Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
FollowingEBA稳定币罚款方法论草案：首个公众反馈截止日期临近
欧洲银行管理局（EBA）针对其直接监管的重大稳定币发行者设定罚款的方法论草案，现已进入公众反馈的最后阶段。该咨询窗口将于9月28日关闭。
核心要点摘要
- 咨询截止时间为9月28日。
- 提案主要涵盖重大稳定币发行者。
- 草案确立了基础金额，随后根据具体情况进行调整。
- 最终方法将在收集反馈后确定。
需要明确的是，这是《加密资产市场法规》（MiCA）中针对特定领域的规则。该提案适用于在EBA直接监管下的重大资产参考代币（ART）和电子货币代币（EMT）发行者。这并非针对整个欧洲加密货币市场的通用处罚时间表。
电子货币代币锚定单一官方货币，而资产参考代币可锚定其他资产或一篮子价值组合。“重大性”地位需通过单独的MiCA评估确定，并非自动附加于所有挂钩欧元或美元的代币之上。虽然许多加密资产服务提供商由各国当局监管，且欧洲证券和市场管理局（ESMA）维护着中央MiCA登记册，但“重大性”地位还会影响储备金规则，这是一个独立的问题。此前欧洲央行曾警告过稳定币挤兑对银行构成的风险，当时也涉及相关议题。
EBA拟定的罚款计算两步法
MiCA法律框架内已对罚款上限设有法定限制。EBA的提案旨在确定在既定限制内的具体数值路径，而非创设新的最高限额。EBA可能采用的罚款确定流程如下：
- 确立起始金额： 草案根据违规行为的严重程度对违规行为进行分类，并利用发行者的年度营业额来设定基础金额。
- 案件事实测试： 违规持续时间、重复性失败、主观意图、配合程度以及补救措施等因素，均可作为上调或下调基础金额的依据。
法定上限并非第三步
最终罚款总额仍须受限于MiCA为每类发行者设定的法定天花板。对于重大的资产参考代币发行者，MiCA规定的上限为上一财年年度营业额的12.5%；对于重大的电子货币代币发行者，相应上限为10%。此外，若能确定收益或避免的损失，法规还规定可按该金额的两倍进行更高额度的计算。
为何法定上限无法确保执法的可预测性
天花板仅告知发行者最坏情况的边界，并不能解释两项不同违规行为将如何被处理。短期内及时披露的报告失误，与长期违规结合误导性信息或重复失败的情况截然不同。 proposed methodology（拟议方法论）旨在使这些区别在案件提交至EBA之前变得清晰可见。
The value ofto the market is not to guarantee specific outcomes, but to provide a clearer assessment of why a failure can lead to vastly different penalties and to review the EBA's reasoning logic when it takes action.
Outlook after September 28
After the consultation, the EBA will evaluate the submissions and issue the final methodology. Because the proposed severity classifications, turnover percentages and adjustment factors are still open for comment, the final document may differ from the draft in some respects. From then on, companies and other stakeholders will lose the formal opportunity to influence how they are calculated before the framework is finalized. However, direct supervision, fines and individual enforcement findings will still follow their respective legal procedures.
The final document will make the EBA's discretion more susceptible to testing
MiCA already stipulates who can issue certain crypto assets and what issuers must disclose. The core issue that has not yet been resolved is how the EBA will calculate penalties when a major issuer fails to comply with these rules. Before its first major law enforcement case tests its capabilities, the final methodology should make this reasoning process clearer.
This article is for reference only and does not constitute legal, financial or investment advice. The EBA's consultation is not the final methodology, and MiCA's enforcement responsibilities vary by entity and jurisdiction.
