Update on our legal war against DAC8 mass surveillance in France
Most of you know we challenged DAC8 at the Council of State in Feb 2025 (announced at BTCPrague in June). What you didn't know: we filed a SECOND emergency challenge in Aug 2025 to immediately suspend the decree.
Why emergency? Because DAC8 forces centralized databases of EU citizens' physical addresses + crypto holdings across all member states. This is a literal honeypot for criminals—kidnapping, extortion, violence against holders and their families. We showed clear, imminent danger.
Council of State just rejected the emergency suspension.
Their reasoning? "The mere possibility of a risk, the probability of which is very low, cannot constitute urgency."
Let that sink in. The French tax authority (DGFIP) itself said in Feb 2025 that centralizing crypto holder data would be "a prime target for hackers" in a context of "frequent cyberattacks." Yet the Council claims low probability.
Violent crimes targeting crypto holders are escalating. Data leaks from government databases are routine. This isn't theoretical—it's happening now.
Key point: rejection was on urgency grounds only, NOT on the merits of our case. The main legal challenge to annul DAC8 entirely is still live, and we're confident we'll win.
We'll publish full details of the emergency proceeding soon so you can judge the evidence yourself.
This is a multi-front, multi-country battle against surveillance overreach. We've won some, lost some. This setback only makes us more determined.
The fight continues.
Most of you know we challenged DAC8 at the Council of State in Feb 2025 (announced at BTCPrague in June). What you didn't know: we filed a SECOND emergency challenge in Aug 2025 to immediately suspend the decree.
Why emergency? Because DAC8 forces centralized databases of EU citizens' physical addresses + crypto holdings across all member states. This is a literal honeypot for criminals—kidnapping, extortion, violence against holders and their families. We showed clear, imminent danger.
Council of State just rejected the emergency suspension.
Their reasoning? "The mere possibility of a risk, the probability of which is very low, cannot constitute urgency."
Let that sink in. The French tax authority (DGFIP) itself said in Feb 2025 that centralizing crypto holder data would be "a prime target for hackers" in a context of "frequent cyberattacks." Yet the Council claims low probability.
Violent crimes targeting crypto holders are escalating. Data leaks from government databases are routine. This isn't theoretical—it's happening now.
Key point: rejection was on urgency grounds only, NOT on the merits of our case. The main legal challenge to annul DAC8 entirely is still live, and we're confident we'll win.
We'll publish full details of the emergency proceeding soon so you can judge the evidence yourself.
This is a multi-front, multi-country battle against surveillance overreach. We've won some, lost some. This setback only makes us more determined.
The fight continues.
