ARTICLE
26 December 2025

FinCEN Assesses $3.5 Million Penalty Against Virtual Asset Platform For Alleged BSA Violations

SM
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP

Contributor

Businesses turn to Sheppard to deliver sophisticated counsel to help clients move ahead. With more than 1,200 lawyers located in 16 offices worldwide, our client-centered approach is grounded in nearly a century of building enduring relationships on trust and collaboration. Our broad and diversified practices serve global clients—from startups to Fortune 500 companies—at every stage of the business cycle, including high-stakes litigation, complex transactions, sophisticated financings and regulatory issues. With leading edge technologies and innovation behind our team, we pride ourselves on being a strategic partner to our clients.
On December 9, FinCEN announced a consent order imposing a $3.5 million civil money penalty on a peer-to-peer virtual asset trading platform...
United States Technology
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP are most popular:
  • within Cannabis & Hemp and Insolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring topic(s)

On December 9, FinCEN announced a consent order imposing a $3.5 million civil money penalty on a peer-to-peer virtual asset trading platform, alleging willful violations of the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN alleged that the platform's compliance failures allowed it to process substantial volumes of transactions connected to criminal activity, sanctions exposure, and other high-risk conduct over an extended period.

According to FinCEN, the platform operated a hosted virtual asset wallet and a peer-to-peer marketplace that connected buyers and sellers using hundreds of payment methods. FinCEN alleged that, over several years, the platform processed transactions involving more than $500 million in suspicious activity, including activity linked to sanctioned jurisdictions, ransomware attacks, darknet marketplaces, terrorist financing, and other illicit conduct. FinCEN also alleged that the platform did not file suspicious activity reports for significant portions of this activity during the relevant period.

FinCEN stated that it considered mitigating factors in determining the penalty, including leadership changes, engagement of outside consultants, and a review to identify and report previously unreported suspicious activity.

Putting It Into Practice: As the CFPB pulls back from active enforcement, other federal agencies continue to exercise their enforcement and supervisory authorities under existing statutory frameworks (previously discussed here and here). Federal agencies are expected to remain active in oversight and supervision, particularly in areas such as anti-money laundering and money services business registration that sit outside the CFPB's core jurisdiction. Market participants should continue to monitor federal enforcement developments and update compliance frameworks as necessary to remain aligned with evolving expectations.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More