Industry Groups Push Back as EU Reconsiders Crypto Rulebook

Europe’s landmark cryptocurrency regulation is facing its first major stress test, as industry bodies lobby the European Commission to resist sweeping changes to a framework they argue has only just begun to bed in.

CryptoUK and The Digital Chamber, two prominent trade associations representing digital asset firms, submitted a joint response on 30 September to the Commission’s ongoing review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, known widely by its acronym MiCA. The regulation, which came into force as the European Union’s comprehensive attempt to bring order to a once largely unregulated sector, is now up for reassessment as Brussels weighs whether the rules have kept pace with a fast-moving industry and the shifting approaches of regulators elsewhere in the world.

The message from the two groups is unambiguous: don’t tear it up and start again. Their submission argues that MiCA has already established a valuable common regulatory foundation across the bloc’s 27 member states, and that the priority now should be targeted refinement rather than a fundamental redesign of the framework.

“The aim should be to preserve legal certainty, consumer protection and market integrity while making the framework more proportionate, workable and internationally interoperable,” the organisations said in their response, which was accompanied by a detailed briefing document outlining their recommendations.

The Commission’s consultation is examining whether MiCA remains fit for purpose following its initial rollout, taking into account both the evolution of digital asset markets since the rules were drafted and the broader international regulatory landscape, which has shifted considerably as other major jurisdictions, including the United States, have moved to firm up their own crypto oversight regimes.

Among the specific areas flagged by the industry groups is the treatment of stablecoins, the digital tokens pegged to traditional currencies that have become a backbone of crypto trading and, increasingly, of cross-border payments. The response calls for globally workable rules that would allow issuers and users access to international liquidity without running into conflicting or duplicative requirements across jurisdictions.

The submission also pushes for a more activity- and risk-based approach to regulation, particularly in areas that have proven difficult to categorise under existing rules, such as decentralised finance platforms, staking services and crypto lending. These corners of the market have grown rapidly in recent years but often don’t map neatly onto the intermediary-based structure that MiCA was originally built around, leaving firms and regulators alike grappling with how the rules should apply.

A further theme running through the response is a call for greater proportionality and coherence within the EU’s broader financial services rulebook. The groups argue that overlaps between MiCA and other existing EU regulations have created unnecessary friction for firms trying to operate compliantly across multiple regimes at once, and that the review presents an opportunity to iron out those inconsistencies rather than layering on new complexity.

The feedback gathered through the consultation will feed into the Commission’s formal review of MiCA and will help shape any future amendments to the regulation. While no timeline has been set for when changes might be proposed, the process is being closely watched by an industry that has invested heavily in building compliance infrastructure around the rules as they currently stand.

For crypto firms operating in and around Europe, the stakes are significant. MiCA was designed in part to give the EU a competitive edge by offering businesses a single, harmonised set of rules rather than a patchwork of national regimes, and firms that have already adapted to the framework are wary of a regulatory reset that could force them to retool again. Industry advocates frame the review as a chance to smooth out rough edges rather than an invitation to rewrite the rulebook from scratch, a distinction they are clearly keen to impress upon policymakers in Brussels as the consultation period closes and the next phase of deliberation begins.