‘We Need a Euro Coin’: Regulators Race to Counter US Stablecoin Grip on European Market
2025/07/05 02:30European authorities are sounding stronger warnings that the growing reliance on USD-backed stablecoins could undermine the euro’s sovereignty and disrupt the financial system. As the popularity of stablecoins surges across the region, officials are under rising pressure to promote euro-denominated digital assets.
Currently, most stablecoin activity in Europe is still based on the US dollar. This trend has sparked concern among central banks, regulators, and leading lenders. As the European Union rolls out new crypto regulations, debates over private and public digital options for money are intensifying.
US Dollar Stablecoins Fuel European Concerns
Recent data underscores Europe’s rapid adoption of stablecoins, though American assets continue to dominate. For example, while the region’s stablecoin activity has risen from 16% to 34% since 2024, nearly 99.8% of all stablecoins are USD-based. The scale of this dependency is now a critical issue for policy leaders.
North America leads stablecoin use, but Europe is catching upSince 2024, NA share rose from 38% to 42%, while EU has made a significant leap from 16% to 34%. Asia, on the other hand, fell sharply: 33% → 12%.However, 99.8% of the total stablecoin supply remains USD-based. pic.twitter.com/aXEIyAg4QZ
— CryptoRank.io (@CryptoRank_io) June 24, 2025
This reality heightens policy worries. If digital dollars become the mainstay of European commerce and savings, the ability of the European Central Bank to steer monetary policy and support the euro’s standing could suffer. The ECB has cautioned that large-scale USD stablecoin adoption could “undermine the euro’s sovereignty and financial stability.”
EU research reveals that dependence on USD-backed stablecoins could accelerate digital dollarization, further eroding sovereignty and central bank influence. Leaders at institutions like Société Générale continue to raise concerns about letting American payment systems lead within Europe.
Reports from the European Parliament outline how dollar-backed stablecoin growth could weaken the effectiveness of ECB actions and increase exposure to outside shocks. These risks have pushed the EU to adopt new regulatory frameworks, including the comprehensive Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation for stablecoin issuers.
“As a result of this growing concern with US stablecoins, the ECB has once again underscored the need for the digital euro as a possible counterweight,” Economic Governance and EMU Scrutiny Unit (EGOV) said.
MiCA Regulation Shapes the Future of Stablecoins
To address these challenges, the MiCA framework sets strict rules for stablecoin issuers, from reserve requirements to transparency and capital standards. Its chief purpose is supporting digital innovation while retaining firm control over monetary policy and limiting economic risks.
As one influential expert commentary notes, “Fostering innovation must be cautiously paired with the preservation of financial stability and trust.” Therefore, the EU is not banning dollar stablecoins but is working to encourage euro-backed digital assets that better fit its economic goals.
Some startups voice concerns that regulatory hurdles could stifle new projects. However, MiCA is widely seen as a foundation, giving investors and developers clear, harmonized rules in all member states and closing cross-border gaps. These safeguards are intended to limit the systemic risks seen in less-regulated markets.
Despite MiCA’s significance, real progress will depend on strong and even enforcement. The effectiveness of these rules hinges on regulators applying them fairly and consistently across Europe.
Balancing Private Solutions and a Potential Digital Euro
The stablecoin debate raises a bigger question. Should private euro-backed stablecoins take the lead, or should the European Central Bank launch its own digital euro?
Many policymakers see a digital euro as a way to protect monetary sovereignty and strengthen the international role of the single currency. Detailed analyses argue a digital euro could defend against dollarization and drive European digital competitiveness.
Nonetheless, some contend that a central bank digital currency may not offer significant advantages over efficient private payment and stablecoin solutions. The policy brief “Digital Euro: Catching Up and Browsing the Daisy” argues the rationale is currently weak and warns of overlap with private-sector options.
The division remains within policy circles. Maintaining public trust, avoiding risky market concentration, and driving local innovation dominate the ongoing debate. The recent ECB hearing provides further insight into how the central bank is weighing risks and opportunities in digital finance.
With stablecoin use accelerating in Europe, policymakers face a key choice. They must act swiftly to defend monetary sovereignty, apply EU-wide regulation, and foster innovations that reinforce—not undermine—the euro. MiCA has set a regulatory framework, but the ongoing debate between public and private digital options will shape the future.
As the region responds to digital finance growth and global USD dominance, its next steps remain crucial.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
AI investment enters the "Trough of Disillusionment", the next 18 months will be a life-or-death test!
Goldman Sachs believes that the AI investment cycle is currently in the "trough of disillusionment," but this is not the first time. The core contradiction lies in the fact that the business models of new cloud computing providers are highly dependent on end-user returns from AI spending, while currently "there are basically zero companies that can attribute profits to AI." Social Capital founder Palihapitiya has clearly defined an 18-month key window, during which the market will decide which AI business models are sustainable and which are not.
Anthropic's Core Concern: Revenue Can Be Withdrawn at Any Time, but Computing Power Costs Are Locked in for up to 20 Years
Zheshang Securities believes that Anthropic's revenue is mainly based on usage-based billing, with remaining performance obligations covering only about 5.1 months of annualized revenue, while compute power costs are already locked in with $895.4 billion in irrevocable commitments, some extending as far as 2045. Revenues can be reduced at any time, but costs are non-exitable, creating a highly asymmetric maturity gap between the two—this is the company's real core constraint.
Triple Pressure from the Federal Reserve, Treasury, and Congress; Goldman Sachs: Liquidity Crisis May Occur in 2027
Goldman Sachs warns that the reserve ratio of bank assets has dropped to around 11%, only slightly above the crisis trough of 2019. In the second half of 2027, a deadlock in debt ceiling negotiations will force the Treasury to rebuild the TGA, triggering a "perfect storm" of a sharp drop in reserves and a surge in T-bill supply; combined with stalled money market fund buying, this will create a huge liquidity black hole. The Federal Reserve could be forced into the awkward position of lowering interest rates and launching large-scale bond purchases to rescue the market.
Crypto prices
More
