04-20-2026 
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Bank of France (BoF) deputy governor has called for stricter controls on stablecoins under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), particularly for assets pegged to non-euro currencies.
- Bank of France deputy calls for stricter MiCA regulations
- MiCA will benefit from stronger regulations: Denis Beau
- Banking sector issuers are lower risk
In a speech published by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), Denis Beau, First Deputy Governor of the BoF, warned that the spread of stablecoins as settlement assets could lead to the “stablecoinisation” and “dollarization” of a significant part of the EU’s payment system, if the sector is not appropriately controlled.
In 2025, the stablecoin market cap rose 50% to hit $320 billion, with some predicting it could hit the trillions by 2028. In terms of total transaction volume, according to a recent report from blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis, stablecoins processed $28 trillion in real economic volume in 2025—a number the firm predicted could rise to $1.5 quadrillion by 2035, surpassing today’s entire cross-border payments market.
Meanwhile, a European Central Bank (ECB) report from November of last year estimated that 99% of the total stablecoin market is U.S. dollar-denominated, with euro-denominated stablecoins only playing “a minor role,” totaling around €395 million.
Answering the question of how the EU should respond to the opportunities and challenges presented by the booming, predominantly USD-denominated stablecoins market, Beau argued that the sector should develop within the current two-tier monetary system, which relies on pan-European public and private payment solutions.
“We need that those solutions rely, for their settlement assets, on the coexistence, complementarity and substitutability at par between public money issued by the central bank and private money issued by European financial intermediaries regulated to that effect,” said the BoF deputy governor.
He suggested that a central bank digital currency (CBDC)—such as the ECB’s proposed digital euro—for both wholesale and retail payments, should be deployed in combination with support for the development of tokenized private money issued by European financial institutions, and that all of this should be overseen by “an adequate regulatory framework.”
His comments were further evidence, if it was needed, that EU lawmakers and finance chiefs are leaning towards a financial system that includes the digital euro and a thriving euro-denominated stablecoin market to rival the current USD-based one.
Boosting MiCA
In terms of what the regulation governing this should look like, Beau praised the EU’s MiCA framework—which came fully into force last year—as a vital regulatory step forward, providing greater legal certainty for the issuance of digital currency, stablecoins, and related services.
However, he suggested that MiCA only partially addresses the risks posed by changes in the sector, particularly in the event of widespread adoption of stablecoins issued by non-European players.
“Against this backdrop, we are pressing for a strengthening of MiCA, particularly to restrict the use of stablecoins for everyday payments, all the more when they are backed by a currency other than the euro,” Beau said. “MiCA would also benefit from a much stricter regulation of the multi-issuance of the same stablecoin within and outside the EU, to reduce regulatory arbitrage risks in times of stress.”
Specifically, he said the regulatory framework for e-money tokens (EMTs), digital currencies designed to maintain a stable value by referring to one currency—the category into which most major stablecoins fall—should be clarified in upcoming revisions to the EU’s second payment services directive (PSD2) and MiCA, “to improve clarity regarding regulatory requirements.”
Currently, under MiCA, stablecoins classified as EMTs must be fully backed by reserves, redeemable at par value, and issued by authorized entities (e.g., credit institutions or e-money institutions). Issuers must also meet strict requirements on governance, transparency, capital, and supervision by EU regulators.
The PSD2 regulates payment services and providers, focusing on consumer protection, open banking, and secure electronic payments. While it does not directly govern stablecoins, in June 2025, the European Banking Authority (EBA) published an opinion clarifying that Crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) providing EMT transfer services will generally need to obtain authorization under PSD2 to continue providing those services beyond March 2026.
When it comes to supervising compliance with PSD2, the opinion also encouraged national EU regulators to focus on strong customer authentication, fraud reporting, and own funds requirements.
Beau didn’t specify exactly how he would want these current rules for EMTs to be clarified in the upcoming PSD2 revision (PSD3), expected summer 2026. Still, it’s likely the hoped-for priorities would be clarifying the requirements for EMT transfer services and avoiding duplicating MiCA’s regulatory authorization requirements.
Banking sector issuers are lower risk
One issue about which the BoF deputy governor was more equivocal concerned who he would like to see issuing European stablecoins.
“I consider that stablecoins issued directly by a bank or by an electronic money institution (EMI) belonging to a banking group present structurally lower counterparty risk than those issued by non-bank actors,” Beau said.
He argued that banks benefit from direct access to central bank liquidity and European supervision, which strengthens their resilience in periods of financial stress. In contrast, non-bank stablecoin issuers “currently do not meet the eligibility criteria” to access central bank services, including central bank accounts.
In practical terms, this means that non-bank issuers face greater exposure to liquidity shocks and operational disruptions, as they must rely on commercial banking partners and market-based mechanisms to manage reserves, rather than having direct access to central bank facilities in times of stress.
Beau suggested that such access could potentially be considered in the future, particularly for non-bank stablecoin issuers, “subject to certain conditions,” but due to concerns around monetary policy transmission, lack of bank-like supervision, and financial stability concerns, it is likely that any central bank access and services provided to non-bank stablecoin issuers would be limited.
Thus, it may be harder for non-bank stablecoin issuers to compete with bank-issued ones in the EU, due to differences in perceived safety and regulatory backing, which is why Beau wants to see more euro-denominated stablecoins issued by banking entities.
Watch | MiCA and the Future of Stablecoins: What Comes Next for Tether?
Recommended for you
