Bitcoin mixing is NOT money laundering, per se

[Z390]

Bitcoin mixing is not money laundering per se and Bitcoin mixing is money laundering per se, it's a two in one package and that's the truth, some people use mixers for their own privacy while others use a mixer to hide their criminal activities online.

Before you say something else, put yourself in a position as the leader of a country, you will not want any crime lord to do illegal funding behind your back to fund his crime empire, probably cause a chaos in your country.

Mixers are like the dark web in the open public that's why the government easily go after them, every mixers must stay hidden for their functionality and all mixer devs must go fully 101% anonymous.

Mixer is the best privacy tool and to stay this way the devs must respect the privacy too.

[1714476661]

1714476661

[1714476661]

1714476661

[1714476661]

1714476661

[Abiky]

Since it's illegal in both Germany and US to run an unlicensed money transmitter service, and ChipMixer was running in just about both countries, it's pretty much certain that it did break the law.

I have nowhere stated that there are no laws that prohibit such activity. I have merely argued there is no law that prohibits mixing, which is true as far as I'm concerned. In no court have I ever seen mixing being equated to some unlicensed money transmitting service's product. You can practically mix coins yourself, with absolutely no other users, even though it's not recommended for your privacy. But it is, and can obfuscate in an extent. Coinjoining is neither money transmitting.

Protocols themselves can't be classified as "money transmitting businesses". They're decentralized (non-custodial) by design. The law only applies to individuals running a mixing service all by themselves (centralized, custodial). I guess that's the reason why the US government has been hunting down centralized crypto mixers lately.

If mixer operators had a "money transmitting license" and followed KYC/AML rules, they would've nothing to fear. But that would greatly undermine a user's privacy/anonymity. Thus, decentralized (non-custodial) mixing would become the norm in the future. I'm fine with that as long as financial freedom and privacy is preserved. Just my opinion

[franky1]

Since it's illegal in both Germany and US to run an unlicensed money transmitter service, and ChipMixer was running in just about both countries, it's pretty much certain that it did break the law.

I have nowhere stated that there are no laws that prohibit such activity. I have merely argued there is no law that prohibits mixing, which is true as far as I'm concerned. In no court have I ever seen mixing being equated to some unlicensed money transmitting service's product. You can practically mix coins yourself, with absolutely no other users, even though it's not recommended for your privacy. But it is, and can obfuscate in an extent. Coinjoining is neither money transmitting.

Protocols themselves can't be classified as "money transmitting businesses". They're decentralized (non-custodial) by design. The law only applies to individuals running a mixing service all by themselves (centralized, custodial). I guess that's the reason why the US government has been hunting down centralized crypto mixers lately.

If mixer operators had a "money transmitting license" and followed KYC/AML rules, they would've nothing to fear. But that would greatly undermine a user's privacy/anonymity. Thus, decentralized (non-custodial) mixing would become the norm in the future. I'm fine with that as long as financial freedom and privacy is preserved. Just my opinion

try and read a regulation once in a while to realise what your getting into
they do actually treat currencies and protocols aswell as businesses

aswell as mixers(not only businesses that use mixers, but mixers themselves) as something to red flag but also AEC
anonymity enhanced currency

yes LN is a red flag monero is a red flag.

...
so lets summarise this entire topic
you can either ass kiss the mad hatter clan of idiots that just kiss ass whomever will sponsor them to advertise crap services.. who never do research.. but want to pretend mixers will hide you better  and there is nothing law can do to find you...

or
you can actually research for instance regulations and see that when regulations LITERALLY SPELL IT OUT FOR PEOPLE that if you use a mixer, tumbler, aec you will be red flagged and monitored, scrutinised more closely

so when regulations tell you that using a mixer gets you scrutinised more closely.. guess what.. mixers are not doing a good job to hide you. instead they are passing you a red flag to wave in the air to be spotted easier

[BlackHatCoiner]

yes LN is a red flag monero is a red flag.

Being passive, unresistant and completely scrutinized is also a red flag. For you as individual.

LITERALLY SPELL IT OUT FOR PEOPLE that if you use a mixer, tumbler, aec you will be red flagged and monitored, scrutinised more closely

Simply not true. I can agree to an extent that governments don't want you to use such tools, but it's plain dumb to believe you're being more spied when using them than otherwise. I agree you're a probable suspect for some, but you're a suspect for a reason; you do gain privacy. If I was being monitored more effectively, I wouldn't be a suspect. I am, because they very much work.

[Obito]

I think it's a matter of semantics, laundering is concealing the origin, mixing is trying to hide the taint by mixing it with clean crypto. Mixing is also done in money laundering, Didn't Saul Goodman explaining it to Jesse a good example of that? The fact that you've added per se in your argument means that you have doubts.

[franky1]

yes LN is a red flag monero is a red flag.

Being passive, unresistant and completely scrutinized is also a red flag. For you as individual.

LITERALLY SPELL IT OUT FOR PEOPLE that if you use a mixer, tumbler, aec you will be red flagged and monitored, scrutinised more closely

Simply not true. I can agree to an extent that governments don't want you to use such tools, but it's plain dumb to believe you're being more spied when using them than otherwise. I agree you're a probable suspect for some, but you're a suspect for a reason; you do gain privacy. If I was being monitored more effectively, I wouldn't be a suspect. I am, because they very much work.

oh again the idiot wants to be ignorant

the regulations literally are telling you that they are more interested in mixer used funds..

the solution is to do what i said several posts ago.
think of a new system not advertised/promoted or niched as only offering mixing as a service. but instead something that acts like something else. but the side effect is it breaks the taint.

get it yet

here ill make it real clear
imagine this scenario.. it involves the same crunched up smelly dirty $100 bank note. going into a service. and the same $99 coming out in different denominations of different bank notes and coins.(same end result)

A. mixer.
B. buying chewing gum from a retailer

did you know that the $100 and $99change from scenario A is being then scrutinised for where the $100 came from and where the $99 ends up
where as B is just another random transaction that no business or regulator sniffs at twice. and just gets lost in thought amungst the monotony of all other random transactions

scenario B is not registered nor required to register, nor deemed illegal for not registering as a money transmitter business. it does not do KYC nor appear on any regulation policy to scrutinise its customers identity or purpose or source or destination of deposits/withdrawals. YET you get the same result as A of different taint/denominations out as what went in



stop advertising something that is listed by regulators to watch A
instead get the same end result you want, but via something else that looks feels like B but does the same end result as A. without being what regulations are highlighting.

[BlackHatCoiner]

did you know that the $100 and $99change from scenario A is being then scrutinised for where the $100 came from and where the $99 ends up

If you think that you can fool chain analysis companies and regulatory authorities by buying chewing gums, then I don't know what to say.

scenario B is not registered nor required to register, nor deemed illegal for not registering as a money transmitter business. it does not do KYC nor appear on any regulation policy to scrutinise its customers identity or purpose or source or destination of deposits/withdrawals. YET you get the same result as A of different taint/denominations out as what went in

Except from the fact that the taint nonsense continues insusceptible to such moron techniques, due to it being absolutely arbitrary in the first place. If you want privacy in Bitcoin, mixing is inevitable. If you want to "not look suspicious", sacrificing your privacy is inevitable.

[mendace]

Except from the fact that the taint nonsense continues insusceptible to such moron techniques, due to it being absolutely arbitrary in the first place. If you want privacy in Bitcoin, mixing is inevitable. If you want to "not look suspicious", sacrificing your privacy is inevitable.

I wouldn't say a must, you can always maintain an excellent level of privacy simply by being careful.  Let's say that using a mixer or coinjoin definitely helps

[Grasper]

Simply not true. I can agree to an extent that governments don't want you to use such tools, but it's plain dumb to believe you're being more spied when using them than otherwise. I agree you're a probable suspect for some, but you're a suspect for a reason; you do gain privacy. If I was being monitored more effectively, I wouldn't be a suspect. I am, because they very much work.

I took my time to think deeply about the mixing, money laundry, and the crime that could be committed via it but I realize that there is nothing different from what has been committed with fiat. The government knows too much about us, companies know too much about and these people are using their positions to sell our data and track us, this is from the fact that anyone could send assassins and thieves to you when they know what you are worth, getting your privacy through mixer is not a crime.

Let the crime be left for our individual action, no government, organization, or persons can claim that they are 100% clean even when they pretend to be. That is how I see mixers too, it's what we use them for that can judge us, and nothing has that power and integrity to completely condemn it.

By law, it is never illegal, what is the headache?

[Who is John Galt?]

The Department of Justice of the United States announced that it plans to pay special attention to exchanges and mixers to counter money laundering. In general, it does not seem that there is anything in the field of cryptocurrencies that does not attract the attention of certain government structures.

[Abiky]

The Department of Justice of the United States announced that it plans to pay special attention to exchanges and mixers to counter money laundering. In general, it does not seem that there is anything in the field of cryptocurrencies that does not attract the attention of certain government structures.

This is nothing new. The US government has been on a "witch hunt" to minimize crypto's dominance in the country after what happened with FTX. They seriously don't want American people to join in the revolution. A pity for them, as other countries will "eat their cake". As far as mixers go, they're a contentious subject among major countries in the world. They're quickly classified as "money laundering tools" just because governments don't want people to use them. Financial freedom and privacy goes against governments' own rules.

I think centralized mixers will ultimately disappear, paving the way for decentralized (non-custodial) mixers to take over the industry. I'm fine with that as long as people use mixers in a legal and responsible manner. Just my opinion

[franky1]

did you know that the $100 and $99change from scenario A is being then scrutinised for where the $100 came from and where the $99 ends up

If you think that you can fool chain analysis companies and regulatory authorities by buying chewing gums, then I don't know what to say.

scenario B is not registered nor required to register, nor deemed illegal for not registering as a money transmitter business. it does not do KYC nor appear on any regulation policy to scrutinise its customers identity or purpose or source or destination of deposits/withdrawals. YET you get the same result as A of different taint/denominations out as what went in

Except from the fact that the taint nonsense continues insusceptible to such moron techniques, due to it being absolutely arbitrary in the first place. If you want privacy in Bitcoin, mixing is inevitable. If you want to "not look suspicious", sacrificing your privacy is inevitable.

and the idiot still wants to say any other form of coins shuffling/swapping is bad but it has to be specifically "mixing" that everyone has to use.. even though its "mixing" that is LITERALLY WROTE IN REGULATIONS TO BE WATCHED MORE CLOSELY

see how ignorant the idiot is. he cares more about his contract to advertise mixers to recruit people into schemes that will get them noticed more.. more so than he cares about privacy

total moron

..
i think he needs one more lesson

lets say using a bicycle on a motorway/highway, will attract the police to stop the vehicle and take it off the motorway/highway..

there are many other vehicles that can use the highway without drawing the attention to the police. but a bicycle is speficically listed as the main things cops should be on the watch for..
blackhat is telling people only ride bicycles on a highway.

guess what. if everyone done it, everyone gets stopped by the cops.

.. he thinks that if he can get everyone to ride a bicycle on a highway, he can make police give up.
what he is not realising is he is making cops get easy arrests..

[macson]

Some clarification is needed to this board due to the recent incident with ChipMixer.

To all advocates of anti-anonymous Bitcoin and Internet tools: Bitcoin mixing is NOT money laundering, per se.

snip

P.S.: You can't have privacy without money laundering due to the nature of humans-- by the way, the opposite does not necessarily hold true.

the government that banned bitcoin Tumblr said that mixing was a place for money laundering but they did not explain in detail the difference between money laundering and the use of mixing itself causing ambiguity in society.  before there was bitcoin, officials and criminals used houses, land, gold and valuables like cars to launder money but when bitcoin appeared, some used bitcoin as a money laundering option but they thought bitcoin was just like any other untraceable, that was a big mistake, actually people who do money laundering with bitcoins are very easy to trace.  So it's actually important that the advertisement explaining the true function and purpose of mixing is reported so that confusion in the community about what mixing is doesn't spread.

[franky1]

Some clarification is needed to this board due to the recent incident with ChipMixer.

To all advocates of anti-anonymous Bitcoin and Internet tools: Bitcoin mixing is NOT money laundering, per se.

snip

P.S.: You can't have privacy without money laundering due to the nature of humans-- by the way, the opposite does not necessarily hold true.

the government that banned bitcoin Tumblr said that mixing was a place for money laundering but they did not explain in detail the difference between money laundering and the use of mixing itself causing ambiguity in society.  before there was bitcoin, officials and criminals used houses, land, gold and valuables like cars to launder money but when bitcoin appeared, some used bitcoin as a money laundering option but they thought bitcoin was just like any other untraceable, that was a big mistake, actually people who do money laundering with bitcoins are very easy to trace.  So it's actually important that the advertisement explaining the true function and purpose of mixing is reported so that confusion in the community about what mixing is doesn't spread.

mixing has one function.. to mix. its not a retailer. its not a forex its not a fruit stall. its sole purpose is to mix.
its only advertised to mix, its promoted and used only to mix
regulations are clear that they MAKE regulated businesses monitor and scrutinise mixer users closely.

emphasis again
mixing is wrote into regulations to be watched more closely(= less privacy)

once more.. for luck
MIXING puts you on a watch list.

so the solution to privacy is not .. wait for it.. take a minute to breathe and let this settle in..
so the solution to privacy is not services advertised specifically as mixing

lets word it another way

imagine prostitution was being watched by the police.
would you name a business "prostitution house" or try something new like 'massage parlour' or 'escort service'
you know. just to make it a lil different and ambiguous to not be an instant knock at the door inspection of the premises

[HmmMAA]

Seems that in a few days/weeks mixing will be laundering ( and much more ) per se . For all the advertisers here of mixing services this might be a warning . Funding terrorism is now on the table https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen-proposes-new-regulation-enhance-transparency-convertible-virtual-currency  

[Plaguedeath]

Seems that in a few/days weeks mixing will be laundering ( and much more ) per se . For all the advertisers here of mixing services this might be a warning . Funding terrorism is now on the table https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen-proposes-new-regulation-enhance-transparency-convertible-virtual-currency 

First I don't know what CVC is, until I found this.

What is Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is a convertible virtual currency. Virtual currency is a digital representation of value that functions as a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and/or a store of value.

This is not good, although it's still a proposal and will be submitted in the next two days, there's a chance they might accept it.

2. Definition of CVC mixing
The term “CVC mixing” means the facilitation of CVC transactions in a manner that obfuscates the source, destination, or amount involved in one or more transactions, regardless of the type of protocol or service used, such as:
(1) pooling or aggregating CVC from multiple persons, wallets, addresses, or accounts;
(2) using programmatic or algorithmic code to coordinate, manage, or manipulate the structure of a transaction;
(3) splitting CVC for transmittal and transmitting the CVC through a series of independent transactions;
(4) creating and using single-use wallets, addresses, or accounts, and sending CVC through such wallets, addresses, or accounts through a series of independent transactions; (5) exchanging between types of CVC or other digital assets; or
(6) facilitating user-initiated delays in transactional activity.

This make any form of privacy e.g. mixing, coinjoining, and swap to privacy coins are considered as CVC mixing.

Slightly off topic: I only find Chipmixer, Bestmixer, Tornado Cash, Blender.io and Sinbad keywords in ther proposal, I thought I would find "Whirlwind" because they said they had a problem.

[FinneysTrueVision]

Seems that in a few days/weeks mixing will be laundering ( and much more ) per se . For all the advertisers here of mixing services this might be a warning . Funding terrorism is now on the table https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen-proposes-new-regulation-enhance-transparency-convertible-virtual-currency  

These scumbag politicians will look for whatever opportunity to restrict an individual's right to self-determination. These regulations will have no effect whatsoever on terrorist groups. It will only harm regular people, especially those from marginalized groups, who seek privacy amidst the mass surveillance we are subjected to from corporations and government agencies.

It's too soon to tell what will happen with all the mixers who advertise on the forum but as US policy creeps closer to full-blown authoritarianism I expect decentralized and non-custodial options will start to become more popular and eventually traditional custodial mixers may become obsolete.

[franky1]

This is not good, although it's still a proposal and will be submitted in the next two days, there's a chance they might accept it.

2. Definition of CVC mixing
The term “CVC mixing” means the facilitation of CVC transactions in a manner that obfuscates the source, destination, or amount involved in one or more transactions, regardless of the type of protocol or service used, such as:
(1) pooling or aggregating CVC from multiple persons, wallets, addresses, or accounts;
(2) using programmatic or algorithmic code to coordinate, manage, or manipulate the structure of a transaction;
(3) splitting CVC for transmittal and transmitting the CVC through a series of independent transactions;
(4) creating and using single-use wallets, addresses, or accounts, and sending CVC through such wallets, addresses, or accounts through a series of independent transactions; (5) exchanging between types of CVC or other digital assets; or
(6) facilitating user-initiated delays in transactional activity.

This make any form of privacy e.g. mixing, coinjoining, and swap to privacy coins are considered as CVC mixing.

not just "mixing" but AEC (anonymity enhanced cryptocurrencies)

here is the thing though. this quote has listed methodologies they class as indications of mixing.. so be smart. stop calling a service a mixer. look at the methods they list to suspect mixing and create a service that does none of the things regulated as mixing and instead has the result people want without being so stupidly named as then thing thats regulated..

be smart, figure it out

[NotATether]

Seems that in a few days/weeks mixing will be laundering ( and much more ) per se . For all the advertisers here of mixing services this might be a warning . Funding terrorism is now on the table https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen-proposes-new-regulation-enhance-transparency-convertible-virtual-currency  

Ah yes the blanket statement that all politicians and fiat bosses use to annihilate a section of cryptocurrency they don't like.

They conveniently ignore the fact that their own banks are 100x more guilty for money laundering and terrorist financing at scale.

And even crypto exchanges don't get to escape the cross-fire, no. Binance willingly laundered money for Iran (the sponsor of terrorist groups that are attacking Israel right now). And who knows how much shit FTX was allowed to get away with before they imploded?

not just "mixing" but AEC (anonymity enhanced cryptocurrencies)

Litecoin has MimbleWimble transactions, which makes an AEC. Let's see if these knuckleheads try to ban LTC too.

Oh and wallets like Samourai and Wasabi wallet would be killed by this bill too, despite the latter's "blacklisting" feature (which hasn't even been made yet).

Slightly off topic: I only find Chipmixer, Bestmixer, Tornado Cash, Blender.io and Sinbad keywords in ther proposal, I thought I would find "Whirlwind" because they said they had a problem.

They only include mixers in the document that had official governmental action taken against them (with the exception of Sinbad I guess, which is all rumors up to now...)

[Blitzboy]

Seems that in a few days/weeks mixing will be laundering ( and much more ) per se . For all the advertisers here of mixing services this might be a warning . Funding terrorism is now on the table https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen-proposes-new-regulation-enhance-transparency-convertible-virtual-currency  

These scumbag politicians will look for whatever opportunity to restrict an individual's right to self-determination. These regulations will have no effect whatsoever on terrorist groups. It will only harm regular people, especially those from marginalized groups, who seek privacy amidst the mass surveillance we are subjected to from corporations and government agencies.

It's too soon to tell what will happen with all the mixers who advertise on the forum but as US policy creeps closer to full-blown authoritarianism I expect decentralized and non-custodial options will start to become more popular and eventually traditional custodial mixers may become obsolete.

Without a doubt, its scary how lawmakers, who are often motivated by their own personal goals, use any opportunity to limit people's rights. Their grasp on rules, which is said to be meant to go after terrorist groups, is at best funny and at worst very scary. Sadly, you're right; these steps always have an effect on the normal person instead of the people they were meant to help. The people who are really at risk are regular people who want to hide from the ever-watchful eyes of corporations and the government. Not a very good irony, is it?

It looks like the writing is on the wall for mixers in the future. As rules get stricter, it looks like we will have to move toward decentralized and non-custodial choices. In the coming years, traditional cleaning mixers may become almost useless because of changes in politics. People are hoping that decentralized solutions will step up and protect their rights and safety.