The European Union is facing a critical challenge within the framework of the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation. This concerns the urgent need to clarify rules for global stablecoins, especially those using a multi-issuance mechanism — where the same asset is issued simultaneously both within and outside the EU. This is not just a technical nuance, but a fundamental issue determining the future competitiveness of European regulation.
Leading crypto policy expert Patrick Hansen has drawn attention to a new study that accurately describes the essence of the dilemma. In his view, the EU faces a choice not between risk and safety, but between "uncontrolled exclusion" and "managed integration." This means that a complete ban on multi-issuance will not solve the problem, but will only push assets into an unregulated gray zone, weakening consumer protection.
Why is MiCA failing to address global stablecoins?
The study, published in the Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, identified an institutional deadlock between the European Central Bank, the European Commission, and the European Parliament. The author argues that MiCA already contains the necessary safeguards: segregated reserves, broad supervisory powers, and limits on the use of non-euro stablecoins in payments. However, the key problem is the uncertainty regarding multi-issuance.
Unlike the U.S. GENIUS Act, which clearly outlines rules for cross-border issuance, MiCA leaves this issue ambiguous. This gap puts the EU at a competitive disadvantage, as global issuers may avoid European jurisdiction, leaving users without adequate protection.
A two-step action plan
Hansen supports the two-step response proposed in the study. The first step is an urgent clarification from the European Commission in a "questions and answers" (Q&A) format to restore a unified approach among national regulators. The second step is a legislative amendment to MiCA that would establish rules for multi-issuance and equivalence frameworks for regulatory regimes in third countries. This would serve as an alternative to a complete ban, allowing global stablecoins to be integrated into the system rather than isolated.
Cryptalist analytical conclusion
The situation surrounding MiCA is "the first serious stress test" for European regulation. The choice between a ban and integration will determine whether the EU becomes a global hub for crypto innovation or remains on the sidelines. I believe that managed integration is the only rational path. It will not only preserve competitiveness but also strengthen trust in MiCA as a global standard. Otherwise, we risk seeing the stablecoin market move into the shadows, with European users losing access to safe and efficient financial instruments.