Europe stands on the precipice of potentially outlawing Bitcoin through a regulatory backdoor that could fundamentally alter the cryptocurrency landscape across the continent.
Alexandre Stachtchenko, Chief Strategy Officer at French cryptocurrency exchange Paymium, has issued an urgent warning that proposed guidelines from the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) could render Bitcoin illegal in Europe by classifying public keys as personal data subject to deletion requirements.
🚨 Alerte réglementaire — Bitcoin risque l’illégalité de fait en Europe 🚨
Si les Guidelines du Comité Européen de la Protection des Données (EDPB en anglais) sont confirmées dans leur version finale, il n’existera plus aucun usage de Bitcoin 100 % conforme au droit européen.👇… pic.twitter.com/0N5qrW4kVg
— Alexandre ‘unhosted’ Stachtchenko (@StachAlex) May 5, 2025
The controversy centers on draft guidelines currently under public consultation that would treat blockchain public keys as personal information under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This seemingly technical classification carries devastating implications for the future of Bitcoin in Europe, as it would subject cryptocurrency transactions to data protection rules that are fundamentally incompatible with blockchain technology’s immutable nature.
Stachtchenko’s alarm stems from the EDPB’s position that data protection principles are “not negotiable” and that technical impossibility cannot justify noncompliance with GDPR requirements. This rigid stance creates an irreconcilable conflict between European privacy law and the fundamental architecture of bitcoin blockchain technology, which relies on permanent, unalterable records to function.
The proposed guidelines acknowledge that “data deletion at the individual level in a blockchain can be challenging and requires ad-hoc engineered architectures,” yet they maintain that if granular data deletion proves impossible, authorities may require “deleting the whole blockchain.” This extreme remedy would effectively eliminate Bitcoin’s operational capacity within European jurisdiction.
Reality Vs. Regulation
The heart of this regulatory crisis lies in the European Union’s apparent refusal to acknowledge technological realities. Stachtchenko characterizes this as classic EU behavior, where regulators expect reality to bend to their normative preferences rather than crafting rules that account for technological constraints.
The EDPB’s guidelines specifically state that controllers must ensure “sufficient technical and organizational measures are in place” for deleting blockchain data, including “any copies held by nodes or other parties.”
This requirement reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of how Bitcoin operates. The network’s security and integrity depend on thousands of independent nodes maintaining identical copies of the blockchain. Demanding the deletion of transaction records from all nodes worldwide would require unprecedented coordination and cooperation from entities beyond European regulatory reach.
The situation becomes even more complex when considering that data anonymization cannot serve as a viable solution. Stachtchenko points out that existing regulations classify anonymous transactions as high-risk activities, with some jurisdictions even criminalizing them. This creates a regulatory paradox where Bitcoin transactions would be illegal whether they maintain identifiable information or attempt to anonymize it.
Call For Public Intervention
With the public consultation period closing on June 9, Stachtchenko has urged the cryptocurrency community to provide feedback before these guidelines become entrenched in European law. The stakes could not be higher, as approval of the current draft would create regulatory precedent that extends far beyond Bitcoin to impact the entire blockchain ecosystem.
The implications extend beyond individual cryptocurrency users to encompass the broader digital economy. European businesses, financial institutions, and technology companies that have invested heavily in blockchain infrastructure could find themselves facing impossible compliance requirements that force them to abandon innovative projects or relocate operations outside European jurisdiction.
This regulatory collision represents more than a technical dispute over data classification—it embodies a fundamental conflict between Europe’s privacy-centric regulatory philosophy and the technological innovations that define the digital age. The outcome will likely determine whether Europe remains a viable market for cryptocurrency innovation or becomes a cautionary tale of regulatory overreach stifling technological progress.
