ECB, EU cenbanks seek changes in MiCA’s minimum bank deposit for stablecoins

MACROECONOMICSECB, EU cenbanks seekchanges in MiCA’s minimumbank deposit for stablecoins41IMPORTANCECLOSED2NEWS MEDIA2PIECESSep 22, 2026 20:33blockboard.net

The European Central Bank and EU national central banks have asked for changes to MiCA’s treatment of stablecoins, including replacing bank-deposit requirements with liquidity thresholds. They also want MiCA’s ban on paying interest on stablecoins extended to crypto lending, borrowing, and staking.

What this rests on

Claim by claim, with its source
✓
The European Central Bank and EU national central banks asked for MiCA’s stablecoin bank-deposit requirement to be replaced with liquidity thresholds.
✓
They warned that sudden withdrawals from stablecoins could strain lenders.
✓
The European Central Bank and EU national central banks asked the European Commission to extend MiCA’s ban on paying interest on stablecoins to crypto lending and borrowing.
✓
They also sought to bring staking within that same ban.

What it means

Who it affects, what changes and what is still unconfirmed

Each sentence links inside to the piece that supports it.

Stablecoin users and lenders in the EU are the immediate audience for this move, because the requested MiCA changes would affect how reserves are held and how yield products are treated. If adopted, people using stablecoins would face a different liquidity setup than the current bank-deposit approach, and yield products tied to lending, borrowing, or staking would fall under the same restriction as stablecoin interest.

In practice, the proposal would shift MiCA away from a bank-deposit rule for stablecoins and toward a liquidity threshold rule, while also broadening the ban on interest-like returns beyond stablecoins themselves. What stays the same is that the discussion is still about regulatory limits inside MiCA; what changes is which products are inside those limits.

Market reaction

We track BTC, but we only have 1 price point in that window. The series is stored every half hour, so newer events will have it. Computing it from two points would not be a reaction, it would be a coincidence.

How the story was built

Every piece in order, with the time its news medium declares — if it is not believable we use ours and say so — and what it added to what was already known at that point. Arriving first is not the same as adding something.

first
Sep 22 15:37
+1 h 42 m
Sep 22 17:19
Unchained context
Its angle: intermediaries, decentralized, arrangements; with quotes

Has this happened before?

Nothing comparable yet.