A digital item costs 700 crystals. How many euros must actually leave your bank account to buy it? The answer is often hidden among currency bundles, promotions and balances that cannot cover the next purchase. On 30 September 2026, European consumer authorities announced nine new coordinated actions concerning commercial practices involving virtual currencies in video games. For players and parents, the important questions are the real price, the information available before payment and the rights that still apply when a transaction takes place inside a fictional world.

What the nine new European actions examine

The Consumer Protection Cooperation Network, known as CPC, operates with coordination from the European Commission. The new actions concern games including Candy Crush Saga, Clash of Clans, Forge of Empires, For Honor, Gardenscapes, Hunt: Showdown 1896, Mech Arena, Minecraft and Valorant. The Commission's official update describes suspected infringements and dialogue with the companies.

These are nine new actions, not eleven companies found guilty. No general ban on virtual currencies or automatic refund of every purchase was announced. Companies are invited to address the authorities' concerns; unresolved concerns may lead to enforcement measures by national authorities. An ongoing investigation is not a final finding of wrongdoing.

The 2025 principles are not a new law

The Key Principles on In-Game Virtual Currencies were published on 21 March 2025. They are non-binding guidance on applying existing EU law. They do not create a new currency law that suddenly entered into force in September 2026. The current development concerns stronger compliance enforcement.

The guidance principally concerns virtual currencies bought with real money and used for digital content or services. It excludes currencies obtainable solely through gameplay that cannot be purchased with real money. This does not exempt other commercial practices from scrutiny: advertising, contractual terms and the presentation of an offer require their own assessment.

The price in euros must be understandable

Articles 6 and 7 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive address misleading information and material omissions about prices, among other matters. When purchasing involves successive conversions between euros, tokens and other symbols, the question is not merely whether an accurate exchange rate appears somewhere. It also matters whether consumers can understand the actual financial consequences in time.

Pre-contractual information should help players identify what they buy, from whom and at what total cost. Information buried in a hard-to-find menu does not necessarily cure a misleading purchase screen. In practical terms, displaying the real-money price close to the item and avoiding conversions that obscure comparisons supports a more informed choice.

When the bundle costs more than the item

Consider a purely hypothetical example that does not describe a particular game: an item requires 700 tokens, but the only available bundle supplies 1,000 tokens for €10. The proportional value of 700 tokens is €7, yet the player must pay €10 to complete that purchase. The remaining 300 tokens are not a cash refund and may be insufficient for another item.

Distinguishing proportional value from actual payment makes the cost easier to recognise. It does not, by itself, prove that every bundle is unlawful. Presentation, available choices and whether the design leads to unwanted additional spending must be assessed. The new European actions do not turn every commercial bundle into a prohibited practice.

Withdrawal requires examining the particular transaction

The Consumer Rights Directive 2011/83/EU generally provides a fourteen-day withdrawal period for distance contracts, subject to exceptions. Buying virtual currency that remains unused must be distinguished from subsequently obtaining digital content. The CPC guidance calls for preserving withdrawal within fourteen days for purchased currency that remains unused. A blanket statement that all purchases are final does not adequately explain which rules actually apply.

For digital content supplied without a tangible medium, Article 16(m), where the consumer must pay, links loss of the withdrawal right to prior express consent to performance beginning, acknowledgement of losing the right and the required confirmation. Other transaction categories have different rules. Whether withdrawal or a refund is available depends on the facts, the information provided and performance, rather than the label “digital purchase”.

Children are protected against direct purchase exhortations

Point 28 of Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC prohibits advertisements directly urging children to buy or to persuade parents or other adults to buy for them. Age and vulnerability also matter when assessing other misleading or aggressive practices. Scrutinising a particular commercial screen does not require declaring an entire game unsuitable.

A countdown, a scarcity claim or a promotion is not automatically unlawful. Its accuracy, target audience and pressure must be considered. Purchase approvals and spending limits can reduce risks for parents, but they do not release businesses from their own obligations. A purchase by a minor does not itself create a universal refund entitlement.

How to support a complaint about a charge

A useful starting point is to keep the payment receipt, the bundle screen, the item's price and the information shown before confirmation. Record separately which tokens were bought, which were spent and what balance remains. This ties the request to a specific transaction rather than merely to news that a company is being investigated.

First send the contracting supplier a written complaint requesting a reasoned response about the charge and your request. Where an app store is involved, check who issued the receipt. For a cross-border dispute, the relevant European Consumer Centre may be able to assist. Reporting a practice to authorities and pursuing an individual refund are separate procedures, with no guaranteed outcome.

What the presentation of a purchase should make clear

For an industry professional, compliance review should follow the entire journey: advertisement, bundle selection, conversion rate, final payment button and information about rights. Terms must also be assessed under the Unfair Contract Terms Directive 93/13/EEC. A general disclaimer cannot replace transparency or remove mandatory rights.

For players, the central question remains straightforward: how much real money must be paid now, and what exactly does it buy? The European development gives that answer greater importance. A supported claim nevertheless requires evidence of the player's own purchase and the applicable rules, rather than a promise that the investigation will automatically return every euro.

Nomika Epilekta Editorial Team. Prepared with AI assistance and verification of the cited official sources on 10 October 2026. This article provides general legal information and is not individual advice for a particular case.