Bitstamp to reject third-party crypto deposits over €1,000

Bitstamp will automatically reject crypto deposits larger than €1,000 that originate from wallets identified as controlled by someone other than the account holder, starting Aug. 18, according to a customer-posted notice and user emails. Bitstamp has not publicly confirmed the policy.

The notice states transfers from other exchanges are exempt. The rule targets third-party self-custody and hosted wallets that the exchange classifies as not in the customer’s name.

Bitstamp’s public API uses an originator_thirdparty flag to mark deposit origin. When a sending address is linked to a customer’s name, whether hosted by a provider or controlled directly by the customer, the flag is set to false. A third-party hosted wallet requires a VASP identifier.

The API provides ways for customers to prove control of an external address, including an ownership-status check, small-value Satoshi tests and xpub registration. The documentation does not specify how each verified address will be treated under the reported Aug. 18 rule.

Operational controls for identifying and rejecting deposits were added before the notice. The exchange added a deposit rejection endpoint in March, address-verification and xpub tools in May, and deposit-originator address data in June.

A rejected deposit does not reverse the blockchain transfer. Bitstamp’s API notes that a pending deposit can be placed into rejection status without assets being returned automatically; customers must contact support to arrange a return to the originator address.

The notice and available documentation do not say how long returns will take, whether fees will apply, how the €1,000 threshold will be calculated in volatile markets, or whether related transfers will be combined for the threshold.

EU Regulation 2023/1113 requires a receiving crypto-asset service provider to assess whether a customer owns or controls a self-hosted address when a transfer from that address exceeds €1,000. The regulation allows a risk-based response when required information is missing, including requesting additional information, executing the transfer, rejecting it, returning it or suspending processing.

Public reports do not identify which Bitstamp legal entities, jurisdictions or account types the rule would apply to, nor do they provide a precise launch time or detailed customer notice procedures. Customers planning transfers from external wallets may wish to verify address ownership through Bitstamp’s tools or contact the exchange for clarification.