The European Union and the United States now each have a dedicated framework for regulating stablecoins: MiCA in the EU, and the GENIUS Act in the US. They take different institutional routes to the same destination. This guide compares what each regulates, who can issue, how reserves and redemption work, and why both prohibit paying interest to holders.
Two regimes, one direction of travel
For most of their history, stablecoins operated without a purpose-built legal framework. That has changed on both sides of the Atlantic, and not by coincidence: stablecoins settled 9 trillion dollars of adjusted on-chain volume in the twelve months to October 2025, up 87% on the year before (a16z, State of Crypto 2025 (opens in a new tab)). The adjusted measure strips out bot and wash activity, so it is the conservative read, and it is already a scale the major economies will not leave unregulated.
MiCA, Regulation (EU) 2023/1114, became applicable to stablecoins from 30 June 2024, and has been in force for over two years. The GENIUS Act was signed into US federal law on 18 July 2025 and is still being built out: the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency proposed its framework in March 2026, and the US Treasury’s proposed rules on issuance, offer and sale were published on 18 August 2026, with comments open until 19 October 2026.
The dates that matter to a business are further out than the signing. Under the Treasury’s proposal, the prohibition on issuing a payment stablecoin in the United States without a federal or state licence takes effect on 18 January 2027, and from 18 July 2028 a digital asset service provider may not offer a stablecoin to US persons unless it was issued by a licensed issuer. Europe is roughly two and a half years ahead on the clock.
The mechanisms differ, but the conclusion is the same: a stablecoin used for payments is regulated financial infrastructure, and its issuer must be authorised.
What each framework regulates
MiCA regulates electronic money tokens (EMTs) under Title IV: crypto-assets that reference the value of a single official currency, such as EUR or USD. Title IV sits within a broader crypto-asset regime that also covers asset-referenced tokens and crypto-asset service providers.
The GENIUS Act regulates payment stablecoins: digital assets designed to be used as a means of payment or settlement and redeemable at a fixed monetary value. The name is deliberate. Congress framed these instruments as a means of payment, not as a deposit substitute or an investment product.
Who can issue a stablecoin
Both regimes close the door on unlicensed issuance, but through different institutions.
Under MiCA, Article 48 is unambiguous: only a credit institution or an authorised electronic money institution (EMI) may issue an EMT in the EU.
Under the GENIUS Act, permitted issuers are insured depository institutions such as banks and credit unions and their subsidiaries, together with approved nonbank permitted payment stablecoin issuers. Nonbank issuers are approved federally through the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, or under a qualifying state regime for issuers below a defined size threshold.
Reserves and redemption
Both frameworks require full 1:1 backing in high-quality, liquid assets, held apart from the issuer’s own funds.
MiCA Article 54 requires the reserve to be fully segregated, with at least 30% held as deposits at credit institutions and the remainder in secure, low-risk instruments. Article 49 gives holders an unconditional right to redeem at par, in the reference currency, at any time.
The GENIUS Act requires reserves to be held in cash, short-term US Treasuries and repurchase agreements, with monthly public disclosure of the reserve composition. Issuers must maintain a clear redemption policy at the token’s fixed value.
Both prohibit paying interest
Two legal systems that agree on very little about financial regulation drew exactly the same line here. Neither lets a stablecoin issuer pay you to hold its token. MiCA Article 50 prohibits it in the EU. The GENIUS Act bars permitted issuers, and foreign issuers, from paying interest or yield in connection with holding a payment stablecoin. When Brussels and Washington land independently on the same rule, the reason is worth understanding.
The logic is identical on both sides of the Atlantic. A payment instrument is not a deposit and not an investment. If a token pays a return for simply holding it, it starts to look like one of those things, and a different and heavier body of regulation applies.
How each treats foreign stablecoins
Both regimes are extraterritorial in effect: access to the market depends on meeting the local standard.
Under MiCA, a stablecoin from an issuer without EU authorisation is an unregulated counterparty for MiCA-authorised firms. Since July 2026 there is no transitional exemption.
Under the GENIUS Act, a foreign-issued stablecoin can be offered broadly to US persons through regulated venues only where the US Treasury has determined that the issuer’s home regime is comparable to the US framework and the issuer is able to comply with lawful US orders. That restriction bites from 18 July 2028.
The two frameworks at a glance
| Dimension | EU: MiCA Title IV | US: GENIUS Act |
|---|---|---|
| Instrument regulated | Electronic money token (single official currency) | Payment stablecoin |
| Who can issue | Credit institution or authorised EMI (Art. 48) | Insured depository institutions and approved permitted payment stablecoin issuers |
| Reserve backing | 1:1, segregated; at least 30% bank deposits, rest low-risk (Art. 54) | 1:1 in cash, short-term Treasuries, repos; monthly disclosure |
| Redemption | Unconditional, at par, any time (Art. 49) | Redemption policy required at fixed value |
| Interest to holders | Prohibited (Art. 50) | Prohibited |
| Legal classification | Electronic money, not a MiFID financial instrument | Not a security or commodity |
| Supervision | National competent authority and the EBA | Federal (OCC / Federal Reserve) or qualifying state regulator |
| Foreign issuers | Must hold EU authorisation | Treasury comparability determination (from 18 July 2028) |
What this means for your business
For a business operating across both markets, the practical question is not which regime is stricter. It is whether the stablecoin you use is issued by someone authorised under a recognised one. A token that meets neither is an unregulated liability in both.
Two regimes, the same test: is the issuer authorised, are reserves fully backed, and can you redeem at par.
Stable Mint is authorised in the EU as an Electronic Money Institution and issues USDSM and EURSM as MiCA Title IV electronic money tokens. That places our tokens under one of the two frameworks described here, with segregated reserves and unconditional redemption at par. If you are building payment or treasury flows that touch both sides of the Atlantic and want to understand the regulatory footing of the stablecoin underneath them, talk to our team.