Under the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, unlicensed crypto firms were required from 1 July 2026 to start winding down their European business, limiting activity to what was needed to return or transfer client assets. Binance, the world's largest crypto exchange, does not hold a MiCA licence. Yet it continues to serve some European customers. Now regulators want to know how. The European Securities and Markets Authority and national authorities in France, Germany and Greece are questioning Binance over its use of the reverse solicitation exemption, Finance Magnates reported. The answer will matter far beyond one exchange.
What reverse solicitation actually allows
Reverse solicitation is a long-standing principle in European financial regulation. It allows a firm outside the EU to serve an EU customer without a local licence, but only if the customer approaches the firm entirely on their own initiative. The firm must not market to that customer, target the EU in its advertising or encourage sign-ups. If it does any of those things, the exemption falls away.
ESMA has been clear that the exemption should be regarded as the exception, not a route around MiCA. That warning matters because a global exchange with a famous brand, a multilingual website and a large social media presence will always receive sign-ups from Europeans. The question regulators are asking is whether those customers truly arrived unprompted, or whether Binance's global marketing effectively reaches them anyway.
The burden is on the firm. If regulators decide that a meaningful share of EU users were solicited, through advertising, sponsorships, influencers or targeted promotions, the exemption cannot cover them. Regulators have requested information from Binance and could take enforcement action, including fines, if they are not satisfied with the response.
Proving that a customer came unprompted is difficult in practice. Firms typically rely on sign-up questionnaires, records of how a customer first arrived, and evidence that marketing was not aimed at the customer's country. Regulators can test those records against advertising data, affiliate payments and social media campaigns. If the evidence shows that a firm paid for promotion that reached EU audiences, the exemption becomes very hard to defend.
How Binance got here
Binance tried to secure a MiCA licence. It created a Greek holding company and filed for an EU-wide authorisation earlier this year, aiming to passport a single licence across all 27 member states. That application did not succeed before the July deadline, and reporting in September suggested that European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde helped block it, a story we covered in our analysis of the Greek application.
Binance's public line is consistent. It says it complies with applicable rules wherever it operates and is actively working toward MiCA authorisation. Its head of Europe and the UK, Gillian Lynch, told Reuters that Binance is not leaving Europe. That statement is what makes the reverse solicitation question so pointed. If Binance is not leaving and not licensed, the exemption is the only legal basis for staying.
For EU customers, the practical situation is confusing. Some can still use Binance, some have been asked to move assets, and the rules differ depending on the products they use and how they first signed up. That uncertainty is exactly what MiCA was meant to end.
The scale of Binance's European user base makes the case unusually significant. Smaller exchanges that lost access to the EU have mostly complied by closing accounts or geo-blocking. Binance's size, brand and resources give it more options, but they also make it the obvious test case. Regulators are aware that how they treat the largest exchange will define how seriously every other firm takes the wind-down rules.
- MiCA wind-down start for unlicensed firms: 1 July 2026
- Binance status: no MiCA licence; Greek application not approved
- Regulators involved: ESMA plus authorities in France, Germany and Greece
- Possible outcomes: information requests, enforcement action, fines
- Binance position: compliant, pursuing authorisation, not leaving Europe
Why every cross-border firm should care
Reverse solicitation is not just a crypto issue. Offshore forex and CFD brokers, investment platforms and prop firms all rely on similar logic to serve clients in markets where they lack a licence. If EU regulators set a strict standard for Binance, defining what counts as solicitation in the age of social media and global sponsorships, that standard will be applied to everyone else.
The hardest question is marketing that is global by nature. A sponsorship of a European football club, a YouTube channel watched across the continent or an influencer posting in German or French all reach EU audiences. A firm can argue that such marketing is not targeted at any specific country, but regulators are increasingly unconvinced by that argument when the results show large numbers of local sign-ups.
The same tension exists in Asia. Regulators in Thailand and the Philippines have taken action against offshore brokers and exchanges that serve local clients without a licence, and we covered the Philippine SEC's blocks on several trading platforms. Europe's approach to Binance is likely to be cited by regulators elsewhere who want a clear line.
If Binance is not leaving and not licensed, the exemption is the only legal basis for staying.
What EU customers should do now
For European users the safest course is to read any notices from Binance carefully and check which services remain available to them. MiCA allows unlicensed firms to keep only the activity needed to return or transfer client assets during wind-down, so users relying on more complex products, such as derivatives or earn programmes, should not assume access will continue unchanged.
Users who want certainty can move to exchanges that already hold MiCA licences. Those firms are now required to meet European standards on custody, disclosures and complaints handling, which gives clients clearer protection if something goes wrong. Moving assets takes some effort and may involve fees, but it removes the risk of being caught in a sudden regulatory decision.
Tax and record keeping matter too. Transfers between platforms should be documented carefully, since EU tax authorities are increasing reporting requirements on crypto holdings. Keeping clear records of purchases, transfers and sales will make life easier whichever platform a user ends up on.
Why licensed competitors are celebrating quietly
Exchanges that invested heavily to secure MiCA licences have an obvious interest in seeing the rules enforced strictly. Every European user who leaves an unlicensed platform is a potential customer for a licensed one. Expect licensed firms to market their regulatory status more aggressively over the coming months, using the Binance case as an implicit contrast.
That competitive pressure is part of how MiCA was meant to work. A single licence was supposed to reward firms that met European standards with access to 27 markets, and to make it harder for firms that did not to compete on equal terms. If reverse solicitation lets an unlicensed giant keep serving the same customers, the value of the licence falls for everyone who paid for it.
Regulators know this. Their response to Binance will be read by licensed firms as a signal of whether MiCA compliance is worth the cost. A weak response would encourage others to rely on exemptions. A firm response would strengthen the licensed market, which is the outcome European authorities have said they want.
What happens next
The likely path is a negotiation rather than an immediate ban. Regulators will review Binance's answers about how EU users were acquired, what marketing reaches Europe and how it screens new sign-ups. They may require changes, such as geo-blocking new EU registrations, ending certain promotions or limiting products. Fines are possible if regulators conclude the exemption was misused.
A cleaner outcome would be a MiCA licence through another member state. That would end the debate overnight. But after the Greek setback and reported resistance at the highest levels of European institutions, a quick approval looks unlikely. Until then, Binance's European business will operate under a cloud, and competitors with MiCA licences will use that as a selling point.
Why are EU regulators questioning Binance?
Binance does not hold a MiCA licence, so it was expected to wind down EU services from 1 July 2026. Regulators want to know how it continues to serve EU customers under the reverse solicitation exemption.
What is reverse solicitation?
It allows a non-EU firm to serve an EU customer who approaches it entirely on their own initiative, without any marketing or targeting by the firm.
Which regulators are involved?
ESMA and national authorities in France, Germany and Greece have questioned Binance, according to reports.
Is Binance leaving Europe?
Binance says it is not leaving Europe, complies with applicable rules and is working toward MiCA authorisation.
MiCA was supposed to replace a patchwork of national rules with one clear licence. The Binance case shows the gap that remains: a firm can be refused the licence and still find a legal argument for serving customers. How Europe closes that gap, through a strict reading of reverse solicitation or a negotiated settlement, will shape cross-border finance well beyond crypto, and every offshore broker should be paying attention.
Speak with the SpinDepth desk
