Our aim is to fully reflect Binance’s position in the article, and to ensure our reporting is accurate. We would be grateful if you could respond to our questions below by the end of the week and raise anything that we may have overlooked. The article covers a range of civil and criminal cases, and we have interviewed law enforcement officials, researchers, and crime victims in nine countries. Based on an examination of blockchain data, court records, and law enforcement statements, we have calculated that during this period Binance processed transactions totalling at least $2.4 billion stemming from hacks, investment frauds and illegal online drug sales. Our reporting indicates that Binance served as a conduit for the laundering of billions of dollars of illicit funds between 20. This reporting follows our January article which showed that Binance kept weak anti-money laundering checks whilst it promised tougher compliance, despite concerns raised by senior company figures. Subject: Reuters' questions for BinanceĪs we mentioned in our previous email, Reuters is reporting an article on Binance which assesses the impact of past gaps in Binance’s anti-money laundering checks. To: Berwick, Angus (Reuters) Wilson, Tom (Reuters) We suggest you read the email exchange below and make up your mind as to whether they honestly attempted to cast light on the subject or sell fear and paranoia clickbait to their readers. Important to note that we offered them an opportunity to speak with the two senior investigators who had led the casework to take down criminal groups Hydra and Lazarus, and offered to review the UID and wallet information that they claimed they were basing their reporting on. Rather than continue to argue our case here, we’ve once again published the full email exchange we had with Reuters below. So you tell us where the real issue is regarding money laundering. Crypto is incredibly transparent, infinitely more so than the traditional cash economy, and this is well-documented. The UN estimates that between 2% to 5% of traditional fiat (cash), about $800 billion to $2 trillion in current US dollars, was associated with some type of illicit activity. And just like many regulators and policymakers, we’re still working through what an appropriate regulatory framework should look like.Īccording to Chainalysis, a company that specializes in crypto and blockchain analytics, of all transactions made with cryptocurrencies in 2021, 0.15% were associated with some type of illicit activity. Neither our industry nor Binance is perfect, but we have grown by leaps and bounds over the past three years. We highly suggest you ignore those authors and pundits who cherry-pick data, rely on conveniently unverifiable “leaks” from regulators, and feed into the cult of crypto paranoia for fame or financial gain. And like their last article, which was brutally fact-checked by multiple third parties including the centerpiece of their story, this latest iteration is rife with falsehoods, massive leaps to conclusions, and relies on poor data that could have been fact-checked by reaching out to one of the major on-chain analyst firms, like Chainalysis or TRM. One author who has published a number of these “breathless pearl-clutching” articles ran another piece today. Sadly, we have seen these types of misleading articles seep into more esteemed media outlets on occasion. Sadly, our industry has to continue addressing these issues over and over again as interested parties continue to spread disinformation or purposely mislead the general public by leaving out critical context, such as how much more effective crypto is than the traditional banking system at casting sunlight on illicit activity. Last week we published a blog that debunked the myth often pushed by adversaries of our industry that crypto is a “haven” for illicit money laundering.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |