EBA’s Opinion on PSD2 and MiCA: Clarifying the Path for CASPs who provide services in relation to EMTs

On 10 June 2025, the European Banking Authority (“EBA”) published its long-awaited Opinion^[1] on how the existing second Payment Services Directive (“PSD2”) interacts with the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (“MiCA”), in the context of electronic money tokens (“EMTs”). The issue at hand is that EMTs, under MiCA, are defined as electronic money—meaning they also fall within the definition of “funds” under PSD2. This dual classification has created a regulatory grey area for crypto-asset service providers (“CASPs”), who may find themselves needing two separate authorisations to carry out what is essentially one activity.

The Opinion aims to provide clarity to national competent authorities (“NCAs”) during the transitional period before PSD3 and the new Payment Services Regulation (“PSR”) come into force. It also offers legislative suggestions to the EU institutions to help resolve this overlap in the long term. Another important aspect is that for CASPs that offer transfer, administration and custody services relating to EMTs, the EBA advises the NCAs to grant such applicants a transition period until 1 March 2026, until the PSD2 authorisation has to be obtained.

The EBA’s guidance is structured around the following seven key areas:

1. Scope and Definitions

The EBA recommends that NCAs treat the transfer of EMTs by CASPs on behalf of clients as a payment service under PSD2. Similarly, custody and administration of EMTs—especially when custodial wallets allow transfers to and from third parties—should also fall under PSD2. However, the Opinion draws a line when it comes to exchange services: exchanging crypto-assets for funds or for other crypto-assets, when done using proprietary capital, should not be considered a payment service.

2. Authorisation

To reduce the burden on CASPs, the EBA advises NCAs to streamline the authorisation process. This includes reusing information already submitted during the MiCA application and applying existing PSD2 exemptions (with some exceptions). The idea is to avoid duplicative requests and make the process more efficient.

3. Capital Requirements

The EBA takes the view that capital requirements under MiCA and PSD2 should apply cumulatively to CASPs offering both crypto and payment services, ensuring that risks associated with both activities are adequately covered. However, NCAs should apply proportionality when assessing capital adequacy and ensure that CASPs are well-informed of the different elements that may be considered towards minimum capital.

4. Consumer Protection

The EBA stresses the importance of applying PSD2’s consumer protection rules to EMT-related services. These include requirements for transparency, fee disclosures, execution times, and liability for unauthorised transactions. However, the EBA acknowledges that some of these rules may be difficult to implement in a blockchain environment—for example, gas fees can be unpredictable, and execution times may vary due to network congestion.

To address this, NCAs are advised not to prioritise enforcement of certain PSD2 provisions during the transition, such as the information requirement concerning the charges payable by the user to the CASPs. Meanwhile, EU legislators should consider incorporating equivalent protections into MiCA or clarifying their application in PSD3/PSR.

5. Security and Strong Customer Authentication

Given the fraud risks associated with EMT transactions, the EBA insists that strong customer authentication (“SCA”) and fraud reporting requirements must apply. These should cover both access to custodial wallets of EMTs and the initiation of EMT transfers. However, recognising the technical challenges involved, the EBA recommends a grace period until 2 March 2026 before full enforcement.

After that date, CASPs should be expected to comply with SCA and begin reporting fraud data as per the Annex of the applicable EBA guidelines (EBA/GL/2018/05).

6. Safeguarding and Safekeeping

MiCA already imposes safekeeping obligations on CASPs holding EMTs on behalf of clients. The EBA believes these are sufficient and that PSD2’s safeguarding rules should not apply concurrently, as this would create unnecessary duplication.

7. Open Banking

Finally, the EBA addresses whether custodial wallets should be subject to PSD2’s open banking rules. If these wallets are considered payment accounts, CASPs could be required to develop an interface through which third-parties could access and provide their services. The EBA advises NCAs not to prioritise enforcement of open banking provisions for EMT-related services during the transition.

Final Thoughts

While the EBA’s Opinion goes a long way in clarifying the regulatory treatment of EMTs, it still leaves some uncertainty unresolved. The guidance provided to NCAs is helpful in the interim, however, the fact remains that CASPs offering services involving EMTs may still find themselves navigating overlapping frameworks. Unless the legislative amendments proposed by the EBA are taken up, CASPs could continue to face disproportionate compliance burdens. This Opinion is a step in the right direction, but further clarity and legislative alignment will be essential to ensure a coherent and workable regulatory environment for EMTs going forward.

^[1] Opinion on the interplay between PSD2 and MiCA.pdf