ECB and EU central banks want MiCA to replace stablecoin bank-deposit rules with liquidity thresholds

The European Central Bank and other EU central banks are pushing for a change to MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation): instead of forcing stablecoin issuers to park part of their reserves in bank deposits, they want reserve assets to meet minimum liquidity thresholds. For PSPs and issuers, the point is simple — the current setup creates a direct funding link to banks, and that is exactly what the ESCB says can turn into a liquidity problem during a stablecoin run.

1. The European System of Central Banks (ESCB) wants to remove MiCA rules that require at least 30% of stablecoin reserves, or 60% for significant stablecoins, to be held as bank deposits. The ESCB made that case in its response, published Tuesday, to the European Commission’s review of MiCA.
2. In place of bank-deposit thresholds, the ESCB backed minimum liquidity requirements for reserve assets maturing within one and five working days. It also pointed to overnight reverse repurchase agreements (repos) and short-term sovereign bonds as alternative instruments issuers could use to meet those liquidity tests.
3. The central banks said the existing bank-deposit rule “creates a direct link between issuers and credit institutions” and could leave banks exposed if issuers need to withdraw deposits quickly during a run. For anyone running high-risk payments, that is the part to watch: reserve construction is not just a treasury issue, it is a bank-liability issue too.
4. The ESCB cited draft rules the European Banking Authority published in 2024. Under those drafts, significant stablecoins would need at least 40% of reserves in assets maturing within one working day and 60% within five working days. For non-significant tokens, the thresholds would be 20% and 30%, respectively.
5. The ESCB also warned of “material challenges” in enforcing MiCA, saying non-compliant crypto companies can still access EU customers despite the bloc’s licensing regime. For PSPs and banks, that means the licensing framework is only part of the gatekeeping problem; access can persist even when compliance is supposed to be the filter.