EBA's 12 February 2026 Opinion On The End Of The NAL Transition Period: Clarifying The PSD2–MiCA Interplay!

On 12 February 2026, the European Banking Authority (EBA) issued an Opinion addressing supervisory priorities at the end of the transition period under its June 2025 No Action Letter (NAL) on the interplay between PSD2 and MiCA.

The Opinion is grounded in Article 29(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, which empowers the EBA to promote consistent supervisory practices across the Union by issuing opinions to NCAs.

The core issue concerns crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) that carry out transactions involving electronic money tokens (EMTs) and whose activities may qualify as "payment services" under PSD2. The NAL had temporarily mitigated the regulatory friction between MiCA and PSD2. The February 2026 Opinion clarifies what happens when that transitional accommodation comes to an end on 2 March 2026.

The Background: The June 2025 No Action Letter

On 10 June 2025, the EBA issued its No Action Letter, responding to uncertainty regarding whether CASPs dealing with EMT transactions required separate authorisation under PSD2 in addition to MiCA authorisation.

Rather than adopting the strictest possible interpretation, which would have required immediate dual authorisation for all EMT-related transactions, the EBA adopted a more proportionate supervisory stance.

It advised NCAs:

• To treat only a subset of EMT-related crypto-asset services as payment services requiring PSD2 authorisation;
• To allow a transition period until 2 March 2026 before PSD2 authorisation would be enforced;
• To streamline the authorisation process by relying on information already submitted under MiCA; and
• Once authorised under PSD2, not to prioritise enforcement of certain requirements (including safeguarding of EMTs and specific consumer disclosure obligations).

The NAL therefore facilitated business continuity while avoiding an abrupt regulatory burden; however, the transition period was intentionally limited to nine months.

The Legal Overlap Between PSD2 and MiCA

The structural tension arises because MiCA does not displace payment services legislation.

Under MiCA, EMTs are crypto-assets referencing a single fiat currency. Under PSD2, however, the execution of payment transactions constitutes a regulated payment service. Where a CASP executes transfers of EMTs on behalf of clients, that activity may fall within Annex I PSD2, in particular payment service 3 (execution of payment transactions).

In its February 2026 Opinion, the EBA reiterates that this qualification does not depend on whether the custodial wallet constitutes a "payment account". Nor does PSD2 exclude so-called first-party transfers.

As clarified in paragraph 71 of the No Action Letter, PSD2 does not create an exception for payment transactions executed between different accounts held by the same payment service user, even where serviced by the same provider. Accordingly, first-party transfers of EMTs may still constitute regulated payment transactions.

The EBA further explains that where a CASP provides custody and administration of EMTs and executes transfers on behalf of clients (including transfers to the same client as part of the pay-out leg of custody) such transfers may themselves qualify as payment transactions requiring PSD2 authorisation, irrespective of whether the custodial wallet qualifies as a payment account.

In practical terms, compliance with PSD2 may therefore require a CASP either to obtain authorisation as a payment institution or electronic money institution, or to operate through or as an agent of an authorised payment service provider. In such cases, NCAs are advised to assess whether the partner PSP itself requires authorisation under Article 59 MiCA.

MiCA authorisation alone may therefore be insufficient.

Supervisory Scenarios from 2 March 2026

The EBA's Opinion identifies three possible scenarios that may arise when the NAL transition period ends:

1. Authorised or Partnered CASPs:

In the first scenario, the CASP has:

• Obtained authorisation as a payment institution (PI) or electronic money institution (EMI), or
• Partnered with a PSP authorised to provide the relevant payment services.

In such cases, the CASP may continue providing EMT-related transactions in line with the scope of the PSP authorisation.

Where the CASP operates as an agent or through a partner PSP, NCAs are reminded to assess whether the partner PSP may require authorisation under Article 59 MiCA.

2. Pending PSD2 Authorisation:

In the second scenario, the CASP has submitted an application for PSD2 authorisation but has not yet received approval.

The EBA advises that NCAs may permit continued activity pending the decision, which may include the continuation of EMT-related payment services on a cross-border basis, provided strict cumulative conditions are met:

• The application has been duly submitted with all information required under Article 5 PSD2 and the EBA Guidelines on the authorisation of payment institutions (EBA-GL-2017-09);
• The applicant cooperates fully, transparently and expeditiously with supervisory queries;
• The NCA confirms that the applicant has not been subject to material supervisory measures or infringements under MiCA, national VASP regimes, AML law or other relevant EU legislation;
• Based on a preliminary assessment, there are reasonable grounds to expect authorisation within a very short timeframe.

Where Member States have applied the maximum MiCA transitional deadline of 1 July 2026 under Article 143(3), any supervisory flexibility must not extend beyond that date or the date of MiCA authorisation (or refusal), whichever occurs earlier.

If supervisory flexibility is granted, the CASP must:

• Cease marketing EMT-related payment services; and
• Refrain from onboarding new clients for such services.

The Opinion further clarifies that these interim restrictions do not apply to CASPs that under national law implementing Article 143(3) of MiCA, are permitted to continue operating until 1st July 2026, or until a MiCA authorisation decision is taken, whichever occurs earlier.

NCAs under PSD2 are advised to coordinate closely with MiCA authorities, including through the imposition of restrictions in existing CASP authorisations where necessary.

Importantly, the preliminary assessment does not prevent the eventual rejection of the application.

3. No Application or Non-Compliant Application:

In the third scenario, the CASP has either:

• Not submitted a PSD2 application; or
• Submitted an application that fails to meet the required conditions.

In this case, NCAs under PSD2, where necessary in coordination with MiCA authorities and other national enforcement bodies, are advised, as of the 2nd of March 2026, to require the CASP:

• To cease providing EMT services that qualify as payment services; and
• To offboard affected clients.

This confirms that supervisory tolerance under the NAL will not continue beyond the transition period.

What are the implications for the Applicable Regulatory Timelines?

The Opinion confirms that PSD2 compliance expectations formally apply from 2 March 2026, notwithstanding that MiCA's transitional regime under Article 143(3) may continue until 1 July 2026.

Although conditional supervisory flexibility exists, it is limited and temporary. Core PSD2 safeguards remain applicable. The underlying dual authorisation exposure is therefore not eliminated.

This sequencing creates structural complexity. CASPs may be required to obtain PSD2 authorisation before the expiry of the MiCA transitional period, despite PSD2 itself being expected to be replaced by PSD3 and the forthcoming Payment Services Regulation in 2027–2028.

The Opinion manages the transition pragmatically but does not resolve the normative tension between the two frameworks.

Concluding Remarks

The EBA's February 2026 Opinion provides necessary supervisory clarification at the end of the No Action Letter transition period. It establishes a structured supervisory framework that balances legal certainty with regulatory integrity.

However, it does not remove the structural overlap between MiCA and PSD2. Instead, it confirms that dual authorisation exposure persists, subject only to conditional and temporary supervisory accommodation.

From 2 March 2026, CASPs engaging in EMT-related activities that qualify as payment services must either be authorised under PSD2, operate through an authorised PSP, or cease such activities.

The broader question, whether legislative reform under PSD3 or amendment of MiCA will resolve this regulatory layering, remains open. The February 2026 Opinion therefore represents not the end of the interplay debate, but a further stage in its development.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.