Circle and Hyperliquid Push EU to Rewrite Crypto Rules in MiCA Review

TLDR

• Circle asked the EU to loosen stablecoin reserve rules under MiCA, including the 30% to 60% bank deposit requirement.
• The Hyperliquid Policy Center wants perpetual futures regulated under MiFID II instead of MiCA.
• Circle said only three of the top 30 global stablecoins currently meet MiCA standards.
• The European Central Bank backed easing the bank deposit floor for stablecoin issuers.
• The European Commission’s MiCA review consultation closed on September 30.

---

Circle and the Hyperliquid Policy Center have both asked European regulators to change parts of the EU’s crypto rulebook. The requests came through the European Commission’s review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, known as MiCA.

🇪🇺 We submitted feedback to the European Commission’s MiCA Review Consultation

As the largest MiCA-regulated e-money token (EMT) issuer for both the dollar (@USDC) and the euro (EURC), and having been the first major global issuer to comply back in July 2024, @circle knows… pic.twitter.com/YvEME8czAr

— Patrick Hansen (@paddi_hansen) October 1, 2026

The consultation period closed on September 30. Several firms submitted responses in the final days before the deadline.

Circle, which issues the USDC stablecoin, focused its submission on reserve requirements. The company said current rules force stablecoin issuers to hold too much cash in commercial banks.

Under MiCA, issuers must keep at least 30% of reserves in bank deposits. That number rises to 60% for stablecoins labeled as “significant” by the European Banking Authority.

Circle said this setup increases exposure to bank risk. The company pointed to its own experience in March 2023, when USDC briefly lost its dollar peg after $3.3 billion of its reserves got stuck at Silicon Valley Bank.

Circle Wants Reserve Rules Changed

Circle said only three of the world’s top 30 stablecoins currently meet MiCA standards. Those three are USDC, USDG, and EURC.

The company wants the bank deposit floor replaced with a liquidity-based rule instead. This would focus on how quickly assets can be sold rather than where they are held.

The European Central Bank has taken a similar position. It proposed that a portion of reserves mature within one to five working days rather than sit in bank deposits.

Circle also asked the EU to keep allowing multi-issuance. This practice lets a MiCA-licensed entity issue a stablecoin alongside a foreign affiliate under one global brand.

The company warned that blocking multi-issuance could push users toward offshore stablecoins that lack EU oversight. It cited the Commission’s own 2020 assessment, which raised the same concern.

Circle additionally asked regulators to drop two technical limits. One caps exposure to a single government at 35% of reserves. The other limits exposure to any one bank to 1.5% of that bank’s total assets.

Hyperliquid Targets Perpetual Futures Rules

The Hyperliquid Policy Center filed a separate response focused on perpetual futures contracts, often called perps. The group wants these products classified under MiFID II, the EU’s existing derivatives framework from 2014.

The center argued that perps should be judged by their economic features rather than the ledger they run on. It said current MiFID II categories already cover these products without new legislation.

The group also asked the EU to avoid applying contracts-for-difference rules to perps. It said the two products work differently because perps trade on open order books rather than against a single counterparty.

Other firms also responded to the review. Deutsche Börse Group proposed a new category for stablecoins used in settlement systems. Chamber of Progress backed keeping multi-issuance and allowing interest payments on e-money tokens.

The Commission has not set a timeline for its next steps following the review.