A Nigerian court has delayed proceedings in the tax evasion case involving Binance and two of its executives until April 30, allowing more time for the country’s tax authority to respond to a legal challenge raised by the cryptocurrency exchange.
The Nigeria Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) had earlier secured a court order to serve legal documents on Binance via email, citing the platform’s lack of a physical presence in Nigeria.
Binance’s legal counsel, Chukwuka Ikwuazom, argued that the court order permitting substituted service was granted improperly, as the tax authority failed to seek court approval to serve documents on a foreign entity.
According to Ikwuazom, Binance is registered and domiciled in the Cayman Islands and, therefore, should not be subject to local procedures without explicit judicial consent. The defense has filed a motion to annul the order issued by the court on February 11.
$81.5 Billion in Claims and Allegations of Currency Impact
The legal action is part of broader efforts by Nigerian authorities to assert regulatory control over cryptocurrency operations. The Nigerian government is seeking $79.5 billion in damages for alleged economic disruptions caused by Binance’s operations and an additional $2 billion in back taxes.
Authorities claim that the exchange played a role in exacerbating the volatility of the naira by facilitating crypto-based currency exchanges.
In 2024, two Binance executives were detained amid rising scrutiny of cryptocurrency platforms in Nigeria. The government argues that Binance’s activities amount to a “significant economic presence,” making it liable for corporate income tax under Nigerian law.
The FIRS is pursuing taxes for fiscal years 2022 and 2023, alongside a 10% annual penalty on the unpaid amounts. Binance has stated that it is cooperating with the FIRS to resolve any historic tax obligations and remains engaged with Nigerian authorities on the matter.
Implications for Crypto Regulation and International Jurisdiction
The ongoing legal developments raise broader questions about jurisdictional authority in the digital age. The court’s decision to initially allow email service on a company without a local physical presence may test the boundaries of Nigeria’s legal system in dealing with cross-border digital entities.
The challenge posed by Binance’s legal team reflects the complexities of international law, particularly in cases involving digital asset platforms that operate across multiple jurisdictions.
The case may also influence future regulatory frameworks in emerging markets, especially those seeking to curb the potential for cryptocurrencies to circumvent traditional financial oversight.
As more countries explore central bank digital currencies and digital tax compliance, the Binance case could become a benchmark for how similar disputes are handled globally. The outcome of the April 30 hearing could shape the regulatory roadmap for crypto firms operating in regions with evolving financial laws.
Featured image created with DALL-E, Chart from TradingView
