View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference
May 13, 2019

I. INTRODUCTION
Good morning, everyone – it’s a pleasure to be here today.
As the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, I spend my time tracking and
targeting money laundering, terrorist financing, proliferation financing, and a myriad of other
illicit activities. My o ice consists of more than 800 career professionals, who are the best in the
world at shutting down the avenues bad actors use to launder money around the globe.
Before I get into our e orts involving digital currency, I want to describe briefly the o ices within
the Treasury Department that I oversee:
The O ice of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, is the beating heart of the sanctions program.
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, oversees compliance with antimoney-laundering/combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) obligations, and is also
the Financial Intelligence Unit of the United States.
I have a policy o ice called the O ice of Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes that does
extensive international outreach to help foreign countries harden their networks against
illicit finance.
And Treasury is actually the only finance ministry in the world that has its own intelligence
unit, the O ice of Intelligence and Analysis, which maps illicit financial flows and networks
around the world.
Each of these components plays a critical role in our e orts to ensure that blockchain and other
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

1/8

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

distributed ledger technologies are not exploited by bad actors.
E-Gold Digital Currency
The idea of using digital currencies to launder money and mask identities is not a new one. I led
a team of prosecutors at the Department of Justice more than a decade ago that successfully
prosecuted the digital currency E-Gold. E-Gold users were able to set up accounts under names
like “Donald Duck” and “Mickey Mouse” and believed they could get away with horrible things,
like tra icking in child pornography. They were wrong. In 2008, we convicted E-Gold’s directors
of felonies, and they paid multi-million dollar fines.
Today, other bad actors are trying to leverage virtual currencies to make an end-run around our
laws and regulations.
Threats
I start every morning at Treasury with a briefing on the threats we face as a nation. Without
divulging any state secrets, I want to start by sharing some of the challenges I see facing the
virtual currency industry.
Sanctions Evasion and Nation States:
In recent years, economic sanctions have emerged as one of the top tools in our national
security arsenal. Without putting boots on the ground or troops in harm’s way, sanctions can
help disrupt the operations of state sponsors of terrorism, human rights abusers, and weapons
proliferators by cutting o their sources of funding. In this Administration, Treasury has brought
unprecedented economic pressure on Iran, North Korea, and Russia, among many others.
Time and again, as regimes and bad actors are cut o from the global financial system, they
search for alternatives. This has resulted in some countries and rogue actors trying to turn to
digital currencies to o set the impact of economic sanctions.
For example, the Department of Justice recently indicted and OFAC sanctioned Park Jin Hyok.
He was part of a North Korea-sponsored hacking team known as the Lazarus Group that is
allegedly responsible for stealing $81 million from Bangladesh’s Central Bank, among other
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

2/8

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

global attacks. As many of you know, the Lazarus Group used spear phishing techniques with
Bank of Bangladesh employees to gain access to the bank’s network, and from there, accessed
the SWIFT payment terminal to cause funds to be transferred out of Bank of Bangladesh’s
account.
In addition to e orts to steal from banks, the Lazarus Group has also leveraged virtual currency
and exchanges to quickly transfer stolen and extorted funds. My team at Treasury back-tracked
these stolen funds that were moved through various victims’ wallets and laundered through
mixers. We traced some of the money through fraudulently opened accounts at exchanges, as it
chain-hopped from one blockchain to another around the world. We then worked closely with
law enforcement and international partners to identify those responsible.
These types of schemes and other large-scale the s from virtual currency exchanges have been
used to generate massive revenues for bad actors. In fact, FinCEN’s analysis estimates $1.5
billion in stolen funds related to cyber hacks of virtual currency exchangers and administrators
over just the past two years.
In addition, several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, and Russia, have launched or
announced plans to launch a national digital currency. Some have publicly and brazenly stated
that the explicit intent of this currency is to evade our sanctions. As you all know, Venezuela’s
ostensibly oil-backed “Petro” was the Maduro regime’s attempt to establish a national digital
currency on top of Ethereum and other blockchains. While it failed to attract many investors to
this risky venture, we know that other dictators and rogue regimes will inevitably try to
succeed.
Terrorists:
Like rogue states, terrorist organizations and their supporters and sympathizers are also
constantly looking for ways to raise and transfer funds without detection or tracking by law
enforcement. In February 2019, Hamas began soliciting bitcoin donations via social media,
using two bitcoin addresses. To make the transactions more di icult to monitor on the public
blockchain, Hamas has begun to provide unique funding addresses for each person making a
donation.
[1] As of late March 2019, two known addresses had received over $5,000 worth of bitcoin. This
might not seem like that much money. But the cost of carrying out a terrorist attack can be low.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

3/8

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

When FinCEN analyzed millions of dollars of remittance transactions with suspected links to
terrorism, it found they averaged less than $600 each. In an era where a radicalized suicide
bomber can bring a tragic end to the lives of hundreds for nothing more than the price of duct
tape, a vest, and supplies, we cannot a ord to allow any money to flow to terrorists.
II. What do digital currency users, businesses and exchanges need to know about
complying with the regulatory and sanctions regimes?
In this context, AML/CFT and sanctions expectations for the digital currency industry should not
be viewed as a chore. It should be viewed as a duty serving our national security. If your
business is to succeed and thrive, then your business model needs to be built on a strong
foundation of anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance from the very beginning. If you
wait until you are contacted by regulators or law enforcement, it is too late.
Anonymity-Enhanced Virtual Currencies:
For example, bad actors today remain intent on abusing anonymity-enhanced virtual currencies
and services designed to hide transaction flows. Just consider that over $140,000 worth of
bitcoin from the global WannaCry 2.0 ransomware attacks was converted into Monero in the
months following the attacks to conceal the stolen funds. Products designed to obscure the
path of a transaction and enhance anonymity are rife for exploitation by bad actors.
Nobody here wants to see innovative products and services misused to support terrorism and
weapons proliferation, or become another vehicle for criminals to carry out child pornography
or human tra icking. Some of the features of emerging technologies that appeal most to users
and businesses – like speed of transfers, rapid settlement, global reach, and increased
anonymity – can also create opportunities for rogue regimes and terrorists. It is for this reason
that industry compliance with our regulations is so critical.
Compliance with BSA obligations:
Since 2011, FinCEN’s regulations have stated that individuals and entities engaged in the
business of accepting and transmitting physical currency or convertible virtual currency from
one person to another or to another location are money transmitters subject to the AML/CFT
requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act and its implementing regulations. This includes
transactions in fiat-to-virtual currency, as well as virtual currency-to-virtual currency.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

4/8

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

When IRS or FinCEN examiners show up at the door to your business, they will be looking to see
if you complied with all of these requirements. That is, did you: (1) register with FinCEN as a
money services business, (2) develop, implement, and maintain an AML program designed “to
prevent [them] from being used to facilitate money laundering and terrorist financing,” and (3)
establish recordkeeping, and reporting measures, including filing Suspicious Activity Reports
(SARs) and Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs)? We will be checking whether you did all this
right from the start of your business – not just a er you got a call from regulators or law
enforcement.
Virtual currency money transmitters are required to undergo regular, routine compliance
examinations—just like every other U.S. financial institution—to help identify weaknesses and
ensure compliance. Our exams have focused on business models including virtual currency
trading platforms, administrators, virtual currency kiosk (or ATM) companies, crypto-precious
metals dealers, and individual peer-to-peer exchangers.
The point of these compliance programs is not to be a roadblock to innovation or divert limited
resources from a startup. It is to ensure that you establish a reporting system that keeps bad
actors away from your businesses and protects our national security. Remember, you are not
only doing this to comply with our regulatory expectations, but also to make sure you are not
the next business that North Korea or Hamas or narcotra ickers exploit.
We have found great partners in your industry committed to this objective. Since 2013, FinCEN
has received over 47,000 suspicious activity reports (SARs) mentioning bitcoin or virtual
currency more broadly. Half of these SARs were filed by virtual currency exchangers or

administrators themselves. These filings have been critical to law enforcement e orts.
Just take as an example the notorious illicit virtual currency exchanger BTC-e. SARs filed by
both depository institutions and virtual currency exchangers helped law enforcement to identify
virtual currency wallet addresses used by BTC-e and to detect di erent illicit streams of activity
moving through the exchange.
We are pleased to see that some virtual currency companies have developed their own
proprietary sophisticated compliance systems to improve responses to law enforcement
requests and overall cyber resilience. Along those same lines, we have seen companies use
creative ways to collect and report cyber indicators like device identifiers, IP addresses with
associated time stamps, virtual currency wallet addresses, and transaction hashes. In fact, it
was this innovative reporting led by the private sector that helped influence FinCEN’s recent
update of the SAR form to explicitly allow for reporting of these cyber-specific indicators.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

5/8

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

FinCEN Exchange Partnership
We believe that it is important that the private and public sectors work collaboratively to protect
our financial system. That is why just earlier this month, we held an information exchange
under our FinCEN Exchange program where we shared illicit finance methodologies with the
virtual currency industry and law enforcement to better protect the financial system. FinCEN
also just issued an advisory describing red-flags and common typologies used in exploiting
virtual currencies and businesses.
And just last week, FinCEN issued guidance (30 pages long!) directly addressing areas of interest
gleaned from ongoing industry engagement about how our regulations apply to di erent
business models, such as peer-to-peer exchangers, virtual currency kiosks, decentralized
(distributed) applications (DApps), and anonymizing services. I encourage you all to read it
closely.
In addition, just last week, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)—the international standardsetting body for combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism and proliferation
——currently led by the United States—hosted a private sector consultative forum on the
various services and business models in the digital currency space, and discussed how industry
can comply with vital AML/CFT obligations, including in the context of asset transfers. During its
presidency of the FATF, the United States has worked with other countries to clarify how
all countries should regulate and supervise activities and providers in the digital currency
space. We anticipate that in June the FATF will adopt a final version of its Interpretative Note,
along with updated guidance to further assist countries and industry with their obligations.
Requiring AML/CFT standards around the world is vital for creating a level playing field and
ensuring that bad actors don’t just gravitate to jurisdictions that have no safeguards. I also want
to be clear that our rules apply to any money transmitter — even if foreign-located—so long as
they do business in whole or substantial part in the United States.
Compliance with OFAC sanctions:
Turning now to OFAC sanctions. OFAC compliance obligations are the same regardless of
whether a transaction is in digital currency or traditional fiat currency. OFAC requirements
apply equally to brick and mortar banks as they do to the digital currency world. And
compliance is not optional: there are civil and criminal penalties if you fail.
There is no “one-size-fits-all” sanctions compliance program, but there are common themes
that are found in all successful sanctions compliance programs:
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

6/8

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

Developing a tailored, risk-based program that accounts for the risks in your particular type
of business;
Knowing your customers and conducting su icient due diligence on them before providing
services;
Making sure you are not conducting prohibited transactions with individuals and entities
that appear on OFAC’s sanctions lists or facilitating prohibited transfers connected to
sanctioned jurisdictions, like Iran, or involving digital currency addresses highlighted on our
sanctions lists;
Communicating with your customer so they understand the types of transactions and
activity you expect to see from the relationship, and the types of activity you will not do or
perform on their behalf.

We just recently published a document outlining these essential components called “A
Framework for OFAC Compliance Commitments,” which you can find on OFAC’s website.
Our sanctions are ever-changing, and our sanctions lists are dynamic with new individuals and
entities, as well as updated identifying information, regularly being added. So your compliance
process must be dynamic as well.
I urge you to take our sanctions lists and do additional analysis to make sure you are not doing
business with designated parties or conducting prohibited transactions with parties in
sanctioned locations. We find that the best compliance programs are those that incorporate red
flags and typologies into their programs to protect their businesses, and then use this
information to provide reporting back to us, as appropriate, including through suspicious
activity reports.
In addition, OFAC’s sanctions programs target not just specific individuals and entities, but also
whole jurisdictions, such as Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria. So, if your program only runs a
check of names against OFAC’s lists, you could completely miss other prohibited activity.
Enforcement
Early on in this speech, I told you that we will identify where compliance is not taking place and
take appropriate action. Treasury is very focused on pursuing those who disregard their
obligations.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

7/8

3/19/2020

Remarks of Sigal Mandelker, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence CoinDesk Consensus Conference | U.S. Departme…

As I’m sure everyone here is familiar, we’ve gone a er some of the biggest non-compliant actors
in this industry, such as BTC-e, which was shut down, and one of its directors and supervisors,
Alexander Vinnik, indicted.
But we will also go a er the individual actors who—while maybe smaller in size— egregiously
flaunt their obligations. For example, just last month, FinCEN issued a money penalty against a
peer-to-peer exchanger named Eric Powers. Mr. Powers failed to register as a money services
business and had no written policies or procedures for ensuring compliance with the BSA. He
advertised his intent to purchase and sell bitcoin on the Internet, and completed many
transactions directly with Darknet Market vendors without ever reporting any suspicious
transactions. He conducted over 200 transactions involving the physical transfer of more than
$10,000 in currency, yet failed to file a single currency transaction report. As a result of our
action, Mr. Powers not only paid a fine, but is now barred from providing money transmission
services or participating in the work of any financial institution.
Conclusion
In closing, I hope you understand how much we value your role in protecting our national
security and this industry. We applaud those individuals and entities who make compliance an
essential part of their businesses, and urge the industry to prioritize compliance before
choosing to bring a product or service to the market.
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/yayafanusie/2019/03/29/jihadists-upping-their-bitcoingame/#5fd2aec179bc

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm687

8/8