On November 18, 2025, the OCC published Interpretive Letter 1186. The letter didn't just authorize banks to hold crypto for gas fees — it implied a pathway for institutional staking on public blockchains. If you were a compliance officer at a bank exploring stablecoin custody, that letter changed your risk assessment overnight.
The question is: how long would it have taken your compliance team to find it?
If they rely on Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence, they probably saw it within 48 hours, buried in a feed covering all of financial regulation — banking, insurance, securities, crypto lumped together. If they rely on legal counsel alerts, maybe a week. If they rely on scanning the OCC website directly, hopefully that day — assuming someone was assigned to check that specific regulator that week.
Now multiply that by every jurisdiction your issuer operates in. The EBA is publishing MiCA technical standards on a rolling basis through 2026 — dozens of RTS and ITS documents across reserve requirements, liquidity, governance, and reporting. MAS updates its Single Currency Stablecoin (SCS) framework FAQ without warning. HKMA's sandbox program announces participant approvals and guidance changes on a Hong Kong business day schedule. The FCA publishes enforcement actions. The US Senate Banking Committee marks up amendments to existing stablecoin legislation.
A compliance team at a multi-jurisdictional stablecoin issuer needs to track all of this. In real time. Mapped to the specific frameworks they're subject to. With a way to turn developments into tracked action items before anything falls through the cracks.
That's what the Regulatory Change Feed does.
The Information Asymmetry Problem
The existing tools for regulatory monitoring were built for a different era. Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence and Lexology cover broad financial regulation — enterprise-priced, not stablecoin-specific, and not mapped to your active compliance frameworks. You get volume without relevance.
Industry Slack groups and Telegram channels give you speed but no reliability. Someone posts a screenshot of a draft bill with no source link. Someone else misinterprets an EBA consultation paper as a final regulation. There's no verification, no impact assessment, no linkage to your actual compliance obligations.
Manual monitoring challengeMost stablecoin compliance teams maintain a "reg tracker" — a spreadsheet updated by a junior analyst who manually scans regulator websites every week. Checking the EBA, the OCC, the FCA, MAS, HKMA, and others leaves room for missed deadlines and inconsistent data quality.
Most stablecoin compliance teams we've talked to maintain what they call a "reg tracker" — a spreadsheet updated by a junior analyst who manually scans regulator websites every week. That analyst checks the EBA, the OCC, the FCA, MAS, HKMA, maybe a few more. They copy-paste headlines, summarize developments in a few sentences, and flag anything that looks important.
This works until it doesn't. It doesn't work when the analyst is on vacation. It doesn't work when a regulator publishes guidance on a Friday afternoon Hong Kong time. It doesn't work when a consultation paper deadline falls on the same week as three other filings. It especially doesn't work when the development that matters most is a subtle change to an FAQ that invalidates a compliance assumption your team has been operating under for months.
What We Built
The Regulatory Change Feed sits inside the compliance module, alongside the framework assessments, posture scoring, and the License Tracker we just shipped.
It's a chronological, filterable stream of regulatory developments — legislation, regulations, guidance, consultation papers, enforcement actions, deadline changes, licensing regime announcements — each tagged to the specific frameworks your organization tracks.
Here's what makes it different from a newsletter or a spreadsheet:
Framework-mapped intelligence
Every event in the feed is tagged to one or more of the regulatory frameworks in your compliance dashboard. A new MiCA RTS publication? Tagged to MiCA. The GENIUS Act gets amended? Tagged to the GENIUS Act framework. An HKMA sandbox approval? Tagged to the HKMA Stablecoins Ordinance. You filter by framework and see only what affects your obligations. When you expand a framework in the frameworks view, the five most recent developments for that framework appear inline — no context switching required.
Impact classification with teeth
Every event gets an impact level: critical, high, medium, low, or informational. Critical means immediate action — a law enacted, a license regime effective date announced, an enforcement action against a peer issuer. High means material change requiring review within a week. This isn't arbitrary — the rubric is visible in the UI so your team applies it consistently. And when your team flags a critical or high event, one click creates a tracked action item in the posture dashboard. The regulatory development becomes a compliance task with a priority and an owner.
AI-powered summarization
When a regulatory document is long — and they often are; EBA technical standards regularly run 80+ pages — you can paste the full text and generate a 2-4 sentence summary focused on what changed, who it affects, and what the deadlines are. The AI (using the same Gemini integration that powers our stablecoin builder) is prompted specifically for a stablecoin compliance audience. It doesn't give you a generic legal summary; it tells you what a stablecoin issuer needs to know.
URL ingestion for speed
Paste a regulator URL and the system extracts the title, description, and published date from the page metadata. It pre-fills the event form for human review. Your analyst doesn't have to manually transcribe headlines — they paste the URL, verify the extracted fields, add the framework tags and impact level, and save.
10 min
Manual entry (old)
2 min
URL-ingested entry (new)
Weekly digest
A generated summary of the previous week's developments, grouped by impact level. Critical and high events get full summaries. Medium events are grouped by framework with titles. Upcoming deadlines for the next 30 days are surfaced at the bottom. Your CCO can brief the board from this digest without reading every individual entry.
How This Connects to Everything Else
The feed doesn't exist in isolation. It connects to the compliance infrastructure we've been building since we shipped the frameworks and posture dashboard:
When a feed event reveals a material framework change — say, the GENIUS Act gets amended — your team can update the framework status in the frameworks view. That status change triggers a posture recalculation across your entire compliance assessment. The feed gives you the signal; the framework and posture layers give you the structure to act on it.
When a feed event of type "licensing" is classified as critical or high, your team creates an action item directly from the feed. A new licensing regime announcement becomes a tracked task in the posture dashboard — assigned to the right person, with the source event linked. That's the bridge between "we saw a regulatory change" and "someone is responsible for evaluating it."
When a feed event of type "deadline" or "regulation" is tagged to a framework your team is actively tracking, it shows up in that framework's "Recent developments" section in the frameworks view. An EBA technical standard on reserve asset composition? Your team sees it right next to the MiCA framework status — no tab switching, no searching.
This is what we meant when we wrote about the Three-Color Evaluation Stack. The feed is the informational substrate. The framework assessments are the rule layer. The posture scoring is the evaluation. The human compliance team makes the judgment calls. Each layer informs the others.
A Real Example
Let's make this concrete. Say the EBA publishes a final Regulatory Technical Standard on MiCA reserve asset composition requirements. Here's what happens:
Your compliance analyst sees the publication on the EBA website (or gets a tip from an industry contact). They paste the EBA URL into the feed's URL ingestion field. The system extracts the title, description, and published date. The analyst selects framework: MiCA. Event type: regulation. Impact: high (it's a final RTS, not a consultation). They paste the full text and hit "Generate summary." The AI returns a focused summary for their review.
They save the event. It appears at the top of the feed for the entire compliance team. It shows up in the "Recent developments" section of the MiCA framework detail view. It appears in next week's digest under the "Critical & High" section.
The analyst clicks "Create action" — the system pre-fills the title from the event, maps MiCA as the framework, and converts the impact level to a priority. The action item appears in the posture dashboard. The team lead assigns it to the reserves specialist. The specialist reviews the RTS against the current reserve composition rules and updates them if needed.
Total time from publication to tracked action item: under 15 minutes. Compare that to the old model: analyst finds it during weekly scan (1-7 day delay), writes it up in a spreadsheet, emails the team, someone eventually creates a Jira ticket, the ticket sits in a backlog. By the time someone reviews the actual RTS, two weeks have passed.
What This Doesn't Do (Yet)
Honesty about scope: the MVP is manually populated. Your team creates feed entries. We provide tools to make that fast — URL ingestion, AI summarization, CSV bulk import for backfilling — but we don't automatically scrape regulator websites or ingest RSS feeds. That's coming, but we shipped the core value first: a structured, searchable, framework-mapped feed with action item generation.
We also don't auto-classify impact levels. Your team applies the rubric and makes the judgment. An AI might flag an EBA consultation paper as critical when it's actually routine. Human judgment on impact assessment is non-negotiable for compliance work.
Push notifications — email, Slack, webhooks for critical events — are also future scope. For now, the feed is in-app with filtering by status, so your team can see which events are new versus reviewed versus flagged for action. Your team checks the feed like they check the posture dashboard: daily.
Who This Is For
If you're a solo compliance officer at a startup issuing a single stablecoin in one jurisdiction, you probably don't need this. You can track three or four regulatory developments a month in your head.
If you're running compliance at an issuer operating under MiCA, the GENIUS Act, MAS, and HKMA simultaneously — or if you're planning to be — you're already drowning in regulatory developments and you know it. The compliance module gives you the framework. The feed gives you the intelligence layer on top. The License Tracker gives you the operational layer underneath.
Together, they replace the combination of spreadsheets, Thomson Reuters subscriptions, legal counsel alerts, and Telegram monitoring that most multi-jurisdictional compliance teams are duct-taping together today.
As we covered in our analysis of crypto companies racing for bank charters, the regulatory environment is bifurcating. Companies that stay on top of regulatory developments will be positioned when frameworks finalize. Companies that don't will be reacting instead of planning.
The feed makes sure you're in the first group.
Key takeaway
Regulatory developments move faster than manual monitoring. Multi-jurisdictional issuers operating under MiCA, GENIUS Act, MAS, and HKMA simultaneously need structured intelligence feeds mapped to their frameworks—not spreadsheets and Telegram screenshots.
The Regulatory Change Feed is available now in the Compliance module. Log in to start tracking regulatory developments mapped to your frameworks.
