At the beginning of 2026, the global digital asset market is experiencing an unprecedented regulatory divergence. While U.S. politics is still struggling over the advancement of the Clarity Act, Europe has already reshaped the rules of the game through concrete actions.

How big is this difference? Looking at the approaches on both sides makes it clear.

Europe spent ten years refining the MiCA framework. Established in 2023 and fully effective by early 2025, it covers 27 member states and a population of 450 million. The most critical part is the unified licensing system—companies authorized in any member state can legally serve the entire European market. This is no small matter; it provides real regulatory certainty.

In contrast, the U.S. moves at a completely different pace. The SEC fills legal gaps through enforcement actions. It finally passed legislation related to stablecoins in July 2025, but the outlook for the Clarity Act, which could impact the overall market structure, remains uncertain. Political game-playing and unpredictability are directly reflected in delays in policy implementation.

This is the core issue—when regulatory clarity emerges, capital flows to the jurisdictions that are regulation-friendly. In this "regulatory arbitrage," Layer 1 protocols that naturally fit into the European framework, originating from the Netherlands, are positioned most advantageously. Not only because of legal advantages but more importantly because of that certainty—something that risk-averse institutional capital values most.

Essentially, this global regulatory migration reflects a deeper logic: those who establish clear rules first will attract the capital and projects driven away by uncertainty.