Skip to content
Today
Sections

Invest Independently confirmed3 publishers 2 min read Published Updated

The ECB asks Brussels to delete MiCA's 60% bank-deposit floor for stablecoin reserves

The ECB's September 22 submission to the Commission's MiCA consultation asks for the deposit percentages to go, with reserve assets instead having to mature within one to five working days. Significant token issuers currently park 60% in banks.

The Investor · Invest desk

Send a correction

What happened

  • The ECB and the European System of Central Banks filed their formal response to the European Commission's MiCA consultation on September 22.
  • Their central recommendation is to eliminate the percentage-based bank-deposit mandate for stablecoin reserves and build the rule around liquidity instead of thresholds.
  • MiCA currently makes e-money token and asset-referenced token issuers hold at least 30% of reserves in bank deposits, rising to 60% for tokens classified as significant.
  • The ECB's stated reason is that mandated deposits leave banks holding volatile balances that could vanish from a balance sheet overnight in a redemption wave.

Why it matters

  • What's now possible capability Deletion would take a significant issuer's freely deployable reserves from 40% of the book to all of it, a pool 2.5 times larger to run against short-dated government paper.
  • What it limits constraint The yield relief scales with size: at a one-point spread on the 60% share, a 2 billion euro reserve book picks up about 12 million euros a year, so the money in this argument sits with the biggest issuers.
  • Who has to decide decision Anyone structuring euro stablecoin reserves for next year is now planning against a percentage the central bank has asked the Commission to remove, and the Commission owns that choice.
  • Who's exposed exposure Redesigning reserves does not touch the gap the ESCB reported, since platforms outside European borders can serve EU users whatever the deposit floor says.

A token designated significant keeps 60% of its reserves in bank deposits [3], and deposits generally pay less than short-duration government securities or other high-quality liquid assets [7]. Crypto Briefing put that gap at hundreds of millions in annual revenue for an issuer holding billions in reserves [17]. Assume a one-percentage-point spread on the mandated 60% share, and 200 million euros a year requires roughly 33 billion euros of reserves [12]. On a 2 billion euro book, the same spread is worth about 12 million [13].

Industry groups had made a different argument. Bruegel and Blockchain for Europe said forcing reserves into bank deposits limits operational flexibility and ties a token's stability to individual banking relationships [11]. Significance, as MiCA applies it, doubles the floor from 30% to 60% [15], so the largest euro tokens are the ones most tied to a single counterparty and the ones with the most to gain from deletion: their freely deployable share goes from 40% of reserves to all of it [16].

Whether the swap raises issuer income is open. The maturity test as described applies to reserve assets generally, and paper maturing within one to five working days is not the three-month bill that a deposit-versus-bills comparison implies [5]. A five-day ceiling across the whole book could bind harder than full discretion over the curve on 40% of it. The ECB's response treated the question in macro-financial terms and did not name any issuer or token [10].

The 30% floor applies to non-significant tokens [3]. At 500 million euros of reserves and the same one-point assumption, deleting it is worth about 1.5 million euros a year [14]. The smaller end of the market has argued this as an operational burden.

MiCA's stablecoin provisions became fully applicable during 2024 and 2025, making Europe the first major jurisdiction to impose a comprehensive framework on crypto assets [9]. The US GENIUS Act imposes no comparable deposit percentage [8], and if the Commission takes the advice, MiCA loses the reserve feature that separated the two.

What to watch

  • Whether the Commission's MiCA review text keeps a percentage floor for significant tokens, drops it only for non-significant ones, or deletes both.
  • Whether the one-to-five-working-day maturity test would apply to the whole reserve book or only to the share that replaced the deposits.
  • Bank disclosures sizing stablecoin-issuer deposit balances would show how much money leaves EU banks if the floor goes.

Information, not investment advice. This story is general information about companies and markets, drawn from cited reporting. It is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security; check the cited sources before acting.

Clarity's read

What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.

Reality

Evidence72
Adoption12
Hype gap+20
Incentives50
Confidence70

Perspective Coverage

3 publishers
Builder
Builder 10%
Operator
Operator 55%
Investor
Investor 35%
Why these scores

Claim ledger

Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.

  1. [1]

    On September 22 the European Central Bank and the broader European System of Central Banks submitted their formal response to the European Commission's consultation on the Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  2. [2]

    The ECB's central recommendation is to eliminate MiCA's percentage-based bank-deposit mandate for stablecoin issuers entirely and replace it with a framework built around liquidity instead of thresholds.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  3. [3]

    Under MiCA as it stands, issuers of e-money tokens and asset-referenced tokens must hold a minimum percentage of reserves in traditional bank deposits: 30% for tokens classified as non-significant and 60% for significant tokens.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  4. [4]

    The ECB argues that mandatory deposit requirements expose banks to volatile, potentially flighty deposits, and that in a redemption wave those deposits could vanish from a bank's balance sheet overnight.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  5. [5]

    Under the ECB's proposed liquidity-focused rule, reserve assets would need to mature within one to five working days.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  6. [6]

    The ESCB response flagged significant challenges in ensuring compliance across the EU, particularly when non-compliant platforms operating outside European borders can still reach EU users.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  7. [7]

    Money sitting in bank deposits generally yields less than money deployed in short-duration government securities or other high-quality liquid assets.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  8. [8]

    The US GENIUS Act takes a different approach to stablecoin reserves and does not impose the same deposit-percentage requirements MiCA currently enforces.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  9. [9]

    MiCA's original stablecoin provisions became fully applicable during 2024 and 2025, making Europe the first major jurisdiction to impose a comprehensive regulatory framework on crypto assets.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  10. [10]

    The ECB's response treated the issue entirely in macro-financial terms, and no specific stablecoin issuers or tokens were singled out.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  11. [11]

    Bruegel and Blockchain for Europe had flagged concentration risk from mandatory bank deposits, arguing that it limits operational flexibility and ties stablecoin stability to individual banking relationships.

    Reported Supported Source: Bruegel and Blockchain for Europe, per cryptobriefing.comView cited source
  12. [12]

    At a one-percentage-point spread applied to the mandated 60% share, 200 million euros a year of extra reserve income implies about 33 billion euros of reserves.

    Derived Supported
  13. [13]

    On the same assumptions, a 2 billion euro reserve book gains about 12 million euros a year from deleting the 60% floor.

    Derived Supported
  14. [14]

    At 500 million euros of reserves, a non-significant issuer's 30% floor and a one-point spread come to about 1.5 million euros a year.

    Derived Supported
  15. [15]

    A significance designation doubles the deposit floor, from 30% of reserves to 60%.

    Derived Supported
  16. [16]

    Deleting the mandate takes a significant issuer's freely deployable reserve share from 40% of the book to 100%, a 2.5 times larger pool.

    Derived Supported
  17. [17]

    For a significant stablecoin issuer holding billions in reserves, the gap between bank deposit rates and short-duration government bond yields can translate to hundreds of millions in annual revenue.

    Reported Contested Source: cryptobriefing.comView cited source

Sources

3 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.

  1. cointelegraph.com

    1 article · September 22, 2026

    ECB, EU cenbanks seek changes in MiCA’s minimum bank deposit for stablecoins
  2. cryptobriefing.com

    2 articles · September 22, 2026

    European Central Bank seeks to scrap MiCA’s stablecoin reserve rule
  3. cryptopolitan.com

    1 article · September 22, 2026

    ECB and EU central banks oppose deposit requirement for stablecoins

Topics and entities

Topics

Entities