EBA Asks EU to Clarify Tokenised-Deposit Boundary in MiCA Review
The authority wants a harmonised deposit definition as banks test DLT claims that may otherwise fall under different EU rulebooks.
The European Banking Authority has asked the European Commission to clarify when a bank-issued token is a deposit and when it falls under the EU's crypto-asset rules. The recommendation appears in the EBA's September 24 response to the Commission's review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, or MiCA.
The EBA wants a harmonised definition of "deposit" in the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation. That definition could then support a common definition of a tokenised deposit and reduce inconsistent classification across EU member states. These are recommendations to the Commission, not adopted MiCA amendments. The Commission's consultation remains open until September 30, and any legislative change would require a later proposal and approval process.
One label can describe different legal claims
The EBA says supervisors must look through a token's label to the claim it represents. A native tokenised deposit may record on a distributed ledger the balance that itself constitutes the customer's deposit claim against a bank. The authority says that arrangement can usually be treated as a deposit and regulated like other deposits.
A non-native representation is different. It can be a DLT token that represents a claim against a balance still recorded on a conventional deposit ledger. The EBA says that structure needs a more detailed assessment because the token could be classified as a deposit, an e-money token under MiCA or another crypto-asset covered by MiCA's Title II.
That distinction is operational, not just semantic. Classification determines which authorisation, prudential, conduct and safeguarding rules apply to the issuing bank and the instrument. Uncertainty can therefore delay product approval and complicate conversations between banks and supervisors even when two projects use similar technology.
MiCA's exclusion leaves a boundary question
MiCA excludes tokenised deposits from its scope, while defining "deposit" by reference to the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive. The EBA says that approach does not fully resolve the boundary for deposit balances that sit outside the deposit-guarantee directive.
The Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation define a credit institution partly by its business of taking deposits or other repayable funds, but they do not provide a harmonised definition of deposit. Some member states have definitions in national law, creating room for different treatment of the same technical structure.
The EBA's proposed fix is to define deposit for the CRD and CRR first, then use that foundation to define tokenised deposits and separate them more clearly from e-money tokens and other MiCA instruments. The authority says comparative work will still be needed because the definition interacts with national law and prudential treatment.
Bank interest is rising faster than live deployment
Spring 2026 EBA risk-assessment data shows 26% of respondent credit institutions expected to deploy tokenised deposits within three years, up from 16% in 2024. The figures describe expectations among survey respondents; they are not a count of current deployments.
The EBA says prospective use cases include on-chain settlement, cross-border payments, corporate treasury management and trade finance. It also says live or pilot cases remain limited. Many projects are still confined to transfers between customers of one bank because a single institution can control compliance and operations more easily.
Interbank and cross-border projects add interoperability, settlement and legacy-system integration problems. The EBA points to Eurosystem initiatives such as Pontes and Appia and to BIS Project Agorá as work that could help connect DLT transactions with settlement in central-bank money. It does not say those projects solve every tokenised-deposit classification issue.
The next evidence arrives in the fourth quarter
The EBA plans to publish a report in the fourth quarter of 2026 on recent developments and indicative features that can guide classification. That report should provide a more practical test for distinguishing deposit claims from e-money tokens and other crypto-assets.
The wider MiCA review also covers multi-issuer stablecoin schemes, reserve requirements, crypto lending, reporting and MiCA's interaction with payment-services rules. As of the EBA's September 1 reference date, 39 e-money tokens had been issued under MiCA and no asset-referenced tokens had been authorised. Those dated figures describe the EBA's review baseline rather than the current market after September 1.
The Commission says consultation responses will inform its required report on MiCA's application and market developments. That report may be accompanied by a legislative proposal, but neither the EBA response nor the open consultation changes existing law on its own.
Sources
- European Banking Authority — The EBA identifies priorities for the review of MiCA, September 24, 2026
- European Banking Authority — Response to the European Commission targeted consultation on the review of MiCA, September 24, 2026
- European Commission — Targeted consultation on the review of MiCA Regulation