Do you accept hackers’ Bitcoin donations to charitable organizations?

[KevinRosa]

Philanthropy is often difficult to succeed due to lack of exposure and transparency, unclear accountability issues, and limited channels for accepting donations. Digital charity (using blockchain technology to promote charitable donations) provides a new solution. In the case of decentralized transactions, charitable organizations can receive donations and raise funds more efficiently.

The point is that we can clearly know the flow of Bitcoin so that we can monitor the use and destination of charitable donations, because some charities are not trustworthy.
But I will not reject the many advantages of this approach.

The potential value of digital philanthropy

Digital philanthropy has some notable advantages for charities and donors:

Complete transparency: every digital currency transaction is traceable through blockchain data. Such a high degree of transparency and openness can encourage donors to donate, and it can also greatly improve the credibility of charities.

Globalization and decentralization: Most blockchain networks are highly decentralized. They cannot rely on a centralized government and institution to operate. Therefore, donations can be transferred directly from donors to charities . The decentralized nature of the blockchain makes global transactions simple and reliable.

Digital protocol: Blockchain makes the sharing and storage of electronic data easier, and it can also be used to ensure that important documents and contracts cannot be tampered with at will.

Reduce expenses: Blockchain technology has great potential to simplify the management of charities, automate operating procedures and reduce intermediary costs.

Reduce taxes: Take an American donor as an example. If he donates a charity fund in Bitcoin, the charity can get the full amount (because there is no need to pay taxes). In addition, donors can also apply for high tax relief from government agencies.

But in other words, I personally would not accept some of the illegal proceeds of hackers for charity.

here are Robin Hoods who "rob the rich and help the poor" in the online world? A hacker group that profited from cybercrime donated money to charitable organizations, causing many doubts and ethical and legal problems.

The hacker group known as the "Darkside" claimed that they had extorted millions of dollars from a number of large companies, but now they want to do something to "make the world a better place."

The group posted on the dark web tax receipts for their bitcoin donations to two charitable organizations. One of the "Children International" (Children International) said that they do not source illegally obtained donations.

What do you think of this problem? This is just an example of our lives. Bitcoin will be used more and more widely, but the same freedom is relative, and we must actively respond.

[1715396826]

1715396826

[1715396826]

1715396826

[1715396826]

1715396826

[1715396826]

1715396826

[1715396826]

1715396826

[1715396826]

1715396826

[anu1908]

well, those organizations would definitely love to stay away from shady money, but validating them would be difficult. i personally think this "robin hood" reason is just a weak excuse. even if that's true, how can you confirm it?

[dothebeats]

There's no telling if the funds that they receive are clean, and it would be extra work for them to validate. If I were an organization receiving donations on cryptocurrencies, I would immediately convert all proceeds to fiat and store it up for later use. Then again, there are organizations that are just being used as a front to launder money around, making it seem that the money was donated, when in fact it was sent there in purpose for money laundering.

I guess charities can say no to such donations, and just accept fiat or in-kind donations instead.

[Kakmakr]

Any Crypto hacker that is actually good, will never send coins stolen (directly) from the source to the charity.... they push those coins through Mixer services so that it cannot be traced to a specific hack. The reason for doing this is simple... if they send it directly from the source to the charity... the authorities with enough knowledge to track transactions on the Blockchain, will be able to track it and then confiscate it.

Also, if the hacker is sending it to a charity and it can be traced to him (Example : Donation for a local school basketball tour...) then he will quickly be pinpointed for that hack by a simple process of elimination.  

[Taskford]

They cannot refuse if the funds is already deposited  to their accounts so maybe they don't have a choice but to accept that, if they know the money came from fraudulent activities for sure the in  charge on financing department will not accept it since this could fire up a controversy  against them  and its really bad to hook up on those incident specially scammed  money is so hot from the eyes of the  people who knows where their money goes   after they got hacked.

[michellee]

First, the hackers can donate the money to any people they want, including sending the money to charity organizations because once they use crypto, they can use any coins and send it right away. Second, the organizations will not know who the sender is, whether it is a hacker or personal or institution because it only shows a wallet address. Third, I can not say accept or not accept because it will be up to the hacker whether they want to do that or keep the money for themselves.

[NeuroticFish]

in other words, I personally would not accept some of the illegal proceeds of hackers for charity.

If one receives cash for charity, there's a huge chance that the money has drug traces on it.
With Bitcoin the problem is rather similar: hacked money can get to you, sooner or later, but, as already said, most probably it will be mixed first.
Expecting to get only "clean" coins is like expecting to use only freshly printed dollars in all your life.

Of course, if you receive directly hacked/stolen money, you'd better report it and let the authorities take over. They may have access to specialists and tools to actually do something (depending on the country of those authorities though)

You cannot block money to reach you, but you can use coin control and don't spend that input.

[kaggie]

The point is that we can clearly know the flow of Bitcoin so that we can monitor the use and destination of charitable donations, because some charities are not trustworthy.
But I will not reject the many advantages of this approach.

This problem is about the charity, not blockchain.

But in other words, I personally would not accept some of the illegal proceeds of hackers for charity.

It can create a legal hassle, so it is understandable.
Would you rather that the hacker maintain the money? I'd prefer the money go to a charity.
A charity may be able to get donations globally that they wouldn't otherwise have.
So, it depends on their risk.

The same issue occurs with cash. Just look at political donations where "person who believes X donated to politician Y, therefore Y is a bad person". It may not reflect reality of the person donated to.

here are Robin Hoods who "rob the rich and help the poor" in the online world? A hacker group that profited from cybercrime donated money to charitable organizations, causing many doubts and ethical and legal problems.

I would be surprised if this was true. If the money were traceable, then the charity would be able to give it back to the groups the criminals stole from more easily. So, this may be an advantage of crypto over cash. Are future bitcoin fraud lawsuits incoming on this?

What do you think of this problem? This is just an example of our lives. Bitcoin will be used more and more widely, but the same freedom is relative, and we must actively respond.

If there are untrustworthy charities, then we should find them out and get law enforcement to help ensure that they performing per their legal and social requirements.

[Fortify]

Philanthropy is often difficult to succeed due to lack of exposure and transparency, unclear accountability issues, and limited channels for accepting donations. Digital charity (using blockchain technology to promote charitable donations) provides a new solution. In the case of decentralized transactions, charitable organizations can receive donations and raise funds more efficiently.

The point is that we can clearly know the flow of Bitcoin so that we can monitor the use and destination of charitable donations, because some charities are not trustworthy.
But I will not reject the many advantages of this approach.

The potential value of digital philanthropy

Digital philanthropy has some notable advantages for charities and donors:

Complete transparency: every digital currency transaction is traceable through blockchain data. Such a high degree of transparency and openness can encourage donors to donate, and it can also greatly improve the credibility of charities.

Globalization and decentralization: Most blockchain networks are highly decentralized. They cannot rely on a centralized government and institution to operate. Therefore, donations can be transferred directly from donors to charities . The decentralized nature of the blockchain makes global transactions simple and reliable.

Digital protocol: Blockchain makes the sharing and storage of electronic data easier, and it can also be used to ensure that important documents and contracts cannot be tampered with at will.

Reduce expenses: Blockchain technology has great potential to simplify the management of charities, automate operating procedures and reduce intermediary costs.

Reduce taxes: Take an American donor as an example. If he donates a charity fund in Bitcoin, the charity can get the full amount (because there is no need to pay taxes). In addition, donors can also apply for high tax relief from government agencies.

But in other words, I personally would not accept some of the illegal proceeds of hackers for charity.

What do you think of this problem? This is just an example of our lives. Bitcoin will be used more and more widely, but the same freedom is relative, and we must actively respond.

No charity should be allowed to accept the proceeds of criminal transactions if they can be clearly identified. They are subject to the same laws and forfeitures as any other entity. I don't really know of many charities that will accept cryptocurrency donations and this is probably the reason, they don't want to become liable at some later time for the actions of some bad actors. It could also make the whole charity system vulnerable to abuse like money laundering if it was ignored and no government is going to accept that. It seems like the answer is pretty clear, regardless of who it was stolen from (funds often get intermingled in many places) it should be given back to the correct owners, it is not for the charity to decide otherwise if they know about it.

[dkbit98]

Charities should decide for themselves if they want to accept that Bitcoin or not, but it's a bit hypocritical that someone criticize Bitcoin donations when we have examples of fake charitable funds and donations made in fiat and used with sole purpose of money laundering and avoiding tax payment (hint Gates, Bezos, Buffett, Bloomberg, Musk, Soros, etc.)
One Bitcoin = One Bitcoin and there should be no difference based on the source of donation or some other nonsense like that.

[hatshepsut93]

What do you think of this problem? This is just an example of our lives. Bitcoin will be used more and more widely, but the same freedom is relative, and we must actively respond.

How are we going to "respond? We can't prevent hacks, we can't prevent hackers from sending and receiving coins, and this will never be possible, because Bitcoin with such feature would not be Bitcoin. It's up to people who receive or send coins to verify that the coins are clean if they need to. If such donations are a major problem, charities should hire chainanalysis companies to help them be compliant with laws.

[masterrex]

I think it is not a big issue for the charitable institution, as long as there is a kind of donation they don't care where the funds are coming from, things like that are simply happening around literally, that's why I believe that there's nothing wrong about it, especially those funds are intended to help people that badly needed like feeding, etc. so the purpose is noble even if the funds are coming from the hackers.

[buwaytress]

It's always hard for a charity when it comes to donation, you've got to preserve ethics, neutrality... but where do you draw the line? How far back to you do due diligence? Do you accept McDonald's money for hunger in Ethiopia with its history of labour abuse? Do you reject Ikea's efforts in providing those new refugee tents because of their own tax, political, financial scandals in the past? Do you refuse aid grants from governments that have in their old histories (or new) commited human rights abuse and theft from their citizens?

Is the coin from a direct crime any dirtier than coins gained from clean business profits made possible by distant criminal transgressions?

I realise I'm not answering, but there's a lot of context and I'd have to make case-by-case decisions if I were a charity.

[The Cryptovator]

If a charity organization accept donations through Bitcoin and hacker want to donate then how will we know the funds came from where and who is donating? Definitely, a hacker will not send funds directly from his wallet, using a mixer means no way to determine who sent it. In this case, even charity organizations don't like hacking funds but they can't do anything since they don't know who sent it. But for me, I don't like or don't accept this kind of behavior. You want to help then earn yourself and donate that. Doesn't necessary to steal from others and donate to charity.

[Renampun]

There's no telling if the funds that they receive are clean, and it would be extra work for them to validate. If I were an organization receiving donations on cryptocurrencies, I would immediately convert all proceeds to fiat and store it up for later use. Then again, there are organizations that are just being used as a front to launder money around, making it seem that the money was donated, when in fact it was sent there in purpose for money laundering.

I guess charities can say no to such donations, and just accept fiat or in-kind donations instead.

Thing like what you said ever made a scene in my country...

some regional heads in my country use charities for money laundering purposes and that's really sad. Cryptocurrency 'robin hood' action in this case I think is like a double-edged knife, we don't know where their money is coming from and who are their victims, maybe other charities fall victim to them. Honestly this is a dilemma for charities that take money from 'robin hood'

[bL4nkcode]

Speaking of hacker's funds, tumblers/mixers like chipmixer and other trusted mixers can easily bypass those "flow of bitcoin" for monitoring in blockchain.

And there's no way it can track. Besides charity donations are at risk of money laundering whether using cryptocurrency or fiat.

[Slow death]

there are particular scenarios, for example:

if a hacker manages to steal 20 BTC, but after years he regrets it, wants to change his life and be an honest person and this hacker donates 10 BTC to charity and those responsible for the charity are aware of the truth because the hacker told The truth is, I think that in this scenario the charity can accept the donation, because they would still not be able to locate the bitcoin owners to return it and we all know how corrupt governments are and if they seized the bitcoin it would go into some people's pockets or they would auction and some rich would buy and the money would go into the pocket of some corrupt, so the biticoin better be donated to the poor in the orphanages

Besides charity donations are at risk of money laundering whether using cryptocurrency or fiat.

this world is heading towards a path where honesty does not exist, in the charities themselves have corruption and theft, we could criticize that stolen funds cannot be given away, but the donations themselves are stolen.

[blockman]

As someone who's just going to give an opinion, we really cannot accept that fact that they shouldn't accept such funds. But for those organizations, if they're legitimate and in need of donations and they are in dire need, they cannot say no to that.

Then again, there are organizations that are just being used as a front to launder money around, making it seem that the money was donated, when in fact it was sent there in purpose for money laundering.

I agree that there are some organizations that are only being used to be a gateway for such funds. As for the idea of converting into fiat, the only matter is that if the charity is the one converting it to fiat, they still know where the donation came from if it's traced back as a hacked bitcoins.

[Ryker1]

^[snip]
But in other words, I personally would not accept some of the illegal proceeds of hackers for charity.

Well, if you know that the bitcoin comes from illegal activity perhaps it will change your mind and not accepting it but without knowing that you have received funds as a donation from the charity so does not matter now as long as you don't know. There is no clean or dirty on bitcoin, just like fiat, --or even much worst because you have received personally in physical the money which is you don't know where it is come from. The same on the bitcoin price, we must be considering it first, in every transaction on bitcoin as long as it can't be traced you are always be safe.

[dansus021]

well, those organizations would definitely love to stay away from shady money, but validating them would be difficult. i personally think this "robin hood" reason is just a weak excuse. even if that's true, how can you confirm it?

well this quite true
but mostly hacker will do mixing it so you dont understand where the money come from 

if i the charitable organization i would still receive it because we need the money and mosly we dont know where come from but i would cooperate government if there something wrong