Stablecoins are increasingly being used for payments and transfers. When is MiCA insufficient, and does a fintech company also need a payment services license?
People usually associate cryptocurrencies with Bitcoin and investing. A stablecoin, however, is different—its value is pegged to, for example, the euro or the dollar, and therefore it is increasingly used not for investing, but for payments, transfers, and cross-border transactions.
This is precisely where the legal perspective on the product is changing. If a stablecoin is pegged to a single currency, the MiCA regulation classifies it as an electronic money token (EMT). If a company merely buys or exchanges it on behalf of a client, it constitutes a crypto-asset service. However, as soon as the company begins sending it to other parties on the client’s behalf, it may also qualify as a payment service.
This distinction ceased to be merely theoretical on March 2, 2026, when the transitional period ended during which the European Banking Authority (EBA) recommended that national authorities not prioritize oversight of payment licenses for these services. The National Bank of Slovakia applies the same approach to licensing.
As a result, fintech companies often fail to realize that a single application may require multiple regulatory authorizations—not only a crypto-asset license but also authorization to provide payment services. Furthermore, the European Union is preparing the next step in the form of the PSD3 directive and the PSR regulation, which are intended to clarify this distinction.
