EU Lawmakers Call for DeFi, Staking, and NFT Regulatory Assessment

European Union legislators are pressing for a structured assessment of how decentralised finance, staking, and non-fungible tokens should fit into the EU's regulatory architecture. The call signals that MiCA, which came into full effect for crypto asset service providers, was always intended as a first layer rather than a finished framework, and that significant rulemaking gaps remain open for some of the fastest-growing segments of the crypto market.

What the Lawmakers Are Asking For

Members of the European Parliament have urged the European Commission to carry out a dedicated assessment of the regulatory treatment of DeFi protocols, staking arrangements, and NFT markets. The request reflects a recognition that MiCA was deliberately scoped to exclude or defer these areas, and that the absence of clear rules is creating uncertainty for firms, auditors, and investors operating across EU member states.

The call is not a legislative proposal in itself. It is a political signal that the Commission should begin the groundwork, which typically means consultation, impact assessment, and eventually draft legislation or delegated acts. Given the EU's standard rulemaking timeline, firms should not expect binding rules in the immediate term, but the direction of travel is now clearer.

Why DeFi Is the Most Complex Case

DeFi presents the sharpest challenge for any regulatory framework. Protocols that operate through smart contracts and liquidity pools without a central intermediary do not map neatly onto the regulated-entity model that underpins MiCA, MiFID II, or the existing e-money rules. Lawmakers appear aware of this tension: the assessment they are requesting would need to address questions of who bears regulatory responsibility when there is no identifiable operator, how AML obligations apply to permissionless systems, and whether existing financial crime rules can reach on-chain activity at all.

For accounting firms advising clients with DeFi treasury positions or yield-farming strategies, the current gap means that accounting treatment, disclosure, and tax characterisation all rest on general principles rather than sector-specific guidance. That ambiguity carries audit risk.

Staking: Where the Tax and Accounting Questions Are Sharpest

Staking rewards sit at the intersection of regulatory classification and tax treatment. Whether staking constitutes a financial service, an investment activity, or simply a technical participation mechanism has direct consequences for VAT, corporate tax, and the accounting treatment of rewards as income or capital. Different EU member states are currently applying different approaches, and without a harmonised EU-level position, cross-border structuring decisions are being made under material uncertainty.

The lawmakers' push for a formal assessment of staking regulation may eventually feed into a more consistent EU-wide tax and reporting framework, including how staking rewards are captured under DAC8 reporting obligations. Firms advising clients on DAC8 reporting implications for accounting firms should monitor whether the assessment produces any interim guidance on reward classification.

NFTs: Fragmented and Largely Unregulated

NFTs were explicitly carved out of the core MiCA framework except where a token is judged to be fungible in practice or functions as a financial instrument. That carve-out has left a wide grey zone. High-value NFT collections, fractionalised NFTs, and NFTs tied to real-world asset rights are all being treated inconsistently across jurisdictions. The assessment call suggests that lawmakers want the Commission to map this landscape and determine whether targeted rules are needed, or whether existing frameworks can be extended with guidance.

From an accounting perspective, NFTs held on a corporate balance sheet still lack a definitive IFRS or EU GAAP treatment. Firms should document their chosen accounting policies carefully until a harmonised approach emerges.

What Firms Should Do Now

This is an early-stage political development, not a compliance deadline. But firms that wait for final rules before building internal frameworks tend to find themselves scrambling. A few practical steps are worth taking now.

First, map your clients' exposure to DeFi protocols, staking arrangements, and NFT holdings. Understanding the scale of unregulated activity within your client base is the foundation for any future compliance response. Second, review how staking rewards and DeFi yields are currently being characterised for tax and accounting purposes, and document the rationale. Third, track progress on MiCA compliance obligations, since the gaps being assessed by lawmakers will likely be addressed through amendments or delegated acts that build on the existing MiCA structure. Our coverage of MiCA compliance obligations for crypto asset service providers sets out the current baseline.

The EU regulatory cycle for crypto is not slowing down. Firms that treat MiCA as the endpoint are likely to find themselves behind the curve when the next wave of rules arrives.

What exactly are EU lawmakers asking for?

Members of the European Parliament are calling on the European Commission to conduct a formal assessment of how DeFi, staking, and NFT markets should be regulated under EU law. This is a political request for groundwork, not a legislative proposal with immediate effect.

Does MiCA already cover DeFi and staking?

MiCA's scope was intentionally limited. Fully decentralised protocols without an identifiable issuer or service provider fall largely outside its remit. Staking is addressed only partially, and NFTs are excluded except where they display fungible characteristics or qualify as financial instruments.

How should accounting firms treat staking rewards under current EU rules?

There is no single harmonised EU rule. Firms should apply general income recognition principles, document their chosen treatment, monitor DAC8 reporting requirements, and revisit their approach as the regulatory assessment progresses.

What is the likely timeline for new EU rules on DeFi or NFTs?

EU rulemaking typically takes several years from initial assessment to binding regulation. Firms should not expect finalised rules in the short term, but early-stage policy signals like this one are worth tracking because they shape future compliance obligations.

How does this affect DAC8 reporting obligations?

DAC8 reporting obligations already apply to certain crypto asset transactions. If the EU assessment leads to staking and DeFi activity being brought more clearly within regulated frameworks, it could expand the scope of reportable transactions. Firms should review current DAC8 obligations and flag the potential for scope changes to clients.

Source: Cointelegraph Regulation