EU should tokenize the boring stuff first, MiCA's own architect says DeFi can wait 🪙

The European Union should prioritize a broader digital asset framework covering real-world assets and tokenization before drafting a second version of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, an adviser at the European Commission said. The European Commission launched a public consultation on MiCA in May, with feedback accepted through Aug. 31, according to Cointelegraph's coverage of remarks made at WAIB Summit Monaco 2026.

Peter Kerstens, one of MiCA's architects, told Cointelegraph during a fireside chat that he does not personally consider MiCA outdated and stressed that the consultation will determine the bloc's next steps. "I do not believe that [MiCA] is outdated now. That's my personal opinion, but it does not matter. That's why we have this consultation," Kerstens said. MiCA is approaching the end of its transitional period on July 1, after which crypto asset service providers will be required to hold a MiCA license or stop servicing EU clients.

Decentralized finance protocols were included among the emerging risk areas examined in the consultation, even though they are largely outside MiCA's current scope. Kerstens said regulating DeFi would be difficult because laws can be applied to people and organizations, but not directly to computer networks, and that lawmakers would need a new legal doctrine to regulate non-entities. "I don't see what the problem is. And if there is no problem, why should it be regulated?" he added, describing DeFi as a "movement" that has "no representatives."

His comments come after a March working paper from the European Central Bank examined whether decentralized autonomous organizations remain decentralized enough to stay outside MiCA's scope. The paper looked at Aave, MakerDAO, Ampleforth and Uniswap and reported that the top 100 governance token holders controlled over 80% of the supply in each protocol, based on holdings snapshots from November 2022 and May 2023, prompting the authors to question whether those entities should continue to be treated as "fully decentralized" services.