FSB global stablecoin recommendations: the supranational baseline shaping national frameworks
The Financial Stability Board's revised 2023 recommendations on global stablecoins set a minimum-standards baseline that most national frameworks — MiCA, HKMA, MAS SCS, UK proposals — implement in some form. Here is what the recommendations require and how they map to current national rules.
The Financial Stability Board ("FSB") is the G20-mandated body that coordinates international financial regulation. Its work does not have direct legal effect — recommendations are addressed to national authorities, which implement them via their own laws and rules. For stablecoins, the FSB published high-level recommendations in 2020 and revised them in July 2023.
The ten high-level recommendations
The FSB framework rests on ten recommendations applicable to global stablecoin arrangements ("GSCs") — stablecoins with the potential to reach a global scale and significance:
- Authority and powers: national authorities should have sufficient powers to regulate, supervise, and oversee GSC activities.
- Comprehensive oversight: the full set of functions in a GSC arrangement should be subject to comprehensive oversight (issuance, reserves, wallets, settlement, transfer mechanism).
- Cross-border cooperation: authorities should cooperate domestically and internationally.
- Governance: GSCs should have a comprehensive governance framework with clear allocation of accountability.
- Risk management: comprehensive risk management framework covering operational resilience, cyber, AML/CFT.
- Data: robust systems for collecting, storing, and safeguarding data.
- Recovery and resolution: appropriate plans for orderly wind-down.
- Disclosures: comprehensive and transparent information to users.
- Redemption rights and stability: legal claim against the issuer and/or reserve assets; redemption within reasonable time.
- Regulatory compliance prior to launch: GSC operators must meet all applicable regulatory requirements before operating.
How national frameworks map to FSB recommendations
| FSB recommendation | EU (MiCA) | UK (proposed) | HK (Stablecoins Ord.) | SG (SCS) | US (state + OCC) | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Authorisation prior to launch | ✓ Article 16/48 | ✓ proposed | ✓ HKMA licence | ✓ MAS recognition | Patchwork (state MTL + OCC IL) | | Reserve composition (HQLA, segregated) | ✓ | ✓ proposed | ✓ | ✓ | NY DFS only | | Redemption at par | ✓ (Article 49/55) | ✓ proposed | ✓ (1 BD) | ✓ (5 BD) | NY DFS only | | Audit + monthly attestation | ✓ | ✓ proposed | ✓ | ✓ | NY DFS only | | Recovery / wind-down plan | ✓ | ✓ proposed | ✓ | ✓ | — | | Cross-border cooperation | ✓ (EU passport) | — | — | — | — |
Two patterns are visible:
- Convergence on substantive requirements: reserves, redemption, audit, governance. Issuer capital, segregation, and at-par redemption are now table stakes in any developed-market framework.
- Divergence on perimeter and process: the EU and UK adopt a single-statute framework; Hong Kong and Singapore adopt single-instrument labelled regimes; the US continues to combine state-level money transmitter licensing with federal-level interpretive authority and unfinalised bills.
What FSB does not prescribe
- Specific reserve asset definitions (national authorities choose between "central-bank deposits + sovereign debt" vs. broader HQLA).
- Specific capital ratios.
- The technological architecture (chain, wallet, settlement model).
- Whether algorithmic or asset-referenced multi-collateral stablecoins are permitted (most adopting jurisdictions exclude them).
Practical relevance
For a stablecoin issuer with multi-jurisdictional ambitions:
- The FSB recommendations are a useful baseline diligence checklist — meeting all ten is a necessary but not sufficient condition for any major-jurisdiction licence.
- Track the FSB's annual progress report on national implementation. The report identifies which jurisdictions still have gaps, which is a leading indicator of where future rulemaking will focus.
- Reciprocal-recognition arrangements between jurisdictions are evolving. MiCA does not currently treat HKMA-licensed FRS as equivalent, but the FSB cross-border cooperation recommendation is the policy hook for future equivalence regimes.
Primary Sources
Get the briefing in your inbox
One concise email when there's something worth reading. No spam.