DOJ seeks $61 million tied to Iranian oil sales laundered on Binance
Regulation & Gov ·
The US Department of Justice is moving to seize $61 million in crypto proceeds it says stemmed from illicit Iranian oil sales routed through Binance.
Prosecutors allege that two Chinese companies used the exchange to launder the funds to Iran and its proxies, according to The Block. The filing centers on how crypto rails were allegedly used to move value derived from oil sales that are otherwise restricted under US sanctions, converting proceeds into digital assets and shifting them through intermediaries before they could be traced to their origin.
The core of the government's case, as described in the reporting, is that the Chinese companies acted as a bridge between Iranian oil revenue and the broader financial system, using Binance as the platform through which the funds passed. That structure — foreign intermediaries plus a global exchange — is the mechanism prosecutors point to as enabling the alleged laundering, rather than any single direct transaction between Iran and the US financial system.
The action has been corroborated separately, with Bloomberg also reporting that the DOJ says millions in Iranian oil proceeds were laundered on Binance. Coverage of the case has now appeared across four distinct sources tracking the same underlying allegation, with the $61 million figure the specific amount the DOJ is now seeking to seize.
What remains unresolved is the extent of Binance's own role or liability in the alleged scheme, beyond serving as the platform on which the transactions occurred, and whether the two Chinese companies named in the filing face separate charges or penalties. Also unclear from current reporting is the timeline of the underlying transactions relative to when they were detected, and whether the $61 million represents the full scope of funds under investigation or only the portion the DOJ is currently pursuing through forfeiture proceedings. Further filings or statements from the DOJ, Binance, or the named companies would clarify how the case proceeds.