Money Laundering Through Digital Currencies, Crypto, And Blockchain
1. Overview: Money Laundering via Digital Currencies and Blockchain
Definition
Money laundering is the process of concealing the origin of illegally obtained funds and integrating them into the financial system to appear legitimate. Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technologies provide pseudo-anonymity, global reach, and decentralized transactions, making them attractive for illicit activity.
Mechanisms
Multiple Wallet Transfers: Funds are moved across several wallets to obscure the trail.
Mixers/Tumblers: Services that mix cryptocurrency from different users to mask transaction sources.
Use of Privacy Coins: Coins like Monero or Zcash provide stronger anonymity.
Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs): Peer-to-peer trading avoids KYC/AML scrutiny.
Integration: Converting crypto back to fiat or buying high-value assets like real estate or luxury items.
2. Legal Frameworks
United States: Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), Patriot Act, FinCEN regulations, AML obligations for crypto exchanges.
India: Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), RBI circulars on virtual currencies.
European Union: EU Anti-Money Laundering Directives (AMLD5/6) requiring exchanges to implement KYC.
International: FATF Guidance on Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs).
3. Case Law Examples
Case 1: United States v. Alexander Vinnik (BTC-e Exchange, 2017)
Facts:
Alexander Vinnik operated BTC-e, a cryptocurrency exchange used for laundering over $4 billion from hacks, fraud, and ransomware payments.
Legal Issues:
Charged with money laundering, operating an unlicensed financial business, and facilitating cybercrime proceeds.
Outcome:
Arrested in Greece at the request of the U.S.; later convicted in France and Greece.
Significance:
BTC-e demonstrated how centralized crypto exchanges can be exploited for large-scale laundering.
Highlighted the importance of KYC/AML compliance in crypto platforms.
Case 2: United States v. Bitfinex/Tether (2019)
Facts:
Bitfinex was accused of covering an $850 million loss and using Tether (USDT) to move funds and obscure transactions.
Legal Issues:
Allegations of market manipulation and money laundering via stablecoins.
Outcome:
Paid $18.5 million fines to the NYAG and agreed to transparency measures.
Significance:
Showed that even legitimate exchanges and stablecoins can be used in laundering schemes.
Case 3: United States v. Bitcoin Fog (2019)
Facts:
Bitcoin Fog, a mixing/tumbling service, laundered over 1 million BTC (~$335 million) from darknet markets.
Legal Issues:
Charged with money laundering and unlicensed money transmission.
Outcome:
Service shut down; operators prosecuted and assets seized.
Significance:
Mixing services are high-risk tools for money laundering.
Blockchain forensics can trace even obfuscated transactions.
Case 4: India – Enforcement Directorate v. Gainbitcoin/Joshi (2018)
Facts:
Gainbitcoin, run by Amit Bhardwaj, collected over ₹2,500 crore from investors in a Ponzi-like cryptocurrency scheme.
Funds were laundered using Bitcoin wallets.
Legal Issues:
Violations of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Outcome:
ED attached properties worth ₹200 crore; Bhardwaj arrested and prosecuted.
Significance:
One of India’s first high-profile crypto money laundering cases.
Case 5: Bangladesh Bank Heist (2016)
Facts:
Hackers stole $81 million via the SWIFT system, and attempted to launder funds through Philippine casinos and cryptocurrency exchanges.
Legal Issues:
International money laundering and cybercrime.
Outcome:
Majority of funds recovered; multiple arrests.
Significance:
Early example of combining traditional bank fraud with cryptocurrency laundering.
Case 6: Silk Road (Ross Ulbricht, 2013–2015)
Facts:
Silk Road, an online darknet marketplace, facilitated drug trafficking and other illegal sales, primarily using Bitcoin.
Legal Issues:
Charges included money laundering, conspiracy to commit narcotics trafficking, and computer hacking.
Outcome:
Ulbricht sentenced to life imprisonment.
Blockchain tracing linked wallet addresses to illicit funds.
Significance:
Pioneering case showing that crypto-based laundering can be prosecuted successfully.
Case 7: WannaCry Ransomware Attacks (2017)
Facts:
Ransomware collected Bitcoin payments from victims globally.
Funds laundered through exchanges, mixers, and tumblers.
Legal Issues:
Money laundering and cybercrime.
Outcome:
Law enforcement tracked wallets using blockchain analysis.
Arrests and indictments followed internationally.
Significance:
Demonstrated the intersection of cybercrime, ransomware, and crypto laundering.
4. Key Takeaways
Blockchain is traceable, but anonymity features (mixers, privacy coins) complicate investigations.
Exchanges and VASPs are liable if they fail AML/KYC obligations.
International cooperation is crucial, as funds often cross borders rapidly.
Criminals exploit both centralized and decentralized systems, including peer-to-peer exchanges and tumblers.
RELATED Blog
0 comments