FTX Has Withdrawn Its Request to Suspend Payments to Customers in Certain Countries

• FTX withdrew the application for legal risk assessment in certain jurisdictions.
• In the long run, this could have resulted in customers from Ukraine and other countries not receiving payments.

Cryptocurrency exchange FTX has withdrawn a petition to restrict payments to clients from certain jurisdictions. The list of countries included Ukraine.

Notice of withdrawal of the petition. Source: Kroll.

The company filed the relevant petition with the Delaware Bankruptcy Court in early July 2025. It is a petition for the entry of a “Limited Jurisdiction Proceeding.”

In it, FTX argued that the peculiarities of the legal regime in certain jurisdictions could prevent the payment of compensation. In the petition, the company sought authorization to hire local lawyers to assess all risks.

If a country-specific compensation procedure was deemed impossible, the exchange could have rejected the claims of local customers by redirecting the funds owed to them back to the trust. In order to get the money, it would have been necessary to go to court.

The list originally included 49 jurisdictions, including Ukraine, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China. In total, clients from these countries account for about 5% of all assets claimed. Users from the PRC account for 82% of the amount.

FTX’s petition caused a wave of criticism both in the community and among the company’s creditors. In particular, about 300 investors from China opposed the decision.

After the meeting on October 23, 2025, and taking into account all the arguments, FTX Recovery Trust decided to withdraw the petition. At the same time, the company reserved the right to resubmit it.

Note, earlier one of FTX’s creditors, Sunil Kavoori, noted that the bankrupt exchange’s customers are actually receiving between 9% and 46% as the payouts are based on November 2022 prices.

We also covered a document with revelations from former CEO Sam Bankman-Fried. In it, he stated that FTX and its affiliate, Alameda Research, were allegedly never insolvent and that the bankruptcy was initiated by lawyers.