On 10 June 2025, the European Banking Authority (“EBA”) issued a No Action Letter in the form of an Opinion (EBA/Op/2025/08), providing targeted supervisory guidance to national competent authorities (“NCAs”) designated under Directive (EU) 2015/2366 (“PSD2”). The Opinion addressed the regulatory interplay between PSD2 and Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (“MiCA”), specifically in relation to the authorisation and supervision of crypto-asset service providers (“CASPs”) that conduct transactions involving electronic money tokens (“EMTs”). The EBA’s intervention sought to ensure supervisory convergence during the transitional period pending the application of the forthcoming Payment Services Regulation (“PSR”) and the transposition of PSD3.
The No Action Letter (“NAL”) covered the interim period between its publication in June 2025 and the end of the transition phase on 2 March 2026. In it, the EBA advised NCAs to treat only a limited subset of EMT-related crypto-asset services as constituting payment services requiring authorisation under PSD2. Importantly, the EBA recommended that such authorisation will only be required only after the expiry of the nine-month transition period and that NCAs adopt a simplified authorisation procedure. This streamlined process was intended to leverage documentation and information already submitted by legal entities in the context of their CASP authorisation under MiCA, thereby avoiding unnecessary duplication.
Furthermore, the EBA advised that, once a CASP, or an entity operating under a national transitional regime referenced in MiCA, obtained authorisation as a payment service provider (“PSP”), supervisory authorities should refrain from prioritising the enforcement of certain PSD2 requirements. These included, inter alia, specific safeguarding obligations relating to EMTs and detailed disclosure requirements concerning charges applicable to consumers. This approach represented a measured and pragmatic interpretation of the interaction between PSD2 and MiCA. Without the NAL, a stricter reading of both frameworks could have resulted in the immediate imposition of dual authorisation requirements for all EMT-related activities, with full compliance obligations applying upon the grant of PSD2 authorisation. The EBA’s position thus mitigated regulatory disruption and ensured operational continuity for CASPs already engaged in EMT transactions at the time of publication.
Since the issuance of the NAL, the EBA has observed considerable market engagement, with more than 100 CASPs either informally approaching NCAs or formally submitting applications for authorisation as PSPs. Given that the transition period was deliberately confined to nine months, so as to limit the duration during which unauthorised entities could provide payment services within the Union and recognising that supervisory capacity varies across Member States, the EBA has now issued a further Opinion to guide NCAs in prioritising authorisation processes as the transition period draws to a close.
The EBA’s competence to issue this Opinion derives from Article 29(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, which mandates the Authority to foster a common supervisory culture, promote consistent supervisory practices, and ensure uniform procedures and approaches throughout the Union, including through the issuance of Opinions addressed to NCAs. In accordance with Article 14(7) of the Rules of Procedure of its Board of Supervisors, the Opinion has been formally adopted and is addressed to the competent authorities designated under Article 22(1) PSD2 and Article 93(1) MiCA.
As the end of the NAL transition period on 2 March 2026 approaches, three principal scenarios may materialise in respect of a CASP operating under MiCA, or under one of the national transitional regimes referenced therein, that intends to continue conducting EMT transactions qualifying as payment services.
In the first scenario, the CASP has successfully secured authorisation as a payment institution (PI) or electronic money institution (EMI) or has entered into a partnership with a duly authorised PSP capable of providing the relevant services. In such circumstances, the CASP may continue to carry out EMT transactions in alignment with the scope of its own authorisation or that of its partner PSP.
In the second scenario, the CASP has submitted an application for authorisation but has not yet obtained approval. In this case, the EBA advises that the NCA under PSD2 may permit the CASP to continue performing EMT transactions that qualify as payment services—including on a cross-border basis—pending a final determination, provided strict cumulative conditions are satisfied. The application must have been properly submitted and be complete, with all information required under Article 5 PSD2 and the EBA Guidelines on the authorisation of payment institutions (EBA-GL-2017-09) available to enable assessment. The applicant must respond comprehensively, transparently and promptly to supervisory queries. The NCA must verify that the applicant has not been subject to supervisory measures or infringed MiCA, national virtual asset service provider regimes, or other relevant Union legislation, including anti-money laundering rules, in a manner that would materially affect its suitability for PSD2 authorisation. Finally, on the basis of a preliminary assessment, the NCA must have no reason to believe that the applicant will be unable to comply with PSD2 and must have reasonable grounds to expect that authorisation will be granted within a very short timeframe.
Where national law implementing Article 143(3) MiCA permits a separate transitional regime until 1 July 2026, the EBA clarifies that any such “very short timeframe” under PSD2 may not extend beyond that date, or beyond the date on which authorisation is granted or refused pursuant to Article 63 MiCA, whichever occurs first. The preliminary nature of the supervisory assessment does not preclude the possibility of subsequent refusal.
Where an NCA elects to allow continued operations under this second scenario, it is advised to impose specific interim restrictions. The CASP should cease all marketing activities relating to EMT services that qualify as payment services and should refrain from onboarding new clients for such services while its application remains under consideration. Coordination between PSD2 and MiCA authorities is expressly encouraged, including through amendments to existing CASP authorisations or referrals to enforcement divisions where appropriate. Notably, these marketing and onboarding restrictions do not apply to CASPs benefiting from national transitional regimes under Article 143(3) MiCA permitting continued operation until 1 July 2026 or until a decision under Article 63 MiCA is taken, whichever occurs earlier.
The third scenario concerns CASPs that have either failed to submit an application or have submitted one but do not satisfy one or more of the conditions outlined above. In such cases, the EBA advises that, as of 2 March 2026, the competent authority under PSD2—where necessary in coordination with MiCA authorities or other national enforcement bodies—should require the immediate cessation of EMT services that qualify as payment services and ensure the orderly offboarding of affected clients.
The Opinion also provides clarification on certain substantive aspects of PSD2 authorisation. A CASP seeking to comply with PSD2 must either obtain authorisation in its own right or operate, for example, as an agent of an authorised PSP. In the latter instance, NCAs are advised to consider whether the partner PSP itself may require authorisation under Article 59 MiCA. Moreover, NCAs are reminded that the execution of transfers involving EMTs may constitute a payment service under PSD2 such as the execution of payment transactions under point 3 of Annex I, irrespective of whether the custodial wallets involved qualify as payment accounts. As previously clarified in paragraph 71 of the NAL, PSD2 does not exempt payment transactions executed between different payment accounts held by the same user, even if serviced by the same PSP. Consequently, first-party transfers of EMTs fall within the scope of PSD2. By way of illustration, where a CASP provides custody and administration of EMTs and executes transfers on behalf of clients, including transfers to the same client in the context of payout arrangements, such transfers may independently qualify as payment transactions requiring PSD2 authorisation, regardless of the legal characterisation of the wallet.
This Opinion represents a further step in refining the supervisory architecture at the intersection of payment services regulation and the emerging crypto-asset framework. For market participants, the message is clear: the transitional accommodation afforded by the NAL is drawing to a close, and a structured, well-prepared approach to PSD2 authorisation is now indispensable for CASPs intending to continue EMT-related payment activities within the European Union.
