Hong Kong Financial Secretary Paul Chan said on February 11, 2026 that the jurisdiction planned to issue a small first batch of stablecoin-issuer licences in March 2026, establishing a near-term timetable for converting its statutory framework into supervised businesses.
Chan delivered the announcement at Consensus Hong Kong 2026. He said applicants would be assessed for real-world use cases, credible and sustainable business models, and strong regulatory-compliance capabilities. The statement did not identify successful applicants, specify the number of licences or approve any stablecoin for circulation.
That distinction was central to the event-day record. Hong Kong had created a regulated route for fiat-referenced stablecoin issuers, but on February 11 it had not yet announced a licensed issuer or demonstrated that a regulated token was operational.
From legislation to licensing
Hong Kong’s Stablecoins Ordinance took effect on August 1, 2025. The framework requires authorization from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority for covered fiat-referenced stablecoin issuance and is supported by separate supervisory and anti-money-laundering guidelines.
An HKMA briefing dated February 2, 2026 said applications were being processed, that the licensing threshold would be high and that only a handful of licences were expected initially. Chan’s February 11 address placed that cautious approach inside a broader digital-asset policy: limited entry first, followed by observation of whether approved businesses could deliver practical payment or settlement uses while meeting regulatory requirements.
The official record therefore supports a timetable and regulatory policy, not a completed licensing action. Receiving a licence would also be different from launching a token. An issuer would still need operational systems, reserve arrangements, redemption processes, distribution channels and continuing compliance before a stablecoin could function at scale.
Why the first batch mattered
The planned decisions represented an institutional test for Hong Kong’s effort to combine digital-asset development with bank-style supervision. Stablecoin regulation addresses more than whether a token maintains a quoted price near its reference currency. It also concerns the legal claim held by users, the quality and custody of reserves, redemption at par, governance, technology controls and protections against illicit finance.
A deliberately small first group would give the HKMA a limited set of issuers to supervise as the regime moved from written standards into operating practice. It would also help determine whether regulated stablecoins could connect with Hong Kong’s separate work on tokenised deposits and assets without treating every applicant or proposed use case as equally mature.
Chan linked stablecoins specifically to payment and settlement frictions in the real economy. That was a policy rationale, not evidence that a licensed token had already reduced costs, accelerated settlement or attracted users. Those outcomes required measurement after issuance.
The February 11 speech also said officials were finalising proposed licensing arrangements for digital-asset dealers and custodians, with legislation targeted for summer 2026. That showed stablecoin issuance was one component of a wider regulatory perimeter rather than a standalone approval campaign.
What remained uncertain
No applicant names, token networks, reserve portfolios, issuance volumes or launch dates were confirmed on February 11. No market-price reaction can be attributed to the address from the cited records, and this reconstruction makes no price, return, capitalization or trading-volume claim.
The appropriate event-day conclusion was narrow: Hong Kong expected to begin choosing its first regulated stablecoin issuers in March, but the licences and operating products remained pending.
Later context
Hong Kong did not complete the first approvals during March. An official June 10, 2026 legislative reply later recorded that the HKMA granted two stablecoin-issuer licences in April after reviewing 36 initial applications. That subsequent outcome clarifies the timetable’s execution but does not change what was knowable on February 11.
The complete source packet and revision history are retained with the newsroom record.
Automated systems may have assisted with source organization and drafting. Coinburn is accountable for the published text and maintains a revision record.
This article provides news and analysis, not investment, legal or tax advice. Digital assets are volatile and may result in total loss.

