Hungary’s withdrawal of additional crypto verification rules has cleared a regulatory obstacle, but it has not restored access uniformly across platforms. Bitvavo says it will resume trading and euro deposits for Hungarian users and reopened registration on September 7. As of November 13, Revolut’s Hungarian help page still described suspended crypto services and account closures, citing a December 2025 deadline. A help page may not reflect current service availability, so users still need to check whether they can open an account or trade.
The difference highlights a limit of MiCA’s EU-wide “passport”: authorization can allow crypto-asset service providers to operate across borders, but it does not standardize each platform’s services, payment methods or product terms. In practice, access also depends on individual firms’ business decisions and how promptly they update customer information.
Hungary withdraws its additional verification rules
Under Articles 59 and 65 of MiCA, an authorized firm can notify its home regulator of the other EU markets and services it plans to offer. It may begin cross-border operations once it receives confirmation that the notification has been forwarded to the relevant authorities, or no later than 15 days after submitting it. The framework does not require a separate office in every country. Revolut’s crypto subsidiary received MiCA authorization in Cyprus in October 2025, and France’s Autorité des marchés financiers lists it as authorized to provide crypto services in the country.
Hungary amended its crypto-asset rules in 2025, introducing additional verification requirements for crypto exchanges and criminal penalties. Revolut then told users to sell their crypto by December 18, 2025, saying it would automatically sell any remaining holdings and close crypto accounts after that date.
On January 30, the European Commission opened infringement proceedings, finding no basis in MiCA for Hungary to establish a separate authorization regime. The Commission acknowledged Hungary’s aim of combating money laundering but said the measures still had to comply with EU law. Hungary withdrew the requirement before a court ruling. Act XXXVIII of 2026 took effect on August 7; its official explanation acknowledged that the former requirement was incompatible with EU crypto rules. MiCA’s maximum transitional period had already ended on July 1, 2026.
The repeal gave platforms room to resume service, but public information has not always been consistent. Bitvavo’s dedicated announcement and country-specific payments page list Hungary, while its general eligibility page, updated on November 4, does not. Users checking only one of those pages may not be able to tell whether registration is available.
Deposit options depend on the platform and country
Differences also apply to how customers fund their accounts. Coinbase’s European payment guide lists Easy Bank Transfer cash deposits for users in the Netherlands, Finland, France, Germany and Ireland. Card-based cash deposits are available in the Netherlands, Italy and Spain, while users in Poland can buy crypto directly with BLIK. Cash deposits and crypto purchases are separate services: a country’s absence from the card-deposit list does not by itself mean residents cannot use a card to buy crypto.
Kraken says residents of the Netherlands can deposit euros using iDEAL, but withdrawals require a different method. Such variations may reflect how exchanges arrange transfers with banks. Article 70 of MiCA allows platforms to provide related payment services themselves or use partners with the necessary authorization. They must tell customers who provides the service and which terms apply.
Article 76 requires trading platforms to set access rules that are objective and non-discriminatory, with participation conditions proportionate to their purpose. Under Article 77, platforms that directly buy from and sell crypto assets to customers using their own funds must publish a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory commercial policy. The European Securities and Markets Authority’s guidance says that once a customer meets the published conditions and an order becomes final, the service provider should execute it.
Assessing whether a platform has breached these obligations requires comparing how the same legal entity handles requests for the same regulated service, while taking eligibility criteria and necessary compliance checks into account. Public payment guides show which methods are supported in each country, but they cannot establish on their own why a platform declined to provide a service. If a platform rejects a payment solely because a bank account’s IBAN is from another member state, that could raise concerns under SEPA rules on IBAN discrimination. Evidence would still be needed to show that the account met the relevant conditions and that the IBAN’s country of origin was the reason for rejection.
One app can involve several legal entities
A customer may see a cash balance, trade crypto or use a rewards feature in the same app, while different legal entities provide those services under different authorizations and rules. Kraken’s European Economic Area terms, effective October 14, state that its core crypto services are provided by an Irish entity authorized under MiCA. Electronic-money services are handled by a separate Irish company, while derivatives and xStocks are provided by a Cyprus investment firm. Staking and margin trading are covered by separate terms.
Coinbase’s European business migration notice also shows that crypto services moved to Coinbase Luxembourg, which is authorized under MiCA, while electronic-money services remain with Coinbase Ireland. Seeing cash and crypto balances in one account does not mean the same company manages both. Each authorization applies only to the authorized entity and the activities it is permitted to conduct.
Staking is another example of why customer protection depends on the service actually provided. MiCA does not establish a separate regime for staking, but if a platform holds crypto assets or private keys to stake them on a customer’s behalf, that custody activity must meet MiCA’s authorization and safeguarding requirements. The European Commission has explained this in guidance, while ESMA has warned that customers may assume other products offered by regulated firms receive the same protections.
Article 66 of MiCA requires firms to describe their services accurately, fairly and clearly, without misleading customers. In Revolut’s case, the old help page alone cannot confirm whether its stated restrictions still reflect current arrangements in Hungary or, if they remain, what grounds support them. Regulators would also need to verify which services the company currently offers and the basis for any restrictions. Hungary’s additional verification requirement has been withdrawn, but local users still need to check whether a platform accepts their account, which deposit methods it supports and which legal entity handles their cash and crypto assets.