An investigation by the Financial Times has raised new questions about the effectiveness of compliance controls at Binance, suggesting that certain high-risk or suspicious accounts may have continued operating on the platform even after the exchange reached a landmark settlement with U.S. authorities in 2023.
The report cites documents and individuals familiar with internal monitoring processes, indicating that while Binance significantly expanded its compliance framework following the plea deal, gaps may have persisted in how flagged accounts were reviewed, escalated, or restricted.
Background: a historic settlement, heightened expectations
In late 2023, Binance agreed to plead guilty to U.S. federal charges related to anti-money laundering and sanctions violations, accepting multi-billion-dollar penalties and committing to extensive compliance reforms. The settlement was widely viewed as a turning point for the exchange and for centralized crypto platforms more broadly, setting a new benchmark for regulatory oversight.
As part of the agreement, Binance was required to enhance transaction monitoring, strengthen know-your-customer controls, and operate under ongoing external supervision. These measures were intended not only to address past deficiencies but also to prevent future lapses in account screening and activity surveillance.
Alleged gaps highlight limits of monitoring regimes
According to the Financial Times investigation, some accounts deemed suspicious under internal risk metrics were not immediately frozen or offboarded, raising concerns about how enforcement thresholds are applied in practice. Compliance experts note that transaction monitoring systems can generate large volumes of alerts, forcing exchanges to balance speed, accuracy, and due process.
The episode underscores a structural challenge across large trading platforms: expanding surveillance capacity does not automatically translate into consistent enforcement, particularly when customer activity sits in regulatory gray zones rather than clearly prohibited categories.
Implications for the wider crypto industry
The renewed focus on Binance’s post-settlement controls comes at a time when regulators are increasingly scrutinizing not just whether exchanges have compliance frameworks in place, but how effectively those frameworks operate on a day-to-day basis.
For the broader crypto market, the case reinforces a shift in regulatory expectations — from headline enforcement actions toward continuous supervision and operational accountability. Other exchanges with global user bases may face similar pressure to demonstrate not only policy alignment, but measurable compliance outcomes.
