The notable restrictions and withdrawals — as sourced facts.
Each row below states only what a regulator or the firm itself has published, with the date and the nature of the action. None of it is a claim that a firm acted illegally — several of these are ordinary business decisions or temporary supervisory measures. Always confirm the current status directly on the relevant authority’s register or the firm’s own notices, because these situations move quickly.
| Firm | Action (as reported) | Date | Source of record |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binance | Told EU users — including in France, Italy, Spain and Poland — that it would restrict or stop providing services after not securing a MiCA licence by the deadline; withdrew its MiCA application in Greece and said it intended to seek authorisation in France. | June–July 2026 | Company communications to users; CoinDesk / Financial Times reporting |
| Gemini | Wound down its UK and EEA retail operations as part of a broader restructuring, with published guidance to affected users on their assets. Stated here as a business decision to exit those retail markets, not a regulator action. | April 2026 | Gemini support / official user notices |
| KuCoin (EU entity) | MiCA-authorised in Austria (late 2025). Austria’s FMA then prohibited the entity from new business and onboarding new customers, citing AML key-function-role gaps; the FMA stated the new-business prohibition was lifted on 18 May 2026 once those roles were filled again. A temporary restriction, subsequently lifted — not a permanent ban. | Restriction Feb 2026; lifted 18 May 2026 | Austria FMA statements; CoinDesk reporting |
Beyond these named cases, industry reporting through mid-2026 noted that a large share of the EU’s registered crypto firms had not yet secured MiCA authorisation, and that several non-EU platforms operating without a valid MiCA licence were expected to offboard or restrict EEA clients. Because that list changes as applications are granted or withdrawn, treat any specific claim as time-stamped and verify it against the firm’s current EU notices and the ESMA register.
Why this is happening — the one rule underneath all of it.
Every row above traces back to the same requirement. Since 1 July 2026, providing crypto-asset services to EU clients requires a MiCA authorisation from an EU/EEA competent authority. A firm that does not have one is expected to stop onboarding, deposits, and new activity, and to let existing clients withdraw in an orderly wind-down. Authorisation, restriction, and withdrawal are simply the three outcomes of that single gate.
To serve EU clients after 1 July 2026 you need a MiCA authorisation. With one, you are on the “authorised” list; without one, you wind down or restrict. That is the whole mechanism — the individual firm stories are just which side of it each landed on.
If you are an EU user of an affected platform.
The steps are the same whichever firm you use, and none of this is investment advice — it is about protecting your access, not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold anything.
Restrictions and wind-downs come with an official notice setting out what stops, what continues, and by when you must act (for example, a withdrawal deadline). That notice, not a news headline, governs your account.
Check whether the specific legal entity serving you is listed as an authorised CASP. If it is not, expect onboarding and deposits to stop while withdrawals remain open during an orderly wind-down.
Make sure you can move assets out if you choose to — a verified withdrawal method and current account access — before any stated deadline. This is general information, not financial or investment advice.
If you market or operate a crypto service into the EU, this is your warning shot.
These restrictions are the enforcement side of the same standard your marketing is held to. Under Article 88, every customer-facing message must be clear, fair, and not misleading — and continuing to advertise or onboard EU users without the authorisation to do so is exactly the exposure the firms above were managing. Before your next EU campaign or availability claim ships, check it.
| If you are… | The immediate move | Start here |
|---|---|---|
| Unsure whether a live asset still passes A banner, landing page, or availability claim running into the EU. |
Paste the copy or URL and get a verdict against the MiCA marketing rules in seconds. | Free MiCA check → |
| Announcing a wind-down or market change A restriction, exit, or migration notice. |
Self-serve the full MiCA, FCA, and GDPR Pro rule packs and audit every notice before it ships. | Self-Audit Suite → |
| Facing a whole asset-set or market review A licence change, a migration, or a high-stakes launch. |
A signed, whole-asset-set review across your EU markets against MiCA, FCA, and GDPR in five business days. | Launch Audit → |
Related rules.
-
The general status page: what the end of the transitional period changed, and what it means if a provider is not authorised.
-
The enforcement-posture spectrum by member state, and how to announce a wind-down without a fresh marketing finding.
-
The authorisation side: a worked example of a firm that did secure a MiCA CASP licence, and how to verify any provider yourself.
-
What an unauthorised CASP can actually do now, and the marketing exposure of each option.
-
MiCA, FCA, SEC, GDPR — the marketing rules, quoted and explained.
This page is general, educational information for EU users and marketing teams, not legal, financial, or investment advice, and not a determination of any firm’s authorisation status or any authority’s intentions. Each event is stated as a factual, sourced data point at a point in time — drawn from regulators’ statements, firms’ own notices, and reputable reporting — and can change as licences are granted, withdrawn, or restrictions lifted. Naming a firm here is not an allegation of wrongdoing. Confirm the current position on the ESMA register of authorised CASPs, the relevant national authority’s records, and the firm’s own EU service notices, and consult qualified counsel for your situation.