The Monetary Authority of Singapore is proposing to let select foreign-issued and jointly issued stablecoins qualify for its regulated stablecoin framework, opening a public consultation on Sept. 1, 2026 that runs through Oct. 16, 2026.
The development could have major implications for stablecoin issuers, payment companies and institutions exploring blockchain-based settlement. It also signals that Singapore’s approach to digital assets is evolving alongside the increasingly international nature of the stablecoin market.
MAS opened a public consultation on Sept. 1 on proposed amendments to the Payment Services Act 2019, together with additional policy measures reflecting developments in stablecoin regulation since the original framework was established.
Singapore reconsiders its stablecoin borders
At the centre of the consultation is a proposal to permit certain stablecoins jointly issued by a Singapore-based issuer and an overseas issuer to come under the MAS framework.
Such tokens could potentially receive the “MAS-regulated stablecoin” designation if the risks associated with their cross-border structure are sufficiently mitigated. That would mark a notable departure from the position Singapore adopted in 2023.
Under the original regime, MAS limited recognition to single-currency stablecoins pegged to the Singapore dollar or a G10 currency and issued in Singapore. Multi-jurisdictional issuance was excluded at the time because MAS said it was difficult to establish regulatory equivalence and effective cooperation with overseas authorities.
The regulator also identified practical concerns around overseas reserve assets, including the difficulty of determining where commingled stablecoins originated and whether reserves held outside Singapore would be adequate to satisfy redemption requests.
That caution now appears to be softening.
MAS is also seeking views on whether a limited number of foreign-issued stablecoins could be recognized where they are supervised under comparable overseas regulatory regimes. The proposal is aimed particularly at cross-border wholesale applications, suggesting that institutional settlement may be a key driver behind the policy rethink.
Why the policy shift matters for stablecoins
The proposed expansion of the MAS framework comes at a time when stablecoins are increasingly being considered for payments, settlement and tokenized financial markets rather than simply cryptocurrency trading.
MAS Deputy Managing Director for Financial Supervision Ho Hern Shin said the proposed legislative changes are intended to support responsible financial innovation while maintaining strong regulatory safeguards.
“Trusted and well-regulated stablecoins can serve as a credible settlement asset in tokenized financial markets,” Ho said, adding that this can help mitigate risks to users and the wider financial system.
That distinction is important. MAS is not proposing to open the door indiscriminately to every offshore stablecoin. Instead, its consultation points toward a controlled recognition mechanism in which overseas regulatory standards, cooperation and risk controls would remain critical.
For issuers, recognition could provide greater credibility in Singapore and potentially improve access to institutional users. For financial institutions, regulated stablecoins could become more useful as blockchain-based settlement infrastructure develops.
The proposal therefore represents less of a regulatory retreat than an attempt to make Singapore’s rules compatible with an increasingly interconnected stablecoin ecosystem.
Tough safeguards remain at the centre
Despite the proposed opening to foreign-linked stablecoins, the MAS framework would continue to impose demanding requirements on issuers seeking regulatory recognition.
The consultation proposes requirements covering reserve-backed value stability, capital, redemption at par and disclosures. Only issuers licensed under the regime would be allowed to market themselves as MAS-regulated stablecoin issuers or describe their tokens as “MAS-regulated stablecoins.”
MAS is also proposing a ban on interest payments on regulated stablecoins, alongside mandatory stress testing and requirements for issuers to maintain recovery and orderly wind-down plans.
Customer protection is another major focus. Issuers would be required to safeguard customer money received before the corresponding stablecoins are issued, adding another layer of protection around the assets supporting token issuance.
The structure reflects the principles behind Singapore’s 2023 regime, which required reserve assets to meet strict standards, established capital requirements and gave holders a right to redeem qualifying stablecoins at par.
MAS framework could reshape Singapore’s stablecoin market
The latest proposals suggest the MAS framework is moving from a primarily domestic model toward a more selective international approach.
That does not mean every offshore stablecoin will suddenly qualify for recognition. MAS is proposing recognition for only a limited number of foreign-issued tokens operating under comparable regulatory regimes, while jointly issued stablecoins would need to satisfy conditions designed to address cross-border risks.
Stablecoins that fall outside the dedicated regime would continue to be treated as digital payment tokens under Singapore’s existing rules rather than receiving the MAS-regulated designation.
The consultation also gives market participants an opportunity to influence how the next phase of regulation takes shape. MAS is accepting public feedback until Oct. 16.
For Singapore, the challenge is now to balance two competing priorities: preserving confidence in the financial system while ensuring regulation does not prevent the country from participating in the next stage of digital finance.
The MAS framework may ultimately become more internationally accessible, but the proposed changes make clear that regulatory recognition will remain tied to transparency, reserve quality, redemption rights and strong governance.
If adopted, the changes could position Singapore as a bridge between domestic regulation and the growing global market for institutional stablecoin settlement — without abandoning the safeguards that made its original framework one of the region’s more closely watched cryp