European market supervisors are examining whether Binance is still providing crypto-asset services to customers in the European Union without the authorization the bloc’s new regime now requires.
Reporting by the FT says the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and national authorities in France, Germany and Greece are looking at the exchange’s reliance on “reverse solicitation.”
The issue sits at the centre of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation. From 1 July 2026, firms offering crypto services in the EU were expected to hold a MiCA licence or to wind down.
Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, did not secure that authorization in time.
It withdrew an application in Greece in late June, shortly before the deadline, and earlier national permissions in countries including France, Spain and Poland lapsed as the single European framework took over.
Customers in several member states were told how to withdraw funds, and new activity was restricted in places where the firm no longer had a local footing.
Reverse solicitation is the narrow path the firm is said to be using where it no longer holds a local licence.
In outline, a company based outside the EU may deal with a European customer if that person approaches the firm entirely on their own initiative, without having been solicited.
It is not a general passport, and it is not designed as an actual substitute for authorisation. ESMA has reportedly told the FT that the carve-out should be read as very narrowly framed, treated as an exception, and not used to get around MiCA.
Supervisors are now testing whether Binance’s arrangements meet that standard.
According to people familiar with the matter cited by the FT, some authorities have asked the exchange for information.
If the answers are judged insufficient, enforcement could follow, including fines.
One account indicated that smaller firms are also being looked at over the same exemption, so the review is not confined to a single platform.
French, German and Greek authorities have not publicly commented on the Binance case, and ESMA declined to comment when approached by Reuters about the FT report.
The Dutch markets watchdog has separately warned that providers cannot simply assert that customers came to them first.
Binance’s overall position now is that it complies with the rules that apply in the jurisdictions where it operates and that it is still working toward MiCA authorisation.
Europe remains commercially important to the firm.
After the Greek filing was pulled, it signalled an intention to seek approval through another member state, with France often mentioned as a possible route.
Any such licence would arrive after the July cut-off, leaving a gap in which only limited, client-initiated servicing is even arguably available.
That gap is what makes the inquiry significant beyond one exchange. MiCA has no broad third-country equivalence regime.
A non-EU firm either obtains authorisation inside the bloc or stays outside its scope. Article 61 is therefore doing a great deal of work.
Guidance around reverse solicitation treats promotion aimed at EU users — including websites, apps, social media, sponsorships and influencer activity — as solicitation that can defeat the exception.
A client’s own first contact also does not open the door to later marketing of new products.
Applied to a global brand with a large existing European user base, the line between passive availability and active solicitation is hard to draw and easy to contest.
The outcome will show how tightly supervisors intend to police that line in practice.
A finding that large-scale ongoing service cannot be dressed up as unsolicited client initiative would push unlicensed platforms toward a genuine wind-down or a successful licence application.
A more permissive reading would leave a route that other firms may try to copy. For users, the practical stakes are access, withdrawals and which venue remains lawful. For the industry, the case is an early measure of whether MiCA’s licensing deadline is being enforced as written.