ESMA Tightens Stance on Non-Compliant Stablecoins
On 8 October 2026, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) published an opinion on the provision of crypto-asset services in relation to asset-referenced tokens (ARTs) and e-money tokens (EMTs) that do not comply with the EU Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).
ESMA considers that crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) should no longer offer services involving these tokens, save for limited services that allow existing holdings to be wound down in an orderly manner. The opinion marks a further tightening of ESMA's approach toward non-MiCA-compliant stablecoins.
Initial January 2025 Guidance
In January 2025, ESMA and the European Commission addressed services involving non-compliant stablecoins through an ESMA public statement and the Commission's Q&A 2404.
Under that guidance, CASPs were expected to stop providing services involving non-compliant stablecoins where those services constituted an offer to the public or admission to trading under MiCA. This meant delisting the tokens from trading platforms and restricting services such as exchange and order execution where they amounted to a public offer. ESMA nevertheless recognised that CASPs could continue providing custody and transfer services involving non-compliant stablecoins.
A Stricter Supervisory Approach
The October 2026 opinion extends ESMA's position to all crypto-asset services, regardless of whether they constitute a public offer or admission to trading. This includes the custody and transfer services that ESMA’s earlier guidance had allowed to continue.
ESMA bases its position on Article 66(1) MiCA, which requires CASPs to act honestly, fairly and professionally in their clients' best interests. It argues that non-compliant stablecoins expose clients to risks because they lack the safeguards MiCA requires of issuers. In ESMA's view, a CASP cannot adequately address those risks through its own controls, risk warnings or client acknowledgements. ESMA also considers that keeping these tokens available through CASPs undermines MiCA and disadvantages issuers that comply with it.
Is a Categorical Ban Justified?
ESMA's reliance on Article 66(1) MiCA rests on the premise that clients cannot be adequately protected where services involve non-compliant stablecoins. Yet stablecoin regimes outside the EU, such as the GENIUS Act in the United States and the Stablecoins Ordinance in Hong Kong, provide for safeguards on reserves, redemption and supervision that may offer comparable protection. CASPs are also subject to their own regulatory requirements under MiCA that serve to protect clients. The opinion, however, leaves no room for CASPs to take these protections into account. This raises the question whether the duty to act in clients' best interests calls for a more differentiated assessment rather than a categorical ban.
What CASPs Should Do Now
CASPs that continue to hold or transfer non-compliant stablecoins for clients should review those arrangements. ESMA expects CASPs to introduce controls preventing clients from acquiring or increasing holdings of these tokens.
National supervisors may permit limited services needed to wind down existing holdings without harming clients. These arrangements should be time-limited, clearly communicated to clients and closely supervised. ESMA expects supervisors to require remediation as soon as possible and no later than 8 January 2027. Given the short timeline, CASPs should assess their current exposure to non-compliant stablecoins at an early stage.