Binance, the world's largest cryptocurrency exchange, is firmly rejecting allegations that its internal investigators uncovered more than $1 billion in Iran-related transactions and then were relieved of their duties.
This tough stance escalates tensions between the crypto giant and sectors of the international financial press, bringing attention back to the company's ability to comply with global sanctions after past legal troubles.
The roots of the controversy: the Fortune report
The case exploded following an investigative report published by Fortune on 13 February. According to the article, Binance compliance investigators identified transactions worth more than $1 billion linked to Iranian entities in the period between March 2024 and August 2025.
The transfers in question allegedly involved primarily Tether (USDT) on the Tron blockchain, an ecosystem that regulators are monitoring with increasing scrutiny for potential use in sanctions-avoidance-related activities. The Fortune report also claims that at least five members of the investigative team were fired after reporting these anomalies internally. Among the staff removed would include several senior investigators with backgrounds in law enforcement.
Binance's rebuttal: "The record must be clear"
In a public statement, Binance Co-CEO Richard Teng directly refuted each allegation. Through a formal letter to Fortune, Binance's communications department called the article baseless, speaking of 'gross material inaccuracies and misleading implications'.
The record must be clear. No sanctions violations were found, no investigators were fired for raising concerns, and Binance continues to meet its regulatory commitments. We have asked for corrections to recent published reports, has written Teng.
The record must be clear.
- Richard Teng (@_RichardTeng) February 16, 2026
No sanctions violations were found, no investigators were fired for raising concerns, and Binance continues to meet its regulatory commitments.
We've asked for corrections to recent reporting. pic.twitter.com/glA9bdGaw1
Key points of the exchange's defence include:
- No retaliation: Binance claims that no employees have been fired for reporting concerns about sanctions.
- Internal and external review: A thorough review, conducted with outside counsel, found no evidence of sanctions violations in the cited activities.
- Whistleblower Protection: The company emphasised that it operates in full compliance with whistleblower protection laws and labour regulations in all jurisdictions in which it operates.
Binance also reiterated that it has never reneged on its commitments to the US authorities following the 2023 plea deal, stating that it has "significantly strengthened" its screening and monitoring infrastructure.
A sensitivity exacerbated by the past
The severity of these allegations is amplified by the company's historical context. In 2023, Binance accepted a record $4.3 billion plea bargain for anti-money laundering and sanctions violations. Since then, the exchange has been operating under an unprecedented regulatory magnifying glass, with stringent compliance obligations and constant monitoring.
Irresponsible and misleading press articles, based on anonymous sources (whether former employees perhaps disgruntled or otherwise), do injustice to the good work of the more than 1,300 compliance staff who work tirelessly to uphold global standards," he affermato Richard.
Irresponsible and misleading press articles based on anonymous sources (whether including possibly disgruntled ex-employees or otherwise) does injustice to the great work of our more than 1300 compliance staff working tirelessly to uphold global standards.
- Richard Teng (@_RichardTeng) February 14, 2026
Facts:
1. Binance...
Beyond the specific dispute, the incident raises broader doubts about the use of stablecoins for sanctions evasion. Analysis companies blockchain such as TRM Labs, Chainalysis and Elliptic have previously reported on the increasing use of USDT by Iranian-linked actors to move funds outside traditional banking circuits.
Currently, the situation remains a head-on collision between journalistic narratives, based on anonymous sources, and categorical corporate denials. Without any new enforcement action from the authorities, the issue shifts to the level of transparency and trust, in an industry that is still struggling to rebuild its reputation.
