The scale of RedotPay’s listing plan still looks large. Less certain now is when the stablecoin payments firm gets to test it in public markets. RedotPay was targeting a valuation above $4 billion and hoping to raise more than $1 billion in a U.S. IPO this year. That timetable has been pushed to 2027 or later while the company seeks regulatory approvals and deals with a legal claim tied to Binance, according to the original report .
The lawsuit comes from Binance-linked entities, not from a minor counterparty. They are seeking nearly $473 million from RedotPay’s founders and allege the company improperly diverted more than 470,000 Binance Card users to its own card product. For a pre-IPO company, the difference between a commercial dispute and a user-diversion claim is material. It forces the company to explain its customer acquisition history, not just its revenue trajectory.
The timing matters because RedotPay had previously signaled an IPO as the next step after building a large card user base. A delay to 2027 or later changes the company’s capital roadmap and likely forces it to rely on private capital or operating cash flow longer than planned.
Court risk meets listing risk
The IPO delay is partly a story about regulatory approval. A stablecoin payments company listing in the U.S. still has to satisfy regulators on compliance and custody, and a lawsuit alleging improper user acquisition adds exactly the kind of disclosure risk banks don’t like walking into a roadshow with. JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Jefferies had been advising RedotPay on a potential New York listing that bankers hoped could happen as early as this year. Pushing that to 2027 or later gives the company more runway to resolve the Binance dispute before it becomes a line item investors have to price in.
RedotPay has rejected the allegations outright. The company says its operations continue as normal and points to its scale as evidence the business doesn’t depend on any single partner: more than 8 million users and roughly $180 million in annualized revenue, by its own account. That revenue figure matters for context — the $472.8 million claim is close to 2.6 times what RedotPay says it earns in a year, which is the kind of number that gets written into a prospectus’s risk section regardless of how the case ends.
The dispute isn’t confined to one court. Binance-affiliated entities — Nest Trading, Distributed Technologies, and Chaintecs Consulting Singapore — filed the primary claim in Hong Kong against RedotPay’s three co-founders, Gao Zhangpeng, Chan Wa Choi, and Yao Chao. A related Singapore filing adds a second jurisdictional front. Binance had already ended Binance Pay functionality on RedotPay’s platform from April 3, 2026, following an internal review of merchant partners — the lawsuit followed months later, once the company’s IPO plans were already public.
How Binance arrived at $473 million is itself notable: the plaintiffs used a lifetime customer value of $925 per allegedly diverted user, multiplied across more than 470,000 accounts. Whether that valuation methodology holds up in court is a separate question from whether the underlying diversion happened — but it’s the number RedotPay’s IPO timeline is now built around.