Stablecoin Licence: What You Actually Need in the US, EU and UK (2026)

Stablecoin Licence

There is no single instrument called a "stablecoin licence." The permission a stablecoin issuer requires depends on where the token is issued, what it is pegged to, and where it will circulate. In the European Union, a fiat-pegged stablecoin is treated as electronic money and requires an Electronic Money Institution licence under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA). In the United States, the GENIUS Act, in force since July 2025, requires issuers of payment stablecoins to become a Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuer. In the United Kingdom, fiat-backed payment stablecoins are being brought within the Financial Conduct Authority's regulated perimeter, with authorisation required as detailed rules take effect through 2026. Choosing the wrong framework, or assuming a general crypto registration will suffice, is the single most consequential structural error a stablecoin business can make.

This guide explains what each of the three major regimes requires, how they differ, and why a stablecoin business with ambitions in more than one market usually needs more than one authorisation. It is written for founders, treasurers and compliance teams designing stablecoin products in 2026.

Why a general crypto registration is not enough

Regulators in the major markets now treat stablecoins as regulated payment instruments rather than as generic crypto-assets, and this reclassification is the reason a lighter-touch crypto or virtual asset registration does not authorise stablecoin issuance. The permission required is a substantive, banking-adjacent financial authorisation with capital, reserve, redemption, audit and anti-money-laundering obligations. A business that holds a crypto exchange or virtual asset service provider registration and then issues a stablecoin to users in the EU, the US or the UK is operating outside the scope of its authorisation for that activity. The most common and expensive failure in this area is a well-engineered token that cannot legally be distributed in the largest regulated markets because the issuer never obtained the correct issuer authorisation.

Issuing a stablecoin in the European Union

Under MiCA, the EU divides stablecoins into two categories according to what they are pegged to. A token pegged to a single fiat currency, such as a euro-pegged or dollar-pegged stablecoin, is an electronic money token (EMT). A token pegged to a basket of assets, currencies or commodities is an asset-referenced token (ART). The distinction determines the authorisation required.

Issuing an electronic money token requires authorisation as an Electronic Money Institution, or as a credit institution, together with a MiCA white paper. This is a substantive authorisation involving meaningful own funds, a full anti-money-laundering and know-your-customer programme, compliance with the Digital Operational Resilience Act, and supervision by a national competent authority. Issuing an asset-referenced token requires a separate ART authorisation from a national competent authority, with additional capital and reserve obligations. Circle, for example, obtained an Electronic Money Institution licence through France to issue its dollar and euro stablecoins to EU users, while stablecoins whose issuers do not hold EU authorisation have been delisted for retail users in the European Economic Area.

Issuing a stablecoin in the United States

The GENIUS Act, signed into law in July 2025, created the first federal framework for payment stablecoins in the United States. To issue a payment stablecoin to US persons, a business must be a Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuer, either federally chartered through the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, or licensed at state level where circulation remains below a defined threshold. A significant feature of the US regime, distinguishing it from the EU, is that non-bank entities may qualify as issuers.

The regime is being phased in through implementing rules, with the full framework targeted to become operational around January 2027. In the interim period, issuers generally operate within existing state money transmitter licensing rules. The GENIUS Act imposes strict reserve requirements, requires redemption at par, and notably prohibits issuers from paying interest or yield to holders. Unauthorised issuance of a payment stablecoin carries serious penalties, including substantial fines and imprisonment, so the interim period is a time to build towards compliance rather than a regulatory holiday.

Issuing a stablecoin in the United Kingdom

The United Kingdom brought fiat-backed stablecoins used for payments within the regulated perimeter through the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023. HM Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority are finalising the detailed rules, with secondary legislation expected to take effect during 2026. Once the regime is in force, businesses issuing or holding these tokens in the UK will require FCA authorisation, and the regime is expected to capture overseas issuers whose tokens circulate within UK payment systems, not only UK-incorporated issuers.

Stablecoin authorisation across the three regimes

Jurisdiction	Token type	Authorisation required	Supervisor	Notable features
European Union	Single-currency peg (EMT)	Electronic Money Institution licence and MiCA white paper	National competent authority and EBA	Own funds, DORA, full AML, one-to-one reserves
European Union	Basket peg (ART)	ART authorisation	National competent authority and ESMA	Higher capital; stricter rules for significant tokens
United States	Payment stablecoin	Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuer (federal or state)	OCC or state regulator	Non-banks permitted; one-to-one reserves; no yield to holders; full regime around January 2027
United Kingdom	Fiat-backed payment stablecoin	FCA authorisation	FCA and Bank of England	Rules landing through 2026; expected to capture overseas issuers circulating in the UK

The common requirements

Although the frameworks are separate, they have converged on a common core. Every regime requires full reserve backing on a one-to-one basis in high-quality liquid assets, held separately from the issuer's own funds. Every regime requires holders to be able to redeem their tokens at par value. Every regime requires independent audits or attestations of the reserves, and a full anti-money-laundering and know-your-customer programme with sanctions screening and, where applicable, compliance with the Travel Rule. Issuance is limited to authorised issuers, and algorithmic or unbacked stablecoins are excluded from the major frameworks and cannot be marketed as stablecoins. Designing reserve, redemption and compliance arrangements that satisfy these common requirements is the practical foundation of any stablecoin authorisation.

Why one authorisation is often not enough

A stablecoin business with ambitions in more than one major market usually needs more than one authorisation, and the structure is best designed for that from the outset. A dollar-pegged stablecoin distributed to EU users triggers MiCA and requires an EU Electronic Money Institution entity; the same token reaching US persons triggers the GENIUS Act and requires a Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuer authorisation. These are separate regulatory tracks, frequently held by separate legal entities, and the reserve, custody and operational infrastructure can be built to serve both frameworks if it is designed with both in mind. Building for a single market and then attempting to expand into the other typically forces a costly restructuring of the issuing entity and reserve arrangements, which is far more expensive than designing the structure correctly at the start.

How Buckingham Capital Consulting can help

Buckingham Capital Consulting advises stablecoin issuers on the correct licensing structure and prepares the underlying authorisations. In the European Union we prepare Electronic Money Institution licensing, the route required to issue a single-currency stablecoin under MiCA, together with the reserve governance, redemption and anti-money-laundering frameworks the regime requires. In the United Kingdom we prepare FCA authorisation as the stablecoin regime takes effect through 2026. We advise on jurisdiction selection and on designing a corporate and reserve structure that works across markets rather than trapping the business in one, and we coordinate with US counsel where a US application is in scope.

If you are designing a stablecoin product and need to establish which authorisations you require and how to structure the issuing entity, contact our team for an initial assessment.

Email: info@buckinghamcapitalconsulting.co.uk.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between an EMT and an ART under MiCA?

The distinction turns on what the stablecoin is pegged to. An electronic money token, or EMT, is pegged to a single fiat currency, such as a euro-pegged or dollar-pegged stablecoin, and most mainstream stablecoins fall into this category. An asset-referenced token, or ART, is pegged to a basket of assets, which may include several currencies, one or more commodities, or a mix of assets. The categories carry different authorisation routes. An EMT requires the issuer to hold an Electronic Money Institution or credit-institution licence together with a MiCA white paper, whereas an ART requires a separate ART authorisation from a national competent authority, with additional capital and reserve obligations and stricter requirements where the token becomes significant in scale.

Can a non-bank issue a stablecoin?

It depends on the jurisdiction. In the United States, the GENIUS Act expressly permits non-bank entities to qualify as Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuers, provided they meet the federal or state standards, which is a notable feature of the US framework. In the European Union, by contrast, issuing a single-currency stablecoin requires authorisation as an Electronic Money Institution or as a credit institution, so the issuer must hold that banking-adjacent authorisation even if it is not itself a bank. In the United Kingdom, issuance will require FCA authorisation under the incoming regime. In every case the issuer must satisfy substantive reserve, redemption, audit and anti-money-laundering requirements, so being a non-bank does not reduce the substance of what is required.

Do I need separate authorisations for the US and the EU?

Usually, yes, and the structure should be designed for that from the start. A dollar-pegged stablecoin distributed to EU users triggers MiCA, while the same token reaching US persons triggers the GENIUS Act and requires a Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuer authorisation. These are separate regulatory tracks, often held by different legal entities within the group. The reserve, custody and operational infrastructure can be built to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously if designed with both in mind, but a business that authorises for one market and later expands into the other typically faces a costly restructuring of its issuing entity and reserve arrangements. Designing for both markets at the outset is materially cheaper than retrofitting later.