FinCEN Civil Penalty for Cryptocurrency Money Service Business

On October 19, 2020, the Monetary Crimes Enforcement Community (FinCEN) released its evaluation of a $60 million civil financial penalty in opposition to the operator of two cryptocurrency “mixers” for violations of the Financial institution Secrecy Act (“BSA”).^[1] The motion marks the primary effort by FinCEN to focus on the usage of these “mixers” to facilitate cash laundering and demonstrates FinCEN’s ongoing dedication to manage entities that transmit cryptocurrencies as cash service companies (“MSBs”) below the BSA.^[2]

Factual Background:

The motion involved Larry Dean Harmon (“Harmon”), a vendor on the “darkish net” who operated a search engine, Grams. Grams allowed customers to entry and search the onion router community, generally often known as Tor.^[3] Grams aggregated darkish net content material and allowed customers to seek for unlawful medication, firearms, and Personally Identifiable Info.^[4]

In 2014, Harmon expanded his enterprise to cryptocurrency. He based a digital foreign money exchanger, Helix, and linked Helix to Grams.^[5] Helix charged clients a charge to switch bitcoins from a private account to a chosen deal with with out figuring out the supply or proprietor of the bitcoin, a course of often known as “tumbling.”^[6]  Harmon supplied customers two choices for transferring bitcoin. Customers created a digital “pockets” in Helix related to a Grams account, and transferred bitcoin to that pockets.^[7] The client would full a withdrawal kind that designated the vacation spot deal with for the bitcoin.^[8] Helix would then break up the bitcoin, sending parts to accounts it held at cryptocurrency exchanges.^[9] Helix would concurrently switch bitcoin from its personal account to a special bitcoin deal with and finally to the vacation spot deal with desired by the shopper, minus a charge.^[10] As soon as the withdrawal was full, Helix allowed clients to delete all data of the transaction.

Alternatively, Harmon supplied clients a service, “Helix Mild,” that didn’t require making a Grams account.^[11] For this service, clients offered a vacation spot deal with for the bitcoin, after which despatched the specified quantity of bitcoin to an deal with offered by Helix Mild.^[12] Helix Mild would transmit the bitcoin deposited in its pockets to one in all its personal accounts at numerous cryptocurrency exchanges.^[13] It will then switch bitcoin from a special account to yet one more account.  From that account, Helix Mild would transmit bitcoin to the vacation spot deal with offered by the shopper, minus a small charge.^[14] Harmon by no means registered Helix or Helix Mild as cash service companies with FinCEN.^[15] FinCEN finally traced greater than $121 million in bitcoin transfers by means of Helix and Helix Mild.^[16]

After three years working Helix, Harmon shaped a further cryptocurrency service, CoinNinja.^[17] Not like Helix, CoinNinja was readily accessible by odd retail clients, and expressly operated as a cash service enterprise.^[18] CoinNinja’s web site marketed bitcoin “mixing” providers, and offered a service, “Dropbit”, that allowed clients to transmit and settle for bitcoin by means of social media providers and textual content messages.^[19] Harmon additionally marketed CoinNinja as a software for sidestepping Know Your Buyer procedures.^[20]

The FinCEN Dedication:

FinCEN’s investigation resulted in three determinations. First, FinCEN discovered that Harmon willfully violated the MSB registration necessities of the BSA.^[21] Harmon operated Helix and Helix mild for greater than three years and by no means registered both entity with FinCEN.^[22] Equally, Harmon by no means registered CoinNinja or its related service, DropBit, as an MSB.^[23]

Second, FinCEN discovered that Harmon did not implement an efficient anti-money laundering (“AML”) program, as required by the BSA and its implementing rules. The BSA rules require all MSBs to develop and implement an efficient, written AML compliance program, focused to cut back the dangers posed by the MSB’s operations.^[24] Harmon by no means developed insurance policies, procedures, or inner controls, or designated a chief compliance officer for both Helix or CoinNinja.^[25] Helix failed to take care of recordsdata on its clients, offered no AML coaching to its staff, and performed no impartial testing.^[26] In truth, FinCEN decided that Harmon “actively aided cybercriminals” to keep away from the “inner controls in place at U.S.-based convertible digital foreign money exchanges.”^[27] Harmon additionally marketed his service as a car for “break[ing] the blockchain taint” and stopping efficient transaction tracing.^[28]

Third, FinCEN discovered that Harmon did not file necessary Suspicious Exercise Stories (“SARs”) on extremely questionable transactions processed by Helix, Helix Mild, and CoinNinja.^[29] FinCEN recognized practically 2,500 transactions the place Harmon ought to have filed a SAR, and failed to take action.^[30] Many of those transactions concerned “illicit markets” on the darkish net the place, in accordance with FinCEN, “people purchased and offered illicit providers” utilizing Bitcoin.^[31] Harmon additionally did not file SARs on transactions between Helix and convertible digital foreign money mixing providers—providers that, in accordance with FinCEN, impede efficient transaction tracing.^[32]

The FinCEN Penalty Calculation

For these violations, FinCEN calculated a possible most penalty of greater than $209 million.^[33] The BSA permits FinCEN to impose a most penalty of $100,000 for every willful BSA violation.^[34] The BSA additionally authorizes a nice of as much as $5,000 for failure to register as an MSB.^[35]  In accordance with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, FinCEN could then alter these penalties by making use of a penalty adjustment desk, discovered at 31 C.F.R. § 1010.821, for every offense that occurred after November 2, 2015.

The inflation-adjusted penalties in impact on the time of Harmon’s misconduct allowed FinCEN to nice Harmon as much as $57,317 for every willful violation of the BSA AML necessities, together with Harmon’s failure to undertake an ample AML compliance program.^[36]  For willfully failing to file SARs, the penalty adjustment desk allowed FinCEN to nice Harmon the larger of the quantity of the transaction (as much as a most of $229,269) or $57,317.^[37] The penalty adjustment desk additional allowed FinCEN to nice Harmon $8,457 for every violation of the MSB registration necessities.^[38]  Every day the violations continued constituted a separate offense.^[39]

FinCEN then thought of ten components in figuring out the ultimate penalty.^[40]  Notably, these components intently parallel the so-called “Filip Components” – the standards set forth by the Division of Justice (“DOJ”) for figuring out whether or not to file prices in a company investigation.^[41] The components are:

• The Nature and Seriousness of the Offense and the Ensuing Hurt to the Public
• The Impression of the Violations on the FinCEN Mission of Safeguarding the Monetary System
• The Pervasiveness of the Wrongdoing
• The Historical past and Period of the Violations
• Monetary Acquire from the Violation
• Cooperation
• The Systemic Nature of the Violations
• Well timed and Voluntary Disclosure of Violations
• Penalties by Different Governmental Entities

Making use of these components, FinCEN arrived at a last penalty of $60 million. FinCEN discovered that Harmon’s conduct was critical and egregious, significantly provided that Helix and CoinNinja operated in a high-risk business.^[42] FinCEN additionally discovered that Harmon and his entities “brazenly flouted current regulatory necessities” and facilitated cash laundering, hindering the efforts of legislation enforcement.^[43]  FinCEN criticized Helix’s failure to speculate “any assets” in compliance, and emphasised that its failure to file SARs “denied doubtlessly crucial data to the BSA database” for not less than three years.^[44] FinCEN famous that quite than adopting insurance policies to adjust to the BSA, Helix “as a substitute instituted insurance policies and procedures that allowed clients of darknet marketplaces to launder bitcoin.”^[45]

Key Takeaways:

FinCEN’s motion suggests three pertinent takeaways. First, between the latest prices filed by the Division of Justice in opposition to BitMEX and this motion, it’s clear that FinCEN and legislation enforcement are more and more centered on cryptocurrency companies with willfully poor AML compliance packages, in addition to cryptocurrency companies that facilitate cash laundering and different crimes.

Second, cryptocurrency companies that at the moment fail to put money into efficient AML packages as a solution to scale back compliance prices, or that prioritize income and advertising and marketing over BSA compliance, ought to rapidly implement and keep efficient AML and sanctions compliance packages to keep away from regulatory scrutiny and corresponding penalties.

Third, conventional monetary establishments and AML-compliant cryptocurrency companies that search to do enterprise or companion with different cryptocurrency companies ought to be sure that their due diligence efforts are strong and concentrate on acquiring proof of efficient AML compliance packages.  “Proof” could embrace web site visits and walkthroughs that target monetary crime compliance, shut opinions of AML and sanctions insurance policies and procedures, and opinions of pattern BSA-AML alerts and the disposition of these alerts.

_{[1] See FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at 1.}

_{[2] FinCEN introduced this coverage in “Software of FinCEN’s Rules to Sure Enterprise Fashions Involving Convertible Digital Currencies (FIN-2019-G001),” Might 9, 2019, p. 19-20.}

_{[3] See Assertion of Info, att’d as Attachment A to FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at ¶1.}

_[4] Id.

_{[5] Id. at ¶2.}

_[6] Id.

_[7] Id.

_[8] Id.

_[9] Id.

_[10] Id.

_{[11] Id. at ¶3.}

_[12] Id.

_[13] Id.

_[14] Id.

_{[15] Id. at ¶8.}

_{[16] See FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at 4.}

_{[17] See Assertion of Info, att’d as Attachment A to FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at ¶4.}

_[18] Id.

_[19] Id.

_[20] Id.

_{[21] See FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at 4.}

_{[22] See Assertion of Info, att’d as Attachment A to FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at ¶7.}

_[23] Id.

_{[24] Id. at ¶10.}

_[25] Id.

_{[26] Id. at ¶11; ¶19.}

_[27] Id.

_{[28] Id. at ¶12.}

_{[29] Id. at ¶22.}

_{[30] Id. at ¶23.}

_{[31] Id. at ¶23-25.}

_{[32] Id. at ¶47.}

_{[33] See FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at 3.}

_{[34] See 31 U.S.C. § 5321(a)(1).}

_{[35] See 31 C.F.R. § 1022.380.}

_{[36] See FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at 3, citing 31 U.S.C. § 5321(a)(1); 31 C.F.R. §§ 1010.820(i) and 821.}

_{[37] See Id., citing 31 U.S.C. § 5321(a)(1); 31 C.F.R. §§ 1010820(i) and 821.}

_{[38] Id., citing 31 U.S.C. § 5330(e)(1); 31 C.F.R. §§ 1022.380(e) and 1010.821.}

_[39] Id.

_{[40] Id. at 4.}

_{[41] See Division of Justice, Justice Handbook, § 9-28.300.}

_{[42] See FinCEN Evaluation of Civil Penalty, Within the Matter of Larry Dean Harmon d/b/a Helix, No. 2020-2, at 4-5.}

_[43] Id.

_{[44] Id. at 5-6.}

_[45] Id.