The ECB published opinion CON/2026/13 on April 9, 2026, endorsing a European Commission proposal to give the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) direct supervisory control over systemically important crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), major trading venues, and central counterparties. Currently, 27 national regulators each handle licensing and oversight of crypto firms operating within their borders. The Commission's proposal, released in February 2026 as part of a broader Market Integration and Supervision legislative package, would consolidate that authority at the EU level for the largest cross-border operators.

"The ECB fully supports the Commission proposals, which constitute an ambitious step towards deeper integration," the central bank wrote in its opinion. The ECB added that "direct supervision by ESMA of certain market players is warranted to address risks stemming from their cross-border activities."

The numbers in the ECB's opinion illustrate the scale of the current patchwork problem. As of November 2025, 94 CASPs had been authorized under MiCA (the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, which took full effect on December 30, 2024), with 62 of those operating across seven or more member states and 47 targeting all EU markets. Under the current MiCA framework, ESMA functions primarily as a standards-setter and coordinator, with direct supervisory powers held only in limited circumstances; the proposed shift would give it direct authority over the largest cross-border operators. That level of cross-border activity, the ECB argued, calls for centralized expertise rather than a network of national authorities with varying standards and resources.

The ECB's support comes with conditions. The central bank warned explicitly that ESMA must receive "adequate staffing and financial resources" before absorbing expanded duties, cautioning that enlarging the mandate without matching capacity could weaken oversight rather than strengthen it. The ECB also recommended a phased transition away from national supervision to limit operational disruption, and requested a non-voting seat on ESMA's board for technical input. Despite carrying political weight, the opinion itself is non-binding.

Malta at the Center of the Dispute

The push to centralize oversight is partly a response to regulatory inconsistencies that critics say have emerged as national regulators competed to attract crypto business.

Malta hosts MiCA licenses for Crypto.com, Gemini, Bitpanda, OKX, and Blockchain.com, among others.

In July 2025, ESMA published a fast-track peer review of Malta's Financial Services Authority and found it had only "partially met expectations," having authorized at least one unnamed CASP while leaving material gaps in governance, ICT security, and anti-money laundering controls unresolved at the time of approval.

France's Autorité des Marchés Financiers has warned against what it called a "fast-food approach" to crypto licensing, an apparent reference to Malta's rapid authorization pace.

Malta's regulator is pushing back hard. Its financial services authority described the centralization plan as "an additional layer of bureaucracy" that would reduce efficiency. Luxembourg and Ireland, which have similarly attracted crypto and fintech firms under national licensing frameworks, are also aligned with the opposition bloc.

France, Italy, and Austria form the pro-centralization bloc, with the initiative fitting into the broader Capital Markets Union agenda to deepen EU financial market integration. Germany has co-backed the Capital Markets Union initiative alongside France, though its specific position on the ESMA supervisory proposal has not been formally confirmed.

Implications Beyond Europe

The consequences of this regulatory shift extend well past EU borders. Exchanges currently licensed in Malta serve large user bases across South Asia and Africa. If those firms transition from MFSA oversight to a centralized Paris regulator, the adjustment period carries real risks: paused onboarding, tightened identity verification requirements, or temporary service disruptions for non-EU users. Firms will need to re-establish compliance relationships under a new authority with potentially stricter standards.

Euro-backed stablecoins issued under MiCA's framework are increasingly used for transfers between Europe and countries including Nigeria, India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. Higher compliance costs imposed on issuers by a more demanding ESMA regime could translate into reduced liquidity or higher fees on those corridors, particularly after the MiCA grandfathering deadline expires on July 1, 2026. That deadline marks the end of a transitional period that currently allows existing CASPs operating under national rules to continue business while their MiCA licensing applications are pending.

South Africa, which published a stablecoin framework diagnostic in March 2025, is actively developing its own crypto oversight framework, while jurisdictions such as Kenya, Nigeria, and India are widely expected to benchmark against the EU model as they shape their own oversight approaches. A consolidated ESMA regime would effectively cement MiCA as the global standard that emerging-market regulators benchmark against, shaping policy well beyond European jurisdiction.

What Comes Next

The legislative proposal now moves to EU member state governments and the European Parliament for negotiation. A vote is expected in summer 2026. Supporters will need to overcome resistance from crypto-friendly jurisdictions with concrete economic interests in preserving national licensing autonomy. The ECB's formal endorsement gives the Commission additional institutional cover, but the political math in the Council remains unsettled.