Brussels Closes Its MiCA Consultation Wednesday, 86…
The MiCA consultation that will shape the next version of Europe’s crypto rulebook closes on Wednesday night, and the European Banking Authority has just used it to ask for something the industry did not put on the table. Brussels is taking responses until 23:59 CEST on 30 September, after which the European Commission starts drafting.
The EBA filed its own response on 24 September, and it urged the Commission to bring crypto borrowing and lending inside MiCA as a regulated service. That is not a side commentary on the review. It is an intervention placed inside the same window every broker, exchange and issuer in Europe still has open for four more days, and it targets one of the precise gaps the questionnaire asks about.
The MiCA Consultation Closes at 23:59 CEST Wednesday, and Only Some Firms Are the Target
The Commission opened this exercise on 20 May and has confirmed that the deadline is extended until 30 September 2026, 23:59 CEST. The MiCA consultation is a targeted one, aimed at what the Commission calls a more specialised audience, meaning crypto-asset service providers, crypto-asset issuers, and public authorities such as national and European supervisors, central banks and finance ministries. A separate public consultation runs alongside it and is linked from the same page. The one-month extension from the original 31 August deadline covers both the targeted exercise and that parallel public consultation, according to Norton Rose Fulbright.
Anyone who fits that description can still file. The practical point for firms holding a MiCA authorisation is that this is the last moment to put anything on the record before officials move from gathering evidence to writing text. Nothing changes on 30 September itself. The rules in force stay in force, and the window for influencing what replaces them simply shuts.
Question 20 on Stablecoin Interest Is One of Four Live Gaps
The consultation document runs to 86 questions across four parts, covering scope and definitions, asset-referenced and e-money tokens, crypto-asset service providers, and a final part on policy areas sitting outside the current perimeter. The fourth part is where the commercial stakes concentrate, because it asks whether activities MiCA does not properly reach should be pulled in.
Four of those gaps matter most to FinanceFeeds readers. Question 20 asks about MiCA’s prohibition on paying interest or other remuneration on e-money tokens, a ban that has pushed yield-seeking demand toward products and jurisdictions outside the regime and helps explain why interest-bearing crypto accounts keep growing.
The EBA counted 39 e-money tokens issued under MiCA and no authorised asset-referenced tokens as of 1 September 2026, which is the practical backdrop to that question. Section 4.1 covers DeFi and Section 4.2 covers staking, lending and borrowing. Those three sections are where a firm’s written evidence has the most room to land, because the Commission has not settled a position on any of them.
Investor Takeaway
The fourth part of the Commission’s questionnaire, covering activities outside MiCA’s current perimeter, is the genuinely open ground, and no position has been settled on staking, lending or DeFi.
The EBA Filed Its Own Response and Asked for Crypto Lending to Be Regulated
The EBA’s submission goes directly at Section 4.2. In its response to the Commission’s targeted consultation, the authority asks for a “robust cost benefit analysis to consider legislative changes (a) extending the list of CASP services in MiCA to include intermediating borrowing and lending, and (b) establishing requirements for CASPs where they facilitate client access to DeFi lending protocols.” Its reasoning on the second limb is that easier interfaces and AI tools are blurring the line between centralised and decentralised activity.
The measures it puts up for consideration are suitability tests, on the view that crypto borrowing may suit only certain users, and caps on leverage that it says “may be appropriate for some/all users.” It also finds consumers getting insufficient information on pricing and fees, on interest rates or yields, and on changes to collateral requirements. The scale argument rests on a January 2025 joint report with ESMA finding that crypto borrowing and lending is intermediated in at least 16 member states, and the EBA’s push to cover DeFi lending and cap leverage lands squarely on the questions already in front of the industry.
There is a direct link back to Question 20. The EBA warns that lending in e-money tokens may pose regulatory arbitrage risks, because the interest prohibition in Articles 40 and 50 pushes yield-seeking into lending instead. A recommendation from the EBA does not bind the Commission. It does mean anyone filing a contrary view has four days to get it on the record, because silence now reads as consent later.
Article 140 Sets a 30 June 2027 Report, and It May Carry a Legislative Proposal
What happens to these responses is written into MiCA itself. Article 140 requires that “by 30 June 2027, having consulted EBA and ESMA, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Regulation accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal.” Article 142 carries a parallel mandate on crypto-asset market developments.
That timetable is the reason this week matters more than the date suggests. Evidence filed into the MiCA consultation by Wednesday feeds a report roughly 21 months from now, and that report is the vehicle through which any MiCA amendment would travel. The appetite for a wider rethink is already visible, with a European Parliament panel pressing for a broader review of crypto regulation.
A Response With Numbers Beats a Response With Opinions
The MiCA consultation is an evidence-gathering exercise, so submissions that carry measurable claims travel further than submissions that carry positions. A firm arguing against the interest prohibition is better off showing what volume moved offshore and where it went than asserting that the ban is disproportionate. A venue arguing that staking should stay outside the perimeter should quantify what compliance would cost and what would close.
One practical warning before Wednesday. The UK’s FCA crypto gateway also opens on 30 September, and the two events are unrelated beyond the coincidence of the date. One is a European Commission consultation closing in Brussels, the other is a British authorisation window opening in London. Firms operating on both sides of the Channel have two separate clocks running on the same day, and confusing them is the easiest mistake available this week.
Investor Takeaway
The 30 June 2027 report is the decision point that matters, because it is the vehicle any legislative proposal to extend MiCA would travel in.