Coinbase freezing funds because there's no official documents of betting.

[L E G E N D A R Y]

There is no such thing as laundering channels, because in this instance we are talking about casinos, which are legitimate businesses but some people try to launder their money through them.. You said it's clean money, then it does not fall under money laundering as the very basic definition of money laundering is making dirty money appear legitimate.

Dirty money + put it through laundry = clean money.

The goal is to make dirty money look clean, so anybody would claim the money was clean even if it was actually dirty, so even if the excuse was pretty good, I mean saying all the money came from a casino is a pretty good one and it’s quite believable, but just because it’s believable doesn’t mean it’s actually true, so it’s normal for any platform to carefully verify such money before it leave their hand.

[stompix]

I have so many questions...

I am not sure what definition of money laundering you are looking at, but hiding the origin and owner of the money is definately money laundering, which that gambler did by using fake id and vpn.

Also, i am confused on your definition of "offence". Like what's your argument here? Offence against whom? You think that there wouldn't be repercussions as US citizen if you hacked a bank overseas because it wouldn't be located in US terrority?

Are you aware that the reason why US citizens are restricted in many places is because it's required by US regulators? Are you aware that FATF is based on international agreements?

If you have that many questions about basic stuff...maybe it's time to stop posting, stop admonishing people for stuff you have no clue about, and....read more from the guys that do so.
I have alrady explained it 1000 times, and I really don't understand how challenged someone could be to not get it

The guy in question:
https://www.reddit.com/user/Tricky_Werewolf_1954/
Has been placing 10k bets on Stake for at least 3 years, and has bragged about them everywhere.
Use your damn brain, who the fucks does this while laundering money!

Second, you don't launder money by placing bets on 5-to-30 odds because you might be losing all of them!

Third, Stake didn't see that as money laundering; Stake paid the sums won fair and square!

Fourth, the user committed a misdemeanor in some states where gambling is illegal; it's not a federal crime and Coinbase doesn't care about that.

Fifth, Coinbase froze the money because it came from a service that bans US citizens in an accoutn of a US citizen, they can't confiscate those assets.

Sixth, if the guy lawyers up there, there is nothing stopping a judge from awarding him the money, absolutely nothing.

Whatever crime he has committed by using a fake ID and gambling is a different thing, this doesn't invalidate property!

So now, be a good sport and cut that bullshit red text because it's pure bullshit!

How interesting, OP. You highlighted everything in red, and the editing of the post took place five days ago, you could say, on the same day that you created the topic, but, however...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5595906.msg67208325#msg67208325

You are right to note that many people do not read the discussion; moreover, they do not even read the topic itself, and warnings and explanations can no longer affect either the color or the size of the letters. Just check how many responses you received after you clarified the reason for the freezing of the funds of the person who provided the false documents. Indeed, @nutildah will not run out of work for a very long time.

I never expected this from you, like not in 1000 years!

[Powerjumboo]

I found this from reddit:



This is one reason why one should keep a detailed spreadsheet of your betting history.

Let me start by approaching this in good faith and assume that user is not lying. Then only thing that would work their favor is to keep as detailed data of their betting history as possible.

I believe that in regulated casinos, you can ask for all betting data. At least EU citizens have law on their side and casinos are required to give all the data they have about the user activity if they choose to request it. That can take couple of months, but resolving these issues take time anyway.

Either case, imho the issue to resolve is with the casino, not with the exchange. Exchange is just following the law and won't be accepting vague data, because it's their license on the line.

But in this case, i genuinely believe this is about money laundering. Because why wouldn't the user contact to police or a lawyer if the money is legally theirs?

Edit: Since people don't read the comments, i am pointing out in here that. Iranus already provided the update, confirming that this was money laundering attempt.

I think their is nothing wrong if Coinbase as an exchange wants to know ones source of income before withdrawing huge amount of money because they know there are some fraudulent people who scam people, and withdraw such money to their exchange. However, if ones account is frozen, and their is an evidence or prove of the fund in your exchange account, your account has to be freed or lifted from ban, and in this case, the evidence has been provided, and his account has to be freed. The owner of the Coinbase account should be able to recover his fund if really he is the owner of that account.

Yes, it is true that if the exchange party wants to know the income level before withdrawing a large amount of money, then the source of income must be disclosed. Because sometimes a lot of black money is entered into the exchange in this way, which if later proven, creates pressure on the exchange authorities. However, if the person can present all the data of his funds with evidence and provide proof, then the exchange authorities must definitely return his money to him because the exchange party does not have the right to withhold legitimate money with its evidence.

[sompitonov]

Yes, it is true that if the exchange party wants to know the income level before withdrawing a large amount of money, then the source of income must be disclosed. Because sometimes a lot of black money is entered into the exchange in this way, which if later proven, creates pressure on the exchange authorities. However, if the person can present all the data of his funds with evidence and provide proof, then the exchange authorities must definitely return his money to him because the exchange party does not have the right to withhold legitimate money with its evidence.

I don't find this request surprising, given that exchanges operate under the supervision of financial regulators who have established specific rules. If a withdrawal exceeds a certain limit, it may be frozen pending the submission of additional information regarding the source of funds. The key issue, in my view, is how a trader can actually prove the history of their funds especially if they have been trading for years, moving assets between exchanges and personal wallets, or perhaps trading on DEXs. The volume of data involved could be overwhelming, yet an exchange might demand a record of every single trade made over that entire period a requirement that seems impossible for most users to meet.

[pawanjain]

$900k is not a small amount to lose. Even though the user has not yet technically lose the money but it is kinda gone if the user is unable to provide the source of funds.
But does it give Coinbase the right to keep that amount to themselves ? Isn't it like free money for Coinbase ? This shouldn't be legal.
However, one should refrain from keep such large amounts on centralized wallets and should rather choose a non-custodian wallet.

Free money.  You just jumped into conclusion that's it's free money. Just what if the terms and conditions that everyone doesn't read says they have the right to sieze any money that cannot be verified and use it as they like. Will you still call that free money, even after the person agreed to the terms. I won't call that fake money at all.

This also proves further why using centralised platforms poses a greater risk than non custodian wallet. Not saying non custodian wallet are completely safe. All that I am saying is that, the risk is way more smaller than using centralised platforms.

Yeah I will still call it free money for Coinbase because they aren't really doing anything for it except for putting the terms and conditions.
I mean, yeah their team has to go through the source of funds and all but not as if they are putting in sweat to earn that money.
Just putting up a notice doesn't mean anyone has the right to use someone else's money.

[hedgeh0g]

Yeah I will still call it free money for Coinbase because they aren't really doing anything for it except for putting the terms and conditions.
I mean, yeah their team has to go through the source of funds and all but not as if they are putting in sweat to earn that money.
Just putting up a notice doesn't mean anyone has the right to use someone else's money.

It is interesting, however, to see exactly how they handle such funds; I hope they don't simply book them as profit, as that would make it look like they are confiscating assets to boost their own performance figures. Ideally, exchanges should earn enough revenue without making a habit of this practice; otherwise, they risk destroying their reputation and eroding trust, which could ultimately undermine or even ruin their business. I am not saying they shouldn't identify such accounts, but they ought to avoid overstepping their authority.

[xenomorfo]

It is interesting, however, to see exactly how they handle such funds; I hope they don't simply book them as profit, as that would make it look like they are confiscating assets to boost their own performance figures. Ideally, exchanges should earn enough revenue without making a habit of this practice; otherwise, they risk destroying their reputation and eroding trust, which could ultimately undermine or even ruin their business. I am not saying they shouldn't identify such accounts, but they ought to avoid overstepping their authority.

Here i absolutely agree with you, reputation is the most important part of our being.
Unfortunately, once it's gone it's difficult to recover.
It takes you a long time to build a good reputation and then it really takes a moment to destroy it.

[o48o]

You either don't know how to read or you're deliberately lying. Money laundering is literally the legitimization of illicit funds. This is clearly emphasized even in the quote I cited.
There is no evidence that he used criminal money. If you have any other information, please present it.
All in all, I don't expect a sensible answer from you, it's clear you're one of those people with mental issues who would rather die than admit they were ever wrong. If you have nothing substantive to write, just don't write to me, there's no need to look even more foolish than you already do.

And again, what you mean by "criminal money" or "illicit funds"? I have never said that this money would have criminal origin or something.

When someone is using fake ID when they are depositing nearly a million dollars, there's no change in hell that it's not tax evasion. Because why would they pay taxes if they successfully withdraw the money and risk whole another layer of problems by adding some shady paperwork trail containing stolen accounts that needed to be somehow scrubbed from it?

Most simplest way to explain where this become money laundering, is that when that person was depositing with stolen identity, they were breaking FATF travel rule by knowingly obfuscating the trail of the money.

For the future: You noticed how i didn't needlessly insult you at any point, or assumed anything about you as a person? Now go and look your arguments. I am hoping you have a better day from here.