Recently, the Philippine regulatory authorities have launched a new round of rectification against cryptocurrency platforms that have not obtained local licenses, with about 50 platforms required to be blocked by internet service providers within the country. This list includes global exchanges such as Coinbase and Gemini. This round of action continues the blocking of Binance in March 2024 and subsequent warnings to OKX, Bybit, KuCoin, etc. The regulatory attitude is shifting from "tolerated operation" to a combination model of "strict license review + technical blocking." For exchanges and investors, this means that the Philippine market is using substantial technical means to redefine the boundaries and cost structures of "licensed/unlicensed."
Core of the Event
In late December 2025, Philippine National Telecommunications Commission (NTC), under the regulatory framework of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), required local internet service providers to implement access blocks on about 50 unauthorized cryptocurrency platforms, explicitly including Coinbase and Gemini. This means that previously regarded as compliant representatives globally, these leading exchanges are now directly classified as "unlicensed and subject to technical blocking" in the Philippines.
This action has been interpreted by local and industry media as an extension of the measures taken to block Binance in March 2024: from a single leading platform to a bulk blocking of unlicensed platforms, the regulation is moving from "case risk prevention" to "institutional boundary delineation." Currently, public information mainly comes from disclosures by a few media outlets and summaries from regulatory announcements, and there has not yet been a complete official disclosure of the blocked platforms list, nor is there systematic nationwide user access data feedback, so the actual implementation scope remains to be verified later.
Regulatory Framework and Compliance Thresholds
In the Philippines, the core regulatory body for Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) is the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), which imposes obligations such as KYC, anti-money laundering (AML), suspicious transaction reporting, capital requirements, and systemic risk control on exchanges, custodians, and fiat deposit and withdrawal service providers through a licensing system and related guidelines. The basic logic of the BSP is to bring wallets and platforms involved in exchange, transfer, payment, and custody under a regulatory intensity similar to that of payment systems and remittance companies, forming a closed loop in terms of anti-money laundering and foreign exchange management.
Under this framework, only institutions that have obtained a local VASP license issued by the BSP or are regarded as "regulated entities" within a compliance structure are considered authorized to provide related services to residents in the Philippines. This is why, even though Coinbase and Gemini have licenses or registrations in major markets like the United States and Europe, they are still regarded as "unauthorized platforms" in the Philippines: global compliance qualifications and local financial regulatory authority are two dimensions that cannot be automatically recognized mutually.
For a long time, many foreign platforms have operated in the Philippines using a model of "no local entity + remote online services," existing in a sort of "tolerated operation" gray area. The current "license precondition + technical blocking" combination promoted by the NTC and BSP indicates that regulation is clearing such gray areas out of the licensing system, making "whether to obtain a BSP license" a threshold for whether one can reach users in a normal network access form.
From Binance to Coinbase/Gemini: Path of Regulatory Upgrade
In March 2024, Philippine regulators had already taken blocking measures against Binance, with the official statement focusing on two points: first, Binance had not obtained a local VASP license, and second, regulators were concerned about its compliance risks in anti-money laundering and investor protection. This action clearly conveyed to the market that even the largest exchange by global trading volume could be restricted from access through technical means if it does not obtain a local license.
Subsequently, the Philippines issued warnings to unlicensed exchanges such as OKX, Bybit, and KuCoin, reminding residents of the risks of using unauthorized platforms while laying the groundwork for possible further actions. The regulatory rhythm has shifted from "blocking a leading platform" to "naming more unlicensed platforms," showing a path of first concentrating on typical cases and then expanding coverage.
The concentrated blocking of about 50 platforms in this round is the third phase of this path. In terms of object selection, this time it not only includes high-leverage derivative platforms previously regarded as "key regulatory risks," but also for the first time includes globally compliant models like Coinbase and Gemini in the blocking scope, elevating "whether to hold a local license in the Philippines" to the only core standard. This shifts the regulatory narrative from "individual platforms are unsafe" to "any platform not included in the local licensing system is classified as high risk and subject to technical isolation."
Data Perspective: Whale $3.96 Million Position Closure and Market Sentiment
During the same time window as the regulatory news was fermenting, a noteworthy large transaction appeared in the market: a whale account chose to close short positions on multiple assets including BTC, ETH, and SOL, with total profits of about $3.96 million. This figure comes from on-chain or trading data tracking, clearly pointing to a single account/group strategy scale, rather than the overall profit and loss situation of the market.
This $3.96 million profit closure indicates that during the phase of rising regulatory uncertainty, some funds have preemptively positioned themselves in a reverse position structure and chose to secure profits when volatility increased. Behaviorally, the strategy combination of this account spans the three major assets of BTC, ETH, and SOL, indicating a greater focus on the overall market volatility increase rather than changes in the fundamentals of a single cryptocurrency.
It is important to emphasize that the current public information is insufficient to prove a direct causal relationship between this transaction and the Philippine regulatory actions, nor can it be inferred that there is insider behavior of "having prior knowledge of regulatory news." A more reasonable interpretation is that against the backdrop of frequent global regulatory news and rising policy uncertainty, some institutions or high-net-worth funds are using multi-asset shorts and volatility strategies to hedge against potential policy impacts, with the Philippine actions being just one of the marginal variables triggering market sentiment.
Long and Short Game: Strategy Differentiation Under Regulatory Tightening
In trading terms, the interpretations of the tightening Philippine regulations by bulls and bears are clearly differentiated. The bullish view holds that the Philippines has a limited share of global cryptocurrency trading volume, and the blocking of about 50 platforms has a marginal impact on overall market capitalization; more critically, this round of events has once again elevated the premium of "regular licenses" for assets and platforms, enhancing the valuation basis for compliant assets in the medium to long term. Within the bullish framework, the concentration of compliant markets increases, and long-term funds will further prefer exchanges and assets that have obtained licenses in multiple countries and have higher transparency.
Bears, on the other hand, focus on two points: first, the Philippines has continuously taken action against different types of platforms such as Binance, Coinbase, and Gemini, which is seen as a shift from "selective enforcement" to "institutional uniform strictness," likely amplifying regulatory expectations for other emerging markets globally in the short term; second, as technical blocking becomes a normative tool, the ability of regional regulation to cut off trading flows is strengthened, which is detrimental to the smooth distribution of overall liquidity. Some macro bears may amplify the narrative of systemic risk based on this, betting on higher volatility or periodic corrections.
From a ripple effect perspective, this round of actions creates an "observational sample effect" for regional markets highly related to the Philippines (such as other Southeast Asian countries) and brings repricing pressure to the cooperation models between local banks, payment institutions, and cryptocurrency platforms. The funding side will be more cautious in assessing business connections with unlicensed platforms to avoid being caught up in potential compliance risk chains.
Outlook: Reassessing "License Premium" in a Tightening Regulatory Cycle
From the perspective of systemic risk and anti-money laundering, the inclusion of unlicensed platforms in the technical blocking scope by the Philippines has its regulatory rationale: by locking user access within the local VASP licensing system, the BSP and NTC gain stronger visibility and controllability. However, at the execution level, this model may also bring new structural risks, including but not limited to: users circumventing through VPNs or non-custodial channels leading to amplified information asymmetry, and local innovation teams facing pressure on compliance costs.
For investors, the core insight from this round of events is that regulatory licenses are rapidly evolving into a "resource of liquidity and pricing power," affecting not only whether exchanges can reach users but also the availability and trading depth of assets in different markets. In the short term, attention can be focused on several indicators: the subsequent pace of BSP's issuance or updates of local VASP licenses, whether blocked platforms choose to apply for local licenses or cooperate with licensed institutions, and whether on-chain funds show visible migration from blocked platforms to local licensed or other overseas platforms.
In the medium to long term, if the Philippines can maintain regulatory clarity while improving the predictability and transparency of compliance pathways, it has the opportunity to form a prototype of a compliant cryptocurrency financial center under the dual thresholds of "license + technology"; conversely, if the licensing threshold is high while the number of licensed entities is low, coupled with differentiated execution of technical blocking, it may drive more funds and flows to neighboring markets with broader regulatory coverage or greater arbitrage opportunities.
In the dynamic game between regulation and the market, exchanges need to proactively layout local compliance strategies, including applying for local licenses, establishing joint ventures or cooperative structures with licensed financial institutions, or orderly reducing exposure in high compliance risk areas. Investors should also incorporate "whether to hold a local VASP license" and "whether there is a transparent cooperative relationship with local banks" into core consideration factors when choosing platforms, rather than just looking at trading depth and fee structures.
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
