Bitcoin Forum

I think Bitcoin has a big problem with tainted coins and the demand to be a store of value.

My example:

X gets 1 BTC through a criminal act. X is trading something for 1 BTC with Y. The Police is blacklisting the 1 BTC and confiscated the 1 BTC from Y.

This is a 100 percent loss of value for Y.

Then the FBI is selling the 1 BTC, often under value. This is an overall decreasing of value for Bitcoin.

Is there a possibility to protect user like Y for such a loss of value? And how do we protect the community from an overall loss of value?

Another example:

Y gets 1 BTC through a criminal act. The police is blacklisting the 1 BTC. So for X the 1 BTC is less worth than a normal 1 BTC. So there is a second market for Bitcoin's tainted coins, where the "tainted" BTC is less worth than the normal BTC. If somebody has a trick to wash it, isn't it draining value out of the ecosystem, too?

And one additional question: Is it legal to get the transaction fees of illegal transactions?

Market has buy support so whatever those guys sell and who ever they are the value will not get affected not unless if they dump huge volume of bitcoin instantly. There's nothing to worry about since bitcoin has circulate appropriately so whatever negative things you thought like it will dump if someone sells you also need to consider that there are still more people willing to buy and that's how bitcoin survive for so many years.

There's a saying that all USD bills smell of cocain. And they are well in circulation.
Tainted bitcoins? Well, it depends greatly on who is looking at them. For now the majority tells that 1 BTC = 1 BTC and those telling stories about tainted coins have a different agenda.
All in all, some (rather few) businesses pretend to have problems with tainted coins, but most of them don't do the right thing (alert the authorities and hand the funds to the right owners), instead they spread big words on tainted money and, when they get such funds may just try to get them for themselves.


What if the miner has processed the transaction without knowing it's stolen money? Who decides what transaction is illegal (and does it makes any use if the miner has already processed it)? Who decides if the first one deciding the tx is illegal was deciding that correctly or not? (Because, sorry, but that's how law works).


So the only sane approach is to leave miners process all the transactions (because any kind of censoring can lead to bigger problems overall) and get hold of stolen money as soon as that money reaches an exchange, for example.

All I know is that tainted coins are handled case by case.

If you use decentralized exchange, that will be where it is best, unlike exchanges. If you used an exchange and the coin is seized, not your key not your coin.

If someone is linked to a criminal use of a coin and the person is later known, that is another case entirely.

Know that tainted coins are handled case by case because almost all coins are tainted coins.

The transaction is confirmed, the miner that mine the block the transaction is included will get the fee. Or you mean the government to seek for the fee? The fee likely is going to be little, it won't be worth going for. Also why going for the fee once the transaction was successful and not reversible in a way the fee paid can be reversed.

In the end, sometimes I almost hope that a big wallet from Silk Road or Dream Market for example, sends some sats to a large amount of active addresses (like the wallets of CEX, celebrities etc...)

That would put things in their right place.

Someone did this with Tornado mixed coins (https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/08/09/someone-is-trolling-celebs-by-sending-eth-from-tornado-cash/), he sent mixed ETH to a lot of celebrities to impregnate their wallet.

I think it's a good idea, it would show the absurdity of this system. The CEX work on a case by case basis, and in absolute terms someone who doesn't do anything dishonest will never get into trouble, but it would still be funny to see it happen.

As for the question about legal fees or not, I think fortunately there is a huge world between us and that level of political/judicial persecution, I don't think the question even arises in reality.
Pools and miners are not interested in who produces the transactions (I mean legal or not etc..), they just solve the blocks and share the reward + fees. Will we attack Visa or Mastercard if someone spends dirty money with their card? In this example, the banks are the CEX, and the CEX are already accountable. No reason to involve the miners in this mess haha.

But the best way to "wash" tainted coins is mining in the end. They rent machines and mine. I think the undertaking as a whole thing (mining pool) would be illegal in this case.

In the real world you have to know your business partners. And I hope it is the same in the virtual world.

Or did not we care?

Not really, if you rent for high amounts with Nicehash, they will quickly ask for a KYC from your side.
Nicehash is a CEX too, they have signed EU AML texts and respect them.

And if the launderers use MRR, they lose a big amount of money.

Serious people are using privacy coins as XMR for their shady things, I am not sure any real player is actually loosing his time with ASICs rental to wash his dirty BTCs...

Money should not be distinguished. Money earned from legal and illegal business is one and should not be distinguished between them, otherwise the US government would have burned those confiscated coins and not sold them.
Either selling them for less than their value is because they are offered in auctions or sold outside the market, and therefore the quantity will be large, but the price is different, and it is something that happens naturally in the market, and soon the prices are balanced.

This is an argument against seizing coins and not one that's for it really. If you had the same problem but mixed your coins or put them through a dex or held them as a privacy coin, this wouldn't be a problem you'd ever have to deal with.

Realistically:
1. Exchange marks and seizes coins
2. You explain how you got the coins and how you paid for them (showing proof where you can).
3a. Exchange unlocks the coins when they're satisfied you've provided all the evidence needed.
3b. You start mediation and then take the exchange to court for the money you've lost because what the exchange is doing isn't fully legal at this point.

Washing coins probably damages the ecosystem as much as holding coins damages market cap (two very precise groups of people just attacking each other over something that doesn't matter as much as you'd expect it might if you listened to either group).

We've all touched tainted cash, the only difference is it's much easier to trace Bitcoin because of the public ledger that we rely. I'd like to think that criminals wouldn't want a permanent association of their Bitcoin to be tainted, and therefore they'd use cash instead. After all, cash is much easier to hide, and much easier to use. I know that isn't the case, but I don't think tainted Bitcoin will be a big problem. After all, they'll be able to somewhat detect when that money changed hands, and if you don't know that those coins are tainted then you aren't breaking the law. It's impossible for the average person to know if coins are tainted. You could potentially be investigated, if the authorities aren't sure if the coins have changed hands, but ultimately that's the very same as cash. If you use Dan Coopers cash, with the serials they'll likely flag that up if they notice it, and ask you in for questioning.

Most of the world is innocent, and it would be a shame to limit a currency based on the select few that use it to break the law.

This question is very problematic, since the definition of legal transactions differs from one country to another, and while some countries view the transaction as illegal, the same transaction can be legal in another country.

If the miners will check every transaction whether it is legal or not, then this will be a huge burden and a big problem in the network, in addition to that it is very difficult to judge whether the transaction is legal or illegal, so I think that it is completely legal to charge a fee for every transaction that takes place Registered on the network (whether legal or not).

Frankly, I don't think tainted coins can be a problem. I'm in Bitcoin for 12+ years and I haven't met or heard/read of someone who was affected by this issue. Which makes me think these cases are incredibly rare. And here I want to ask you: did something like this happen to you? Your friends or relatives? Probably not. I guess, in most cases, coins get blocked/seized before they reach user marked Y in your scenario. This is true mostly to big amounts of Bitcoin. Yes, there are also some petty thefts/crimes which never get reported and therefore nobody marks them tainted. Just my 2c.

Protect before it happens, no, solving the problem afterward, yes, by taking the one that has sent you the money in the first place to court, just as you do know if you find you have bought stolen goods from somebody without knowing and the cops come and seize those.


There is no such market, if somebody knows he has got tainted coins he will not sell them to somebody directly so that a connection can be made to him, he will try to as you said,  wash the coins, at which point the coins are just like any other coins, so no discount.


If you're aware of a transaction being "illegal" for various reasons even the fact that you helped it is illegal, not just taking a fee.
If you have taken the fee unaware of this and in good faith at that moment,  it's nothing that can really happen to you.


No, it's not, by mining you just earn clean coins but you still have to pay for the mining hardware and electricity with your previous funds first before you earn a thing, so you're back to square one.

If ever the confiscated BTC is sold, there is really a temporary decrease in price of Bitcoin but I do not think that it will decrease the value of Bitcoin.  As the market flow is dependent on supply and demand, it is obvious that when a huge chunk of BTC is sold in one go, the demand side will be eaten but eventually, I know the demand will catch up recovering the price



If user Y had bought the coins legally, he can then show the proof of purchase, that is one way of protecting ourselves from losing 1 BTC due to the reason that is tainted when we actually bought it from the exchange. 


I do not think we have the capability to protect the community from overall loss of value.  I even doubt we have the capability to protect ourselves from it.

Thank you for all the responses!

I think a core problem is, that BTC is often defined as an asset and not as money. As an asset it is a "good". In my country (Germany) it is called "Hehlerei", when you receive stolen goods - and you have no chance of get back the good, if it was taken by the police. Because you cannot own a good that you received unlawful. (After 10 years you can.)

So yes, I see, that there are different laws in different countrys about that and about fractional ownership, f.E. when transactions and miner fees involved.

Another thing is, unlawful transactions are forbidden to happen - so if cought, they are reversed - but, if they happening, they are lawful taxed by the state. And yes, we had some cases here in Germany. One case was "shiney flakes", an online drug market.  

It is a different topic, but one more leak for a loss of value of Bitcoin is tax fraud with getting taxes back for losing coins. If you have a business and you trade with BTC, and you sent BTC to a wrong wallet, you can claim taxes back for the loss. I thing this is also a big deal for crypto as "store of value".


Negative, Sir.

You can explain. But it is against the law to buy stolen goods. With intent or without intent. You buy a stolen bike, you do not get it back. You buy a stolen bike on the street, and you do not know it was stolen, you do not get the bike back and you will be charged, because before the deal you have to make sure that you do not trade stolen goods.


Yes, I mean that. Not today, but it is coming - and it is right. You cannot make business with illegal assets. This is a problem.


Sir, this is a very good example.

Traces of cocain are not forbidden. But if you try to wash It is not just money. Also clothings (assets) having traces of cocaine on it. But the thing is, there is a difference between asset (clothing) and forbidden asset (cocaine). And we were talking of the forbidden asset (the tainted coin). So 1g of 10kg cocaine is forbidden. And 0.01 BTC trading fee out of 1000 traded tainted BTC are still tainted.

Laws change, and if we look at the legislation that was 10 years ago and today, we will find it different because they did not understand this new economy. Over time, understanding will increase, and then the laws will change, so I do not consider it a big problem.

The definition of bitcoin as an asset or as a commodity or any other definition is temporary and soon a new regulatory framework may be put in place, but it is not supposed to distinguish between currencies as good currency and polluted currencies (Tainted coins,) and soon those currencies are returned to the economy again or burned and thus gain value for the rest of the currencies.
The worst thing is that people believe there is currency discrimination.

First of all no one can confiscate BTC unless its stored in centralized platforms.

Ironically buying Bitcoin from centralized exchange is safe compared to p2p because we receive funds from exchange's wallet so it won't be considered as tainted and exchange has the complete responsibility for all the outcomes.

Blacklisting an address is possible but it can't be possible to stop transactions whether its incoming or outgoing.

And finally are we sure that fiat money we are using everyday has any assurance that it never used for anything which goes against laws of a country?

And there's no protection for you - the buyer - for the cases you didn't know you've bought stolen goods? That would be a bit odd, there must be something that can help you.

Plus, in case of Bitcoin, there's a very good chance that when you get coins from somewhere, maybe 1/100 of an input would be from "bad sources". Will you call that tainted? Most don't. Most businesses tend to work with a number of steps back and a certain percent of "bad". A skilled thief (ie one that's not doing an obvious theft that's known almost instantly by everybody) has very good chance to get the time to conceal his coins even under the legal (percent, steps) "radar" (PS: afaik the last heists were not made by thieves that skilled). You know, it's not all black and white. That's why I said that for the sake of sanity the miners should not censor for reasons like "taint coins".


Actually this last point is invalid. And that's because of the way bitcoin works. Technically the link between the miners' fee and the "tainted transactions" is lost.
It's like for all the mined transactions the fees are sent into oblivion (destroyed) and spoof, the same amount gets added to the block reward (as newly created money).
(So while there can be a debate whether miners should censor or not transaction - but you would not have enough good arguments in that - on the tx fee I think that you have an even weaker case.)

"tainted coins" and the whole debates of  "fungibility" is not a yes or no question
its a scale of risk percentage

even bank notes are like this
a grocery store owner accepting a one time $10 bank note from a known drug dealer, the grocery store owner doesnt care much and only checks that its not counterfeit. he just sees it as a drug addict wanting feeding his personal drug fueled hunger for a bag of potato chips and candy

however if same grocery store owner was handed $10k of funds and was asked to be a part of a deal where he hands $10k of candy to be sold by the dealers pals for fresh cash from innocent kids. then the grocery store owner would reject the bank notes deal, as that risks him being involved in laundering

same 2 scenario's but from the banks prospective
bank receives money from a grocery store owner
1 bank note of 1000 has a serial number that goes back to a known drug deal. the bank just puts a small flag that drug money has circled through a grocery store owner. but the grocery store owner is not to be implicated, by giving it a low 0.1% suspicion rating

bank receives 1000x$10 bank notes from a grocery store owner. the flag rating that month is 100% suspicion rated and becasue it involved $10k a suspicious activity report is sent to authorities about the grocery store. where authorities then start investigating the grocery store owner

......
the silly thing about those promoting 1BTC=1BTC "bitcoin is 100% fungible" are the same guys that actually use mixers and want to lull innocent people into using mixers too via pretending bitcoin is fungible. and non fungible at the same time

now if bitcoin was 100% fungible. why would these dodgy people be trying to convince innocent people into using a mixer if a mixer was not needed

its becasue the dodgy people that care soo much about mixers and fungibility. want to get rid of their dirty funds on some innocent person and they dont care about how it risks that innocent person

1.Bitcoin mixers are a thing. I'm not saying that all BTC mixers work properly and would do the job of hiding the origin of the coins.
2.Most criminals are moving away from Bitcoin and picking privacy coins like Monero.
3.The fact that you sold some item and you got "tainted coins" doesn't mean that you are a criminal and you are guilty for committing a crime. The authorities aren't that dumb. If you cooperate and help them find the criminal you will get your coins back and you won't be punished.
4.This isn't 2013 and the police selling a bunch of BTC under the market price won't crash the entire BTC market. ;D

wait, I'm confused by the meaning of tainted coins and have to be washed with mined?
how does this mean
if you mean coins obtained from the proceeds of crime and in the form of btc are tainted (dirty) money then what about fiat money obtained from selling illegal drugs?
basically the crypto market does not know what tainted money is because no one knows who we are transacting with because it is anonymous every trader let alone
The market has buy-sell support so that no matter what people sell, there are always people who respond

Nearly 50.000 BTC (former "tainted coins") were trasfered to Coinbase in the last days. 100.000 BTC (former "tainted coins") will follow in the next days. The "tainted coins" were confiscated coins by the US governement, and are going cheap in the market now!

Please where are sources of those tainted transactions that are big with 50.000 and 100.000 BTC.

If I have tainted bitcoins from criminal activities, I am not stupid to do money laundering on a centralized platform like Coinbase. So the story seems to be untrue.

If I do this, I would be smarter to move smaller amount of BTC than move them all in two big transactions like you shared. I would prefer to gradually make money laundering than do it all at once and face with risk that all of my coins will be seized by a centralized exchange.

One source for one part: https://thedefiant.io/us-gov-moves-1b-seized-btc

Another source for the other part (german): https://www.btc-echo.de/schlagzeilen/mt-gox-insolvente-bitcoin-boerse-verschiebt-rueckzahlung-160739/

The timestamp was early March 2023.

The first source is about 40.000 BTC (seized through the US governement) transfered for selling to Coinbase.

The second source is about the payback of the frozen/seized Mt.Gox Bitcoins.

Despite of very biggest cases, tainted coins will no longer be tainted after they have many layers of transactions from initial tainted addresses and wallets to other wallets.

Bitcoin Q&A: Blacklists, Taint, and Wallet Finger-printing (https://youtu.be/BILcJ3WtdLQ?t=195).

This video is from Andreas Antonopoulos, the author of Mastering Bitcoin book, a most successful book about Bitcoin. He explained very detailed about tainted coins and how exchanges blacklist such coins. Usually exchanges don't use too complicated tools and check very deep in blockchain history to find tainted coins.

One possible solution to this problem is to use a third-party service that can verify the origin of a Bitcoin transaction. These services will flag any transaction that has been involved in illegal activities so that users can avoid it.

Tainted coins are an agenda pushed by companies like chainanalysis to make some coins to be perceived as more valuable than others. A great contradiction of the theory was recently told when the German police sold seized "criminal"/"tainted" coins and now claim that they are completely clean because it came from them.

The people can stand up to this agenda and make all coins equal again by using non-custodial services, decentralized/p2p exchanges and avoiding any service that uses these companies and their services.

There is no such thing as tainted coins. This isn't endorsement to accept coins from shady places, but if you aren't a criminal then you shouldn't be treated like one if your coins came from somewhere shady a long way down the chain.

Do you mean using third party services like Binance to hold your BTC because you are worried about 'tainted coins', sorry, but i will pass that one, the risk that comes with using third party services to hold your BTC is far greater than the worry about 'tainted coins'. How many times have we read charges against third party services for knowingly helping money launderers and fraudsters to hide the source of their money, they only declare the ones they want to and act legitimate when the radar of the authorities is on them, so do not believe that these services are saints in the network that help keep the network safe, it may even be the opposite.

If you use BTC and you are not a criminal, neither are you a money launderer, you don't have to worry about tainted coins, the correct thing for the authorities to do is to flag the initial address than first received the stolen money, and from there begin their investigation. If they don't and the funds keep changing hands and gets to you, i don't think you can be prosecuted for that.

This is all founded upon a subjective presupposition. This is based on mere opinion. In the first place, why is this standard applied to Bitcoin when it is not even applied to fiat? Is a soiled 1 dollar bill lower in value than a newly printed 1 dollar bill? Does a crumpled or creased 10 dollar bill have lower value than a smooth one? The answer is no.

Scientists and chemical analysts actually found out in a number of studies and surveys that more than 90% of US bills are contaminated with cocaine.^[1][2][3] Do these 90% contaminated bills have lower value than those cleaner ones? Of course, not! So why should Bitcoin be treated any differently?

In terms of Bitcoin used in criminal activities and transactions, they should be confiscated the way US dollars used in illegal transactions are confiscated. And then they will go back into circulation carrying the same purchasing power.
 

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contaminated_currency#:~:text=%22It's%20virtually%20impossible%20for%20cocaine,was%20confirmed%20by%20Ronald%20K.
[2] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/cocaine-on-money-drug-found-on-90-of-us-bills
[3] https://www.acs.org/pressroom/newsreleases/2009/august/new-study-up-to-90-percent-of-us-paper-money-contains-traces-of-cocaine.html

Bitcoin Never Tainted coin Because All Of The Coins Of Mothers Coin Is Bitcoin.But So Many Tainted Alts Coin Are Available In Crypto Currency Market Still Now So Many Scam Coin Available So Be-Careful And Always Beware Scam/Tainted Coins And Always Try To Find Out Very STRONG Project With Best Coins.

I wish it was true. But I don't agree with it. I think once tainted, always tainted.. Otherwise, thing would have been much easier. People could then just self-send all the time and laundering until it's no more tainted.

I've never encountered an issue of tainted coins personally, and I don't know if there really is a problem of such coins being confiscated or frozen when people are merely recipients of such coins and have no involvement in the criminal acts. I've heard stories of the FBI seizing accounts and then selling bitcoins, but in those cases the money was clearly taken from criminals. Also, I believe it's sold in a form of an auction, so it's not necessarily undervalued. Moreover, once sold by the FBI, I'm sure these coins are cleared of any suspicion and are successfully back in business as clean coins.  So maybe there isn't much of an issue here.

If you use mixers and have mixed coins from outputs, you should use those coins with a separating account for those coins. If you get troubles with exchange, it won't be mixed with your clean coins. You will reduce risk of losing all coins just because of Mixing or Coinjoin transactions.

Did you imply about the coins from SilkRoad seize years ago which were auctioned long time ago too?

U.S. seizes over $1 billion in bitcoin tied to 'Silk Road' (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-justice-crypto-currency-idUKKBN27L2I9)
US government prepares to auction $17m of seized Silk Road bitcoins (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/24/us-auction-seized-silk-road-bitcoins)
The Final Silk Road Bitcoin Auction Has Occurred (https://bitcoinist.com/final-silk-road-bitcoin-auction-occurred/)

After auctions, seized coins (that were tainted too) will be circulated on the market again. They would no longer be tainted after getting covered more deeply on the blockchain.

Sending a coin from mixer to wallet and other wallet is called as conceal, this still tagged as high illicit money because you're trying to hide something.

Sending your coin from one wallet to another wallet for many times doesn't solve anything because it's really easy to track it, they will know the original source of your coin.

If you have trade P2P with someone and you're suspected using money laundering, you can explain to the banks about it, your case will be solved.

But if you're the one who's using mixer, it's better if you never link your coin with banks in order to cashout your money.

Actually, Bitcoin is designed in such a way that the mere sending of transactions makes it a little bit "cleaner" (use quotation marks to emphasize that the "taint" thing doesn't really exist: it is just a made-up term used to control people's minds and actions), which you can verify just by learning how the mining process works under the hood. When you are sending a transaction (even to yourself), you implicitly specify the amount of money you want to pay to see your transaction confirmed. This implicit amount equals the total of outputs substructed from the total of inputs. Yes, it is called a transaction fee. Fees have no inputs, and no outputs, the are completely anonymous and, therefore, clean by definition. By actively making transactions in the bitcoin network, people constantly "launder" part of the total supply and eventually will make the taint coins narrative obsolete.

It's just them trying to make BTC tainted. Whether 1BTC is tainted or not, it's still 1BTC.
So yes it's a big loss for Y that got it legally and then just taken away from him. X didn't know. But if he just knew that the coins are tainted he could have used a mixer to fix them.

Once the FBI sold the coins, will they still be considered tainted?  Because it seems to be like they are also violating that rule.

It's a tough situation, but perhaps Bitcoin could implement some kind of tracking system to prevent tainted coins from being used in transactions. This could help protect both buyers and sellers

I guess the lesson here is to always do your due diligence before accepting Bitcoin as payment. You wouldn't want to unknowingly get mixed up with any dirty coins.

No, if btc wants to be day-to-day money, this has to be obvious and easy to solve. It's not some investment where you do research. Do you do your due diligence before taking your salary?

Scammers exist in the market, people who only exist to accuse others while complicating and jeopardizing the entire trade system. I've seen a lot of examples when traders' accounts get frozen because they've left a trail of fraudulent activity, and this primarily happens in P2P trading. For instance, purchasing large quantities of bitcoin from a pathological liar and getting adequate account punishment. Being involved with tainted coins is equivalent to engaging in illegal activity on the market, putting your personal accounts and cash at stake, and triggering a seizure order should things go completely wrong.

My opinion Contaminated coins, which refer to Bitcoins associated with illegal activity or criminal transactions, can pose a significant risk to both users and exchanges.

From both incidents I think As the industry continues to grow and mature, it is important for regulators to work closely with stakeholders to ensure that laws and regulations are effectively enforced, and wrongdoers are held to account. This will help promote trust and confidence in cryptocurrencies, making them more accessible to mainstream users and investors.

Bitcoin is decentralized, if you suggest to implement such kind system it means Bitcoin no longer decentralized. You don't need to create a tracking system because Bitcoin is using public blockchain and anyone can see any transactions, address and the balance.

Let's say you're asking everyone about the original coins they got, do you think a criminal will answer if the coins got from hacking a centralized exchange?

"Taint" doesn't exist in the blockchain, it's better to leave your UTXOs alone. But if you truly want to make sure that you don't have "tainted" outputs, then try letting them pass through Wasabi Wallet's centralized coordinator. nopara73, Wasabi's developer, works with Chainalysis to "track" tainted outputs.

Haha, What is this ?? Bro... Are you serious?
I am a bit confused now after the chip mixer incident and SEC's strong policies against the crypto market, especially around the miners and Bitcoin accumulators. A maximum of the newbie and other members' topics in the Bitcoin discussion from the last few weeks are around Bitcoin and criminal acts and everyone is trying to prove something trying to defend BTC with stupid facts or vice versa. I would like to say there is no need for this.

You know what BTC is I know so what. Let others think whatever they want to why waste valuable energy explaining to those who don't want to understand and want to be deaf & blind so let them bee. What value are these topics are adding in the Bitcoin Disucssionshould be on a good topic and now these days topics be like just for merit fishing and bla bla bla.

But in the laws (of various countrys).

If a 8 year old is producing a block in the BTC network, it is illegal in Germany. If a drug dealer is selling drugs for BTC, it is illegal in the USA. And the authorities of these countrys are tagging the coins and adresses. This is the fact. Basically if one country is defining BTC as a good, the good can be stolen. And the receiving and/or buying of this stolen good is/can be illegal.

The BTC network cared for these illegal activities. But most of the answers were: It is a small problem in relation to the benefits. But the answer is not solving the problem. The same problem is existing with FIAT. But partly solutions are restrictions of the trading amounts, KYC and tax investigations/trackings. And of course physical markings with special colours or tracked bill numbers.

Basically every Satoshi could pegged (by the BTC network) to a NFT. And if one country is blacklisting it - because of the law - it would not be tradeable in this country. So in the end the price of this one Satoshi would become less value as another Satoshi.