Jan 27 (Reuters) – Money launderers received at least $82 billion in cryptocurrencies last year, up sharply from $10 billion in 2020, driven in part by fast growth among Chinese-speaking groups, blockchain researchers said on Tuesday.
The fastest-growing category has been Chinese-language money-laundering networks, which emerged during the pandemic and processed almost $40 million worth of crypto per day in 2025, U.S.-based blockchain research company Chainalysis said in a report.
Blockchains create a record of the wallet addresses involved in cryptocurrency transactions, but identifying who is behind the wallets is difficult.
However, Chainalysis said it had identified nearly 1,800 active wallets used by Chinese-language money-laundering networks to process $16.1 billion worth of crypto in 2025, and that its numbers were likely an underestimate.
A spokesperson for Chainalysis declined to detail the company’s methodology but directed Reuters to its website, which said it connects real-world activity to blockchain records using machine learning and forensic experts.
Crypto trading is banned in China and digital tokens are not recognised as legal tender or assets there. In 2024, China sued 3,032 people involved in crypto-related money laundering, the country’s top procurator has said.
Regulators and authorities worldwide have warned for years about crypto’s role in crime, as it is generally subject to less specific regulation than mainstream finance. Still, experts say it is just one of many ways criminals move funds.
Crypto money-laundering networks’ techniques to avoid detection include using “guarantee” platforms, which provide escrow services and allow money launderers to advertise their services, Chainalysis said.
“Chinese-language guarantee platforms, money movement services and associated financial crime networks reveal a complex and resilient ecosystem that continues to adapt despite enforcement efforts,” Chainalysis said.
“As with other genres of illicit on-chain activity, actions against guarantee services can be disruptive, but the core networks persist and migrate to alternative channels when challenged.”
(Reporting by Elizabeth Howcroft. Editing by Kirstin Ridley and Mark Potter)
