European authorities are also debating how to treat multi-issue stablecoins, such as Circle Internet’s (CRCL) USDC, which can be minted by multiple legal entities across different jurisdictions, yet presented to users as a single, fungible token.
When MiCA was designed, it was absolutely the European Commission’s intention to support multi-issuance models, according to Catarina Veloso, director, regulatory and compliance at Notabene, a protocol designed to bring crypto transactions into the everyday economy. However, during the implementation phase, various stakeholders in the EU, including the ECB, withdrew because they have their own views on the resulting risks.
The real value of stablecoins is that they are natively global, Veloso said. Imposing geographic restrictions would create a scenario where Circle Europe, now licensed under MiCA, would have to build its own fragmented version of USDC for European markets, she said.
“One of the main value additions of stablecoins is that it is not a payment system built within a specific jurisdiction,” Veloso said in an interview. “So that value is diluted by the fact that it’s now being captured by regulatory frameworks that exist within borders.”
Taking control
Apart from stablecoins, another important area of ​​discussion is the possibility of more centralized control of MiCA under the auspices of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).
