to solidify expectations for issuance, compliance, and oversight.

What could change: broader MiCA scope and “MiCA 2.0” discussions

The reported EU officials are expected to consider expanding MiCA’s scope beyond the current stablecoin-centric approach. Euronews said the debate includes whether MiCA should incorporate rules for tokenized payments and deposits, which would extend the framework into segments closely tied to everyday financial activity.

The idea of an expanded “MiCA 2.0” has circulated as authorities assess gaps that appear once firms attempt to operationalize compliance across multiple jurisdictions. However, while the framework is reportedly open for comment until Aug. 31, legal timelines remain uncertain.

Miroslav Durić, a senior associate at Taylor Wessing, told Cointelegraph in June that it is unlikely any concrete legislative proposals will be adopted before 2028. That distinction matters for market participants: even if the EU signals a direction of travel in 2027, firms may have a prolonged compliance runway before any formal changes take effect.

Compliance clock continues under MiCA’s CASP licensing model

MiCA’s central operating feature is licensing. For crypto companies that provide services to EU-based users, authorization as a CASP is now a key requirement, supervised by a regulator in one member state—after which the authorization can be recognized across the EU under the framework’s structure.

The EU licensing requirement took effect on July 1, but regulators have been balancing implementation with input channels for potential amendments. The timing of consultations—paired with the new US stablecoin law push—suggests EU authorities are trying to avoid a scenario where compliance expectations diverge significantly between regions.

For crypto businesses, the practical implication is that market access planning may need to account for two simultaneous processes: ongoing adherence to current MiCA obligations and the possibility of future regulatory refinements related to stablecoins, tokenized money-like instruments, and cross-border issuers.

ESMA to test custody resilience for CASPs

Alongside stablecoin-focused rulemaking discussions, EU supervision is also turning toward operational risk. On Wednesday, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)—a regulator involved in supporting MiCA implementation—announced it plans to review the operational resilience of CASPs licensed under the recently enacted framework.

ESMA’s review period runs from July through the first half of 2027, with regulators examining how crypto firms manage custody-related operational risks. The emphasis on operational resilience is significant because custody failures can expose firms not only to compliance issues but also to user harm and systemic confidence concerns across regulated market infrastructure.

For CASPs, this means compliance may increasingly be measured against resilience and risk-handling capability, not just authorization status. Firms should expect scrutiny around backup and recovery, incident response, and continuity measures—particularly in custody arrangements that are foundational to user assets and institutional workflows.

US market-structure bill discussions add another layer

In parallel with GENIUS-related developments, US lawmakers have reportedly continued discussions on a separate market-structure proposal known as the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act. Cointelegraph reported that the bill has advanced through two key committees in the preceding 12 months and is expected to move to a Senate vote in July before the chamber enters a month-long state work period.

While CLARITY is not directly part of the EU’s MiCA text, the broader pattern matters: both regions are attempting to define stablecoin oversight and market rules in ways that can affect cross-border companies’ compliance strategies.

Readers should watch for two near-term signals: whether EU authorities provide clearer guidance on non-EU stablecoin issuers during the comment window ending Aug. 31, and how ESMA’s custody resilience review findings influence expectations for operational controls under MiCA. Together, these developments could shape how quickly firms can translate licensing into durable, cross-border-ready compliance.