MEXC Under Fire Again: Spanish CNMV Issues Fresh Warning to “Binance-Style” Crypto Exchange

The crypto exchange MEXC has once more come under regulatory scrutiny. Scam-Or Project has previously cautioned readers about the exchange’s global expansion model, describing how this “Binance-style” platform allegedly operates across jurisdictions without clear authorization while serving millions of users.

The latest development involves a public warning issued by Spain’s financial watchdog, the CNMV. This action follows earlier alerts published by BaFin, FMA, and the FCA, among other authorities. In response to these cumulative signals, Scam-Or Project has placed MEXC on its Red Compliance List.

Regulatory Pressure Intensifies

MEXC, which reportedly channels elements of its operations through Lithuania, has grown into one of the most heavily trafficked crypto exchanges worldwide. According to traffic analytics, the platform records more than 17 million monthly visits—outpacing well-established, regulated competitors such as Kraken and Bitpanda.

Recent regulatory signals include:

• A warning from Spain’s CNMV
• A public notice from Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)
• A UK warning from the FCA

Web traffic data further indicates that Russia accounts for a significant share of MEXC’s user base, followed by Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

A Cross-Border Structure with No Clear Headquarters

MEXC appears to follow an operational model similar to that of Binance, utilizing multiple legal entities across different countries without clearly disclosing a single global headquarters.

Information obtained from whistleblower sources suggests that U.S. authorities may be reviewing the exchange in connection with potential sanctions compliance and anti-money laundering concerns. At the same time, analytics data shows substantial customer activity originating from both the United States and Russia.

This combination of global reach, opaque corporate structuring, and repeated regulatory alerts has intensified questions regarding oversight and accountability.

Estonia and Lithuania: Compliance Under Review

One of the more significant regulatory setbacks concerns MEXC Estonia OÜ. The Estonian Financial Intelligence Unit revoked its crypto authorization. That decision is currently being challenged before Estonian courts.

At the same time, the exchange’s fiat infrastructure reportedly involves cooperation with Paytend, an electronic money institution regulated in Lithuania.

Operationally:

• Card deposits and bank transfers are said to be processed through MEXC Estonia OÜ.
• Paytend provides regulated payment rails for certain transfers.
• MEXC Estonia OÜ remains registered in Estonia despite the licensing issue.

These arrangements raise broader supervisory questions. When a crypto platform has accumulated multiple regulatory warnings across Europe and beyond, continued cooperation by regulated payment institutions inevitably attracts attention. Oversight responsibility in this case may fall within the remit of the Bank of Lithuania.

Contractual Transparency Concerns

A review of MEXC’s user documentation reveals ambiguities regarding the contracting entity. The Terms of Service state that agreements are concluded between the user and “MEXC Trading Platform,” without clearly identifying the precise legal entity or governing jurisdiction.

This lack of clarity creates potential uncertainty in areas such as:

• Legal recourse
• Jurisdiction for dispute resolution
• Applicable regulatory protections
• Corporate accountability

From a compliance standpoint, clearly identifying the contracting party is a fundamental requirement for financial service providers. The absence of this transparency remains a central issue in the broader risk assessment.

Compliance Outlook

Given the accumulation of warnings from CNMV, BaFin, FMA, FCA, SFC, and other authorities, as well as the Estonian license revocation, risk exposure surrounding MEXC appears elevated.

Scam-Or Project therefore reiterates its cautionary stance regarding the platform. The growing number of supervisory alerts and unresolved compliance questions suggest that additional regulatory scrutiny may follow.

MEXC – Corporate Overview

Submit Information

If you have verifiable information about MEXC, its operators, affiliated entities, or related activities, you may submit it confidentially via the Scam-Or Project whistleblower section.