In a recent discussion held at the Blockworks’ 2025 Digital Asset Summit in New York, Binance CEO Richard Teng addressed allegations concerning potential negotiations between Binance.US and parties associated with former President Donald Trump. His comments serve to clarify the position that both he and Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, the founder of Binance, have previously taken regarding these claims.
On March 13, The Wall Street Journal reported discussions about Binance.US—an independent entity operating within the United States—possibly taking on an equity investment from various Trump-affiliated businesses, including World Liberty Financial, which is connected to the Trump family’s decentralized finance (DeFi) initiatives. The report emerged in the wake of Binance’s legal troubles following a guilty plea related to regulatory compliance.
During his address at the summit, Teng reiterated the lack of truth behind these reports. “I believe both World Liberty Financial and CZ have tweeted to deny these claims,” he asserted, emphasizing that there essentially is nothing further to add on the matter. This firm denial aligns with statements made by both Zhao and Trump, indicating a unified front against the circulating rumors.
It is paramount to recognize that Binance.US operates separately from its parent company. As Teng delineated, “The US and dotcom [Binance] are quite different animals,” highlighting that they consist of distinct boards of directors, shareholders, and management teams. This operational independence underscores the complexity of cryptocurrency regulation in the U.S. marketplace.
Amidst this political backdrop, Teng did express an appreciation for Trump’s policies, noting that despite Binance’s lack of direct engagement in U.S. operations, it has still benefited from the Trump administration’s pro-cryptocurrency stance. He remarked on the transformative events of the previous year, stating, “Last year was a landmark year in that institutions are finally coming on board.” He pointed out Trump’s strategic push for the U.S. to become the “world’s crypto capital,” an initiative marked by the appointment of industry-friendly personnel to significant regulatory positions.
However, it is crucial to note the potential complexities and conflicts of interest surrounding these discussions. The Wall Street Journal article suggested that if a deal were to materialize, it might be contingent upon a pardon that CZ is purportedly seeking from the Trump administration after spending four months imprisoned in the U.S. The nature of such a business relationship has raised eyebrows and questions regarding regulatory landscapes in the cryptocurrency sector.
As it stands, Binance remains the leading cryptocurrency exchange globally, although Binance.US continues to lag behind its major competitor, Coinbase, in the U.S. market. In light of the report, both CZ and Trump took to their respective social media platforms to deny any such encounters. Trump categorized The Wall Street Journal’s narrative as the product of “polluted thinking,” indicating that the publication lacks credibility in understanding the nuances of business and cryptocurrency.
The intersection of politics and cryptocurrency has been further complicated by Trump’s introduction of a memecoin associated with his brand, which reportedly generated significant revenue for its creators. This engagement with digital currencies is unprecedented for a former president and raises relevant queries regarding ethical standards and potential conflicts of interest, as highlighted by various experts in the field.
In summary, the recent claims of a partnership between Binance.US and Trump-related ventures have been decisively refuted by leading figures on both sides of the story. Richard Teng’s statements at the summit reinforced the operational independence of Binance.US while appreciating the political climate that fosters a more favorable environment for the cryptocurrency industry. The dialogue surrounding potential business conduct between influential political figures and digital asset enterprises continues to evolve, necessitating scrutiny and transparency to uphold ethical governance in this rapidly expanding sector.