MAS consults on legislation for its stablecoin framework

On 1 September 2026 the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) published the Consultation on Proposed Amendments to the Payment Services Act 2019 for Stablecoins Regulation (consultation P015-2026), with draft legislative amendments attached. The amendments would implement the MAS Single-Currency Stablecoin (MAS-SCS) framework, setting out how issuers can become MAS-regulated and which safeguards they must meet. Those affected are stablecoin issuers, digital payment token service providers and groups planning to use stablecoins for settlement. Comments closed on 16 October 2026.

What the rules say

The framework itself has been some years in the making. MAS first consulted on it on 26 October 2022 and published its response to feedback on 15 August 2023. It covers single-currency stablecoins issued in Singapore and pegged to the Singapore dollar or a G10 currency. What is new is that MAS has now proposed the statutory text.

Under the framework, only licensed issuers may describe themselves as MAS-regulated stablecoin issuers and call their tokens "MAS-regulated stablecoins". MAS says the label is meant to help users tell such tokens apart from other crypto tokens that use the word "stablecoin" without MAS oversight of their value. Stablecoins that are not MAS-regulated would be treated as digital payment tokens and would carry the consumer safeguards that already apply to those. MAS gives examples: assessing a customer's risk awareness, and bans on trading incentives, on financing, margin or leverage, and on payment with locally issued credit cards.

MAS sought feedback on the draft requirements for value stability, capital, redemption at par and disclosure. It also proposed changes to the framework as it stood in 2023:

• stablecoins jointly issued by a Singapore issuer and a foreign issuer could fall under the framework and carry the "MAS-regulated" label, if risks are sufficiently mitigated;
• MAS would recognise a limited number of foreign-issued stablecoins regulated under a comparable foreign framework, citing cross-border wholesale use;
• interest could not be paid on MAS-regulated stablecoins;
• issuers would need stress testing and recovery and orderly wind-down plans; and
• customer money received before stablecoins are issued would have to be safeguarded.

According to a summary by the law firm Rajah & Tann Asia, the draft also provides for a "stablecoin issuance licence", for powers allowing MAS to designate systemic stablecoins, and for a requirement that banks wishing to issue MAS-regulated stablecoins do so through a separate non-bank entity. The MAS media release does not mention these points, and we have not been able to check them against the consultation paper.

Who is affected

The proposals matter most to firms that want to issue a Singapore dollar or G10-pegged stablecoin from Singapore, and to digital payment token service providers that list stablecoins. Foreign issuers whose stablecoins are used in wholesale cross-border payments may seek recognition.

For groups in the UAE, Mauritius or the Seychelles, the interest lies in two places. Issuers already regulated elsewhere will want to know whether joint issuance or recognition gives them a route into Singapore. Treasury and trade teams that settle in stablecoins will want to know which tokens their Singapore counterparties may call "MAS-regulated".

Key dates

• 26 October 2022: first MAS consultation on the stablecoin framework.
• 15 August 2023: MAS response to feedback.
• 1 September 2026: consultation on draft amendments published.
• 16 October 2026: consultation closed.

MAS has not published a date for introducing the bill, or for the amendments to take effect.

What it means in practice

The framework is a label, not a ban. A stablecoin outside it would be treated as a digital payment token: it could not be described as MAS-regulated, and its users would have only the protections that apply to digital payment tokens.

Consider a hypothetical UAE-based issuer of a US dollar stablecoin that wants institutional clients in Singapore. On the release's description it has three possible paths: set up a Singapore issuer and seek a licence, issue jointly with a Singapore entity, or apply for recognition as a foreign stablecoin. MAS says recognition will be limited in number, so the issuer should not count on the third. Whichever route it takes, the prohibition on interest means that any yield feature in the product would need review.

What we do not yet know

MAS has not said when it will respond to the comments or when the legislation will be passed. The detail on capital levels, reserve composition and redemption timeframes is in the consultation paper and draft amendments rather than the release, and may change after consultation. Nor has MAS said which foreign frameworks it would regard as comparable.