BIN lookup · Mastercard · EEA (Europe) · log through 13 Sep 2026 14:40 UTC

BIN 555549 (EEA (Europe), Mastercard) - What It Works On

Bottom line

Our log shows clean passes on Steam, Epic Games Store, Google Play, first charge and renewal both going through.

555549Mastercard EEA (Europe)Debit 64/93 cleared

555549 comes from KuCard (KuCoin) and is issued in EEA (Europe) on Mastercard. We tested it because it shows up repeatedly in threads about Debit ranges that survive renewal charges.

The spec sheet

BIN
555549
Card network
Mastercard
Issuing country
EEA (Europe)
Card type
Debit
Issued by
KuCard (KuCoin)
Card form
Virtual only
KYC tier
ID + proof
3-D Secure
Yes
AVS check
No
Billing address
EU General
Funding methods
Crypto · Bank transfer
Max cards per account
5 (max cards per account)
Issuer risk rating
Low-Medium

Costs, stacked up

The first charge carries no issuance fee. Every charge after it carries no top-up fee, and outside USD, a 1% conversion fee. Nothing is hidden. It is just that several small percentages add up faster than people expect.

Card creation feeFree (1st) / 9.99 USDC
Monthly fee2 USDC inactivity
Top-up fee
FX / conversion fee1% + 0.5% txn
Declined transaction fee
Minimum top-up

Cleared versus declined

Attempts counted per merchant by hand from the log, so a single declined order does not skew the rate.

Merchant by merchant

MerchantAttemptsClearedRateWhat happened
Steam292793%no friction, and no AVS prompt
Epic Games Store242083%cleared on the first attempt, no challenge issued
Google Play181478%cleared first time; a second charge a week later also went through
StockX1200%AVS mismatch. The ZIP on file did not match the address registered to the card.
Sephora US10330%3-D Secure challenge never completed. The order timed out waiting for the OTP.

Run from a EEA (Europe)-region account between 18 Jul to 22 Aug 2026, with the billing address set to the issuer default unless noted. Declines were logged with the reason the gateway returned.

Failures we could not fix

The weak spot is StockX, which declined every time. Everything else was either clean or fixed by correcting the billing address.

What to change before you retry

Before you try it

  1. Funding is crypto-first. Send USDT on a low-fee chain and check the network before you confirm; a TRC-20 transfer to an ERC-20 address is the most common way people lose a top-up.
  2. This is an anonymous-account product. There is no meaningful account recovery, so export the card details and the billing address the moment you create them.
  3. Set the billing address to exactly what KuCard (KuCoin) generates for EEA (Europe). Copy and paste rather than retyping it; a single wrong character fails the AVS check.

Final word

Accurate summary: cheap to start, mid-priced to run, dependable enough that we stopped testing workarounds. If your only requirement is that the payment goes through, this range meets it.

FAQ

What does the 555549 BIN tell a merchant?

It tells the risk engine three things before your bank is ever contacted: issuer KuCard (KuCoin), country of issue EEA (Europe), product class Debit. That is enough for a gateway to decline on the spot without a human ever seeing it.

Is 555549 a real card number?

Six digits of a sixteen-digit number. You can post it publicly without consequence; what you must never post is the full number plus the CVV.

Why would 555549 be declined if the range is fine?

Of the 93 attempts behind this page, the losses broke down as address mismatch first, incomplete 3-D Secure second, and merchant-side range blocks a distant third. Only the last one is about 555549.

Can thousands of people share the same BIN?

That is the normal case. Every Debit card KuCard (KuCoin) issues in EEA (Europe) carries the same six digits. Two people on 555549 can get opposite results at the same checkout, which is why a single review is never conclusive.

Method

We bought a KuCard (KuCoin) card, funded it, and pushed 93 charges through live merchant checkout pages between 18 Jul to 22 Aug 2026. Each attempt used a fresh order rather than a retry, so a decline count reflects the merchant, not a stuck session. 64 cleared.

Counting rules

Renewals count alongside first charges, which is why a range that passed once and failed a month later reads lower here than on a first-charge-only list. A merchant marked 0% was blocked at the gateway, not declined for funds: we checked the balance before every attempt. Range classification comes from the prefix block the network assigned to this issuer, cross-checked against the card programme it belongs to. Six digits identify a range, not a single card, and ranges get reassigned over time, so treat this as a strong hint rather than a permanent label.

Log through 13 Sep 2026 14:40 UTC · rate last re-checked 24 August 2026 · 93 charges on record for this range.