Turkey has made substantial progress bringing crypto service providers within a regulatory framework, yet a separate regime for stablecoin issuers remains unfinished. That is the central tension in the Financial Stability Board’s November 11 peer review: the country’s market is more visible to supervisors, but digital tokens linked to outside currencies still raise questions the existing structure does not fully answer.
The international watchdog praised registration and licensing requirements for crypto-asset service providers, safeguards that separate certain custodial holdings, and a centralized data platform for monitoring the industry. It nevertheless asked Turkish authorities to take further steps on financial-stability monitoring, supervision, enforcement and cross-border cooperation. This is a review and set of recommendations, not an announcement that the FSB has directly imposed new Turkish laws.
Why stablecoins are the unfinished piece
Stablecoins can transmit risks differently from speculative crypto assets. Tokens denominated in foreign currencies can be used as a store of value or a route for moving money internationally, and their stability depends on the issuer’s backing, redemption arrangements and operational controls. A licensing scheme for trading venues alone does not necessarily answer who supervises a stablecoin issuer or how it would meet redemptions under stress.
According to the FSB, Turkey has already prohibited the domestic use of crypto-assets for payments. The watchdog presents that restriction, together with custody protections, as one way to limit connections between crypto activity and the conventional payment and banking system. It should not be mistaken for a blanket ban on all crypto ownership or exchange activity.
What supervisors have already built
The peer review credits Turkish authorities with bringing a large part of service-provider activity inside the regulatory perimeter. It also notes a central data platform intended to help authorities understand business models and potential contagion channels. Visibility, however, does not guarantee uniform risk controls across every issuer or eliminate the need for enforcement capacity.
The report recommends operational financial-stability monitoring, a dedicated stablecoin framework, stronger supervision and enforcement, and better international information-sharing. Those are separate workstreams. Even if a domestic exchange is licensed, stablecoins may be issued abroad and circulate across networks and intermediaries.
The regional and global context
This issue extends beyond Turkey. Optimisus recently examined why Dubai’s public register distinguishes full licences from in-principle approvals, and why changes to proposed US crypto transfer reporting rules should not be confused with existing obligations. Both demonstrate that counting registered firms or announcing a proposal is different from showing an operational regulatory regime.
The next meaningful milestone is a detailed Turkish plan for stablecoin issuers, including reserves, redemptions, oversight and cross-border cooperation. The FSB’s assessment establishes where the gaps are; it does not, by itself, say when those gaps will close.
Sources: Financial Stability Board press release, November 11, 2026; FSB Peer Review of Türkiye.
