The stablecoin battlefield has gotten pretty interesting lately.

There’s been a lot of activity in Europe—BNP Paribas, along with nine other banks, is planning to launch a euro stablecoin in the second half of 2026. The project is being managed by Qivalis, which is licensed by the Dutch central bank, and it has to comply with the MiCA regulations. Clearly, the compliance bar is set quite high. The European strategy is obvious: they don’t want to just watch others lead the digital currency race—they want a say in it and hope to provide new options for local businesses and users along the way.

But there are challenges. Even the Dutch central bank governor has warned that if the stablecoin market grows unchecked, it could disrupt monetary policy. And the awkward reality is that euro stablecoins currently account for less than 1% of the global market share—the foundation is too weak, and there are several hurdles to overcome before making a comeback.

What about the US? Trump signed the GENIUS Act, which specifically sets rules for payment stablecoins. You can see that everyone’s after this sector, but each has a different approach. Europe is taking an alliance and compliance route, while the US is moving quickly with a legislative framework.

There’s also an incident that really illustrates the point—Tether halted EURt euro stablecoin redemptions because of the new MiCA regulations. What does this show? When the rules change, issuers have to adapt, or risk crashing out at any moment.

Honestly, stablecoins right now are like a half-finished product. Both Europe and the US are scrambling to secure their positions, but no one is confident that they’ll come out on top. Regulators are worried about potential problems, issuers are afraid of stepping on landmines, and the market is still in a trial-and-error phase.

The game has only just begun, and how it develops will depend on how all sides balance the scales—getting the market moving while keeping risks from exploding.