Coins.ph says it has not had its BSP license revoked despite reports that the Philippines’ central bank may move to cancel authorization tied to alleged activity involving restricted offshore gambling operators. The exchange claims it remains a BSP-licensed institution and says its platform is designed to screen customers and transactions in line with central bank requirements.
The dispute centers on Coins.ph’s payment stack, particularly the cash-in services linked to DCPay Philippines, the company that operates Coins.ph’s peso e-wallet services. According to CoinGecko, Coins.ph posted roughly $52 million in 24-hour spot trading volume on Wednesday, underscoring its scale in the Philippine crypto market even as regulatory scrutiny intensifies.
Key takeaways
- Coins.ph says it remains BSP-licensed and denies knowingly serving offshore gambling or gaming operators.
- BSP restrictions reportedly targeted Coins.ph-linked payment services—cash-in and QRPh collections—while trading and withdrawals reportedly continued.
- Coins.ph says it does not accept or permit offshore gambling operators and that it screens customers and transactions for compliance.
- The BSP has not publicly tied earlier anti-gambling payment directives to the current restrictions, leaving the full scope unclear.
Coins.ph pushes back on license-revocation claims
In an update shared with Cointelegraph, a Coins.ph spokesperson said the company “firmly denies any claim” that it knowingly serves offshore gaming or gambling operators. The exchange added that its users’ funds are safe and that it continues to operate under a BSP license.
Coins.ph’s response followed reports that the company could face license revocation after alleged transactions involving restricted offshore gambling operators. When Cointelegraph asked whether such transactions had been processed on its platform, the spokesperson said Coins.ph does not accept or permit those operators and continuously screens customers and transactions in accordance with BSP requirements. However, Coins.ph did not directly confirm or deny whether any such transactions had occurred.
For users and traders, the distinction matters. A denial of intent does not automatically address whether certain counterparties were able to route payments through related services—an issue regulators typically focus on when reviewing internal controls and compliance systems.
BSP actions reportedly focused on payments, not crypto trading
Coins.ph previously told users that the BSP had instructed it to strengthen internal controls. In an advisory released by the exchange, Coins.ph said cash-in services and QRPh collections were temporarily unavailable, while crypto trading, cash-outs, bill payments, and merchant QRPh payments remained accessible.
QRPh is the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas’ national QR standard. The reported impact on QRPh-related cash-in and collections suggests the friction point was tied to incoming payment rails rather than on-exchange crypto functionality.
BitPinas reported that the restrictions were imposed under BSP Monetary Board Resolution No. 839. It also described a split between payment and crypto oversight within Coins.ph’s operating structure: DCPay Philippines holds an electronic money issuer license, while Betur Inc. is said to hold a separate virtual asset service provider license for crypto asset services. Under that framing, the reported restrictions were aimed at DCPay’s payment operations rather than Betur’s crypto services.
Coins.ph’s own experience, as reflected in the advisory, appears consistent with that division—crypto-related features continued while specific peso cash-in channels were curtailed.
How earlier BSP rules may—or may not—connect
Back in 2025, the BSP ordered supervised financial institutions to remove links that provide access to gambling websites through payment applications. A publicly available BSP directive, referenced in the report, indicates the central bank had already targeted payment interfaces used to reach offshore gambling content.
At the same time, the BSP has not publicly linked that 2025 directive to the restrictions affecting Coins.ph. When Cointelegraph sought additional comment from the BSP, a central bank representative said they would look into the inquiry but did not provide further information at the time of publication.
This lack of an explicit connection leaves market participants with an important uncertainty: are regulators responding to a specific compliance failure involving Coins.ph-linked payment services, or are they applying a broader framework aimed at offshore gambling payment flows that may be wider than one operator?
What to watch as the situation develops
For Coins.ph users, the immediate question is operational: whether cash-in and QRPh collections remain restricted and whether any further changes affect other payment touchpoints. For the broader market, the episode is a reminder that compliance scrutiny in the Philippines is not only about crypto asset services, but also about the payment rails that move fiat into and out of exchanges.
Readers should watch for clarification from the BSP on the scope of the restrictions and whether any additional enforcement steps are tied to specific past transactions, as well as for Coins.ph to provide clearer confirmation about whether prohibited offshore gambling-related flows ever reached its systems.
https://www.cryptobreaking.com/coins-ph-says-bangko-sentral/?utm_source=blogger%20&utm_medium=social_auto&utm_campaign=Coins.ph%20Says%20Bangko%20Sentral%20License%20Remains%20Valid%20Despite%20Revocation%20Claims%20
Comments
Post a Comment