The new FinTech expansion playbook: EU and Asia trends, regulations and market hurdles.

Why some markets look irresistible in 2026, and why others are quietly falling out of favor.

If you run a FinTech in payments, digital assets, or remittances, international expansion now means something very specific: expanding into jurisdictions where regulation can accelerate growth, without turning compliance into a permanent drag on unit economics.

Over the last 12 to 18 months, a clear pattern has emerged. Companies are choosing expansion hubs based on four core questions:

1. Does a license open multiple markets at once?

2. Are regulators providing clarity, or moving the goalposts?

3. Do local payment rails support instant, cross-border, API-first models?

4. Will AML and reporting requirements make certain corridors commercially unattractive?

Below are the most important trends shaping those decisions across Europe and Asia, and the hurdles that continue to slow teams down.

1) “License-to-scale” is back, and it’s driving where firms land.

Europe: pick the license that unlocks the EEA.

In Europe, many firms are treating licensing as a strategic asset. A strong license can create distribution, credibility, and in some cases passporting pathways into multiple countries.

Recent examples show how expansion leaders are thinking:

• Airwallex (payments) is investing approximately €200 million in the Netherlands over five years, with plans to grow its Amsterdam team. The strategy leverages a Dutch license that can support wider European operations. The company reports over $1 billion in annual recurring revenue and serves 150,000+ clients.

• Zilch (consumer finance, payments-adjacent) acquired a Lithuanian lender (Fjord Bank) for $38 million to secure an EU banking license, enabling expansion across the bloc.

  
  

What this tells us: Europe remains attractive when a firm can anchor in one jurisdiction and scale regionally. Licensing becomes a growth lever, not just a compliance checkbox.

Common hurdles in EU licensing:

• Time to license and supervisory depth: governance, IT controls, safeguarding, outsourcing, and audit expectations can significantly extend timelines.

• Fragmentation in supervisory style: even under harmonised rules, regulators interpret risk differently.

• Rising AML expectations: particularly for cross-border and crypto-adjacent activity.

2) Instant payments are changing the economics of EU market entry.

The EU is making “instant” the default.

A major reason Europe remains attractive is the rapid modernization of its payments infrastructure. The EU Instant Payments Regulation introduced concrete implementation deadlines, including mandatory receipt of instant payments by 9 January 2025 for euro-area payment service providers, with later deadlines for non-euro countries.

For FinTechs, instant rails matter because they:

• Reduce settlement friction,

• Improve customer experience expectations,

• Enable new embedded use cases, such as payouts, refunds, wage access, and real-time treasury.

Wero: a bet on European payment sovereignty.

In parallel, Europe is building new rails and consumer payment experiences. Wero (EPI) has announced e-commerce expansion plans for 2026, including additional countries such as the Netherlands, where iDEAL migration is expected to begin.

What this means for expanding payment firms:

• Opportunity: new acceptance methods, reduced reliance on global card schemes, and stronger account-to-account models.

• Hurdle: product teams must support multiple rails (cards, SEPA Instant, local wallets), while sales teams need a clear and compelling merchant value story.

3) Digital assets expansion is now a regulatory clarity race in Asia.

Hong Kong: stablecoin licensing is attracting global attention.

Hong Kong’s stablecoin issuer regime went live on 1 August 2025, requiring a license for the issuance of fiat-referenced stablecoins.

By late 2025:

• 36 companies had applied for stablecoin licenses.

• The HKMA indicated the first batch would be limited, signaling a cautious rollout.

Major players are positioning early:

• Ant’s international unit announced plans to apply for a Hong Kong stablecoin issuer license and explore similar licenses in Singapore and Luxembourg.

• Standard Chartered’s Hong Kong arm announced a joint venture to apply for an HKD-backed stablecoin license.

Why Hong Kong looks appealing:

• A clear licensing perimeter,

• A regulator actively shaping the stablecoin market,

• Strong capital markets connectivity.

Why it remains challenging:

• Only a small number of initial licenses are expected, driving intense competition.

• Governance, reserve management, redemption mechanics, and risk controls face heavy scrutiny.

Singapore: high standards, predictable outcomes.

Singapore’s MAS finalized a stablecoin regulatory framework in 2023, focused on value stability and consumer protections, including reserve backing and redemption requirements. For many firms, Singapore remains attractive because the rules are demanding but coherent, particularly for companies targeting institutional-grade stablecoin and tokenization use cases.

4) Remittances and cross-border payments: the compliance bar is rising everywhere.

Cross-border payments are becoming more regulated, not less. Growth remains, but the path is increasingly defined by compliance capability.

Example:India’s RBI authorisation of Skydo as a Payment Aggregator – Cross Border (PA-CB) illustrates how regulators are formalising routes for cross-border collection and payouts.

Common hurdles in remittance and cross-border expansion:

• Payment transparency standards: FATF’s updated Recommendation 16 requires better data quality and verification to reduce fraud and errors.

• Corridor risk and de-risking: enhanced due diligence requirements can make certain corridors commercially unattractive, especially when banking partners become cautious.

• Unit economics vs compliance cost: additional monitoring, screening, and audit requirements can quickly erode margins in low-ticket remittance flows.

5) Why some locations are becoming less appealing in 2026.

This shift is driven by three main factors:

A) Increased supervisory scrutiny, especially in digital assets.

In the EU, MiCA introduces a single framework, but regulators are closely monitoring how licenses are issued and supervised. ESMA’s criticism of Malta’s MiCA licensing process highlights why “easy licensing” can become a reputational and operational risk.

Translation for operators: a “license anywhere, fast” strategy may still raise questions from banks, partners, and enterprise clients.

B) AML expectations are becoming centralised and data-driven.

AMLA began operations on 1 July 2025, sending a clear signal that crypto-asset activity requires strong AML protections.

Even firms not directly overseen by AMLA can expect:

• More standardised expectations across Europe,

• Less tolerance for weak transaction monitoring and governance.

C) The cost of doing business has changed.

Expansion in payments, digital assets, and remittances increasingly requires:

• Stronger compliance staffing earlier in the lifecycle

• Better product instrumentation (monitoring, audit logs, risk models)

• More mature third-party and outsourcing oversight

Practical checklist: deciding where to expand next

If you are evaluating EU or Asian expansion in 2026, a useful internal checklist includes:

1. License leverage: does one license unlock multiple markets or partners?

2. Rail readiness: can you support instant payments and relevant local wallets?

3. Banking partnerships: will partner banks accept your risk profile and corridors?

4. AML corridor economics: how do high-risk lists and enhanced due diligence affect CAC, cost-to-serve, and margins?

5. Regulatory runway: are rules stable enough to support a 12 to 24 month roadmap?

Where do you see the biggest expansion opportunities for FinTech in 2026, and which markets have become harder to justify?