The European Commission launched a formal comment period in May 2026, soliciting industry feedback that will shape revisions to the Markets in Crypto-Assets framework, widely referred to as MiCA 2.0. The consultation closes on August 31, though legal experts warn concrete legislative proposals are unlikely before 2028.
MiCA 1.0: Foundation, Not Finish Line
Full application of the original MiCA rules began on December 30, 2024, with the first licences issued in early 2025. Katie Harries, director and head of policy for Europe at Coinbase, described the framework as setting an early global benchmark that gave the EU a first-mover advantage over the United States. For Coinbase specifically, she said MiCA provided the foundation to expand into the next phase of adoption across retail and institutional markets in Europe.
The Commission’s consultation is divided into four parts: regulatory scope and definitions for crypto assets other than asset-referenced tokens (ARTs) and e-money tokens (EMTs); requirements for EMTs, ARTs and their issuers; the legal framework for crypto-asset service providers (CASPs); and topics MiCA 1.0 left untouched, including DeFi and prediction markets.
Stablecoins: The Most Politically Charged Section
Catarina Veloso, director of regulatory and compliance at Notabene, identified part two, covering stablecoin requirements, as the longest and most politically charged section of the consultation. She argued that how stablecoins are classified determines everything: if treated as crypto trading instruments, investor protection and market integrity stay central; if treated as payment infrastructure, redemption rules, liquidity, reserve management, operational resilience and supervisory reporting become far more pressing.
Coinbase’s Harries called for MiCA 2.0 to make euro stablecoins more competitive by recalibrating rules around reserves, rewards and the multi-issuance model. She specifically advocated allowing a greater share of reserves to be held in high-quality sovereign assets to reduce risk without compromising safety.
A separate sticking point is the current prohibition on EMT issuers offering interest to holders. Veloso warned this restriction weakens euro-denominated stablecoins and pushes users toward foreign-currency stablecoins or unregulated yield structures. Harries proposed that MiCA should instead permit non-interest incentives such as cashback and loyalty programmes, which she described as standard features across the payments industry.
Bringing DeFi Inside the Regulatory Perimeter
The original MiCA framework excluded fully decentralised CASPs operating without intermediaries. Veloso cautioned that decentralisation is rarely binary, and that regulators must define what indicators matter: protocol control, governance rights, admin keys, front-end control, revenue capture, upgradeability, or the ability of identifiable persons to influence outcomes.
Miroslav Djuric, a senior associate at Taylor Wessing, noted that many CASPs already connect clients with DeFi platforms. Because those platforms are currently exempt from MiCA, the Commission is now asking whether CASPs should conduct due diligence on the DeFi platforms they make accessible to clients. He noted the Commission appears ready to explore approaches that might only permit CASPs to direct clients to platforms certified under a new regime.
Prediction Markets: Regulatory No Man’s Land
Prediction markets are currently banned in some EU member states and lack any unified regulatory structure. The Commission is seeking views on whether they deliver economic benefit to consumers and whether they fall under MiCA or the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID). Djuric noted that depending on the contracts available on a given platform, an operator could simultaneously face requirements under MiFID II, gambling law, and MiCA, sometimes in conflicting ways.
Timeline: Years Away
The comment window closes August 31, 2026. Harries called for sustained dialogue between industry, policymakers and regulators throughout the process. Djuric was direct about the pace: given the complexity of the issues raised and the usual speed of EU legislative movement, any concrete proposals before 2028 are, in his words, hardly expectable.
