On November 15, Director Kenneth Blanco of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) offered his most extensive remarks on blockchain since the agency’s release of updated guidance in May. Speaking at the Chainalysis Blockchain Symposium, Director Blanco offered a number of insights on FinCEN’s current priorities and industry trends.

Suspicious Activity Reports

According to Director Blanco, since the publication of FinCEN’s guidance in May, the agency has received over 10,000 suspicious activity reports (SARs) related to convertible virtual currency (CVC) with 6,600 of those SARs filed by CVC-related businesses, including exchanges and kiosks. Director Blanco noted that this was a significant increase in SAR volume, particularly from CVC-related businesses, and included SARs from dozens of businesses that had never filed a SAR with FinCEN prior to the publication of the guidance.

Director Blanco also highlighted a couple of trends in SAR reporting. The first is SARs related to “potential unregistered, foreign-located money services businesses (MSBs), specifically, Venezuela-based P2P exchangers.” A foreign-located MSB is required to register with FinCEN if it conducts business in whole or in “substantial part” in the United States. (Determining precisely what constitutes “substantial part” continues to be an area of uncertainty for industry, which Director Blanco did not address.) A second trend was CVC kiosk operators reporting on “activity indicative of scam victims upon identification of new customers who have limited knowledge of convertible virtual currencies, particularly those in vulnerable populations, including the elderly.”


Continue Reading

On October 11, the leaders of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a joint statement regarding anti-money laundering (AML) compliance for persons engaged in certain activities involving digital assets. While the statement largely reaffirms known agency guidance and existing regulations, it is noteworthy for a number of reasons.

First, the joint statement, issued from multiple regulators, is the first of its kind in the digital asset space with respect to AML and may indicate an intent of regulators to show that their approach to AML compliance is aligned and to coordinate more closely on AML compliance going forward. While each of the three regulators has published guidance regarding digital assets and has engaged in related enforcement actions, there has not been any public indication to date that such efforts have been coordinated across agencies.


Continue Reading

On October 11, the leaders of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a joint statement regarding anti-money laundering (AML) compliance for persons engaged in certain activities involving digital assets. While the statement largely reaffirms known agency guidance and existing regulations, it is noteworthy for a number of reasons.

First, the joint statement, issued from multiple regulators, is the first of its kind in the digital asset space with respect to AML and may indicate an intent of regulators to show that their approach to AML compliance is aligned and to coordinate more closely on AML compliance going forward. While each of the three regulators has published guidance regarding digital assets and has engaged in related enforcement actions, there has not been any public indication to date that such efforts have been coordinated across agencies.


Continue Reading

On September 4th, Alan Cohn hosted the 229th episode of The Cyberlaw Podcast.  We took a deep dive into all things blockchain and cryptocurrency discussing recent regulatory developments and best practices for users of exchanges.  Our episode begins with Charles Mills discussing the landmark decision coming out of the New York Eastern District Court in

The Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has principal responsibility for issuing and enforcing federal anti-money laundering (AML) regulations applicable to US financial institutions, including money services businesses (MSBs) operating as “money transmitters” in the cryptocurrency space.  Followers of cryptocurrency regulation have been eager for additional FinCEN guidance clarifying the agency’s approach to a number of significant industry developments.  FinCEN principally relies upon its 2013 guidance, subsequent administrative ruling letters, and other written correspondence such as the agency’s 2018 letter to Senator Ron Wyden confirming that initial coin offerings (ICOs) fall within FinCEN AML regulations.  However, the rapid pace of development in the blockchain and cryptocurrency sector has left many in the industry with questions regarding how to apply FinCEN’s regulations to new business models and technological advances.

On August 9, 2018, FinCEN Director Kenneth Blanco delivered a speech regarding the agency’s approach to cryptocurrency.  The speech offered helpful clarifications and insights, but also left a number of important questions unanswered. 
Continue Reading

On July 26, 2017, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the US Department of the Treasury assessed a civil monetary penalty of $110,003,314 against Canton Business Corporation (BTC-e), one of the largest virtual currency exchanges by volume in the world, and a $12,000,000 penalty against Alexander Vinnik, a Russian national who allegedly controlled, directed, and supervised BTC-e’s operations, finances, and accounts. On the same day, a 21-count criminal indictment against BTC-e and Mr. Vinnick was unsealed, and Mr. Vinnick was arrested in Greece.

This is the second supervisory action that FinCEN has taken against a virtual currency exchanger, and the first against a foreign entity operating as a money services business (MSB) with activities in the United States. FinCEN’s action also imposes the second highest civil monetary penalty assessed against an MSB to date. FinCEN has increasingly brought enforcement actions against MSBs and other non-traditional financial institutions, and similar actions seem likely in the future.


Continue Reading