FSB Urges Türkiye to Close Stablecoin Regulation Gap

The Financial Stability Board has urged Türkiye to close gaps in stablecoin regulation, warning that the absence of a dedicated issuer framework leaves important financial stability risks unresolved.

Its peer review, published on November 11, recognizes progress in regulating digital asset service providers but calls for further action on stablecoins, supervisory enforcement and cross-border cooperation. The findings place particular attention on foreign currency exposure and the potential for digital dollarization.

The distinction is significant: overseeing the platform where a stablecoin trades does not, by itself, establish safeguards for the issuer responsible for its reserves and redemption.

Stablecoin regulation meets demand for dollar exposure

The review describes a market in which speculative trading drives much digital asset activity, while stablecoins also serve as a store of value and a hedge against inflation and lira depreciation.

These uses bring stablecoins into a wider policy discussion. A dollar-linked token gives holders exposure to foreign currency through infrastructure whose issuer, reserves and supervisory authority may sit overseas.

The FSB identifies the lack of comprehensive stablecoin issuer regulation as a financial stability concern, given foreign exchange channels and the potential for digital dollarization.

The assessment does not establish that stablecoins have already undermined Türkiye’s monetary sovereignty. It identifies channels through which their use could affect capital flows and financial stability.

Platform licensing leaves an issuer gap

Türkiye has brought a substantial part of its domestic digital asset market within the regulatory perimeter through registration and licensing requirements for crypto-asset service providers.

These measures follow the country’s earlier moves to regulate digital asset platforms and custody services.

Authorities have introduced custody safeguards and operationalized a centralized data platform. A prohibition on using digital assets for domestic payments also helps limit some connections with banking and payment systems, the FSB acknowledges.

However, the review finds that the stablecoin framework remains incomplete.

It recommends issuer requirements covering redemption rights, effective stabilization mechanisms and prudential safeguards, alongside clarity on how stablecoins interact with payments and electronic money legislation.

For foreign stablecoins distributed through domestic platforms, the FSB calls for stronger expectations around reserve composition and transparency, supported by cooperation with issuers’ home authorities.

From registration to effective supervision

The recommendations also address the implementation of Türkiye’s existing digital asset framework.

Authorities should complete the transition from interim registration to full licensing on a defined schedule, address audit and review bottlenecks, and improve consistency in disclosures and reporting.

This distinction matters when assessing regulatory progress. Establishing a licensing framework and completing the authorization and supervision of individual providers are separate stages.

The FSB also recommends developing specific indicators for financial stability risks. Supervisory information could be supplemented with blockchain analytics and cross-border transaction data to improve visibility into activity outside domestic reporting.

The review reflects information on reforms available as of August 2026.

Foreign stablecoins test domestic oversight

The cross-border challenge becomes particularly clear when a domestic platform distributes a token issued abroad.

Local authorities can supervise the platform. Assessing the underlying stablecoin also requires information about the issuer, its reserve arrangements and the mechanisms supporting redemption.

International cooperation therefore becomes essential to effective stablecoin regulation.

Türkiye’s experience illustrates a broader challenge for markets where stablecoins meet demand for foreign currency exposure. Restricting domestic payments addresses one channel of risk; their use for savings and offshore transfers requires a wider supervisory view.

The FSB review does not introduce new Turkish stablecoin legislation. It identifies the next task for authorities: connecting oversight of domestic intermediaries with safeguards for the stablecoins moving through them.