Two Nigerian nationals have been sentenced in the U.S. for orchestrating a Business Email Compromise (BEC) scheme that defrauded U.S. companies out of more than $5 million. Franklin Ifeanyichukwu Okwonna, 34, received five years and three months in prison and was ordered to pay nearly $5 million in restitution. His co-conspirator, Ebuka Raphael Umeti, 35, was sentenced to 10 years and ordered to pay the same amount in restitution. Short Narrative Okwonna pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, while a federal jury convicted Umeti on multiple charges, including wire fraud and computer hacking. The scheme involved sending phishing emails to businesses and tricking employees into transferring money to fraudulent accounts by exploiting their computer systems with malicious software. A federal jury convicted Ebuka Raphael Umeti on June 13 of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, three counts of wire fraud, conspiracy to cause intentional damage to a protected computer, and intentional damage to a protected computer. Key Points Defendants: Franklin Ifeanyichukwu Okwonna, Ebuka Raphael Umeti Jurisdiction: United States Criminal Charges: Okwonna and Umeti were convicted of wire fraud, identity theft, and computer hacking. Fraudulent Scheme: Between 2016 and 2021, they and their co-conspirators sent phishing emails to U.S. companies, infecting computers with malware and stealing sensitive information to execute unauthorized wire transfers. Total Losses: The BEC scheme resulted in over $5 million in losses for multiple U.S. companies. Sentences: Okwonna received 5 years and 3 months, and Umeti 10 years, along with nearly $5 million in restitution for both. Actionable Insight Business Email Compromise (BEC) schemes continue to be a significant threat to companies worldwide. The case underscores the need for companies to strengthen their cybersecurity measures and educate employees on recognizing phishing attempts. Insider information and tips are vital to uncovering these schemes. Report Cybercrime FinTelegram urges whistleblowers and industry insiders with information on BEC schemes or cyber fraud to report via our secure platform, Whistle42, to help combat cybercrime. Report Cybercrime to FinTelegram CategoriesFinTelegram United StatesTagsEbuka Raphael UmetiFranklin Ifeanyichukwu Okwonna

Former Cyprus Transport Minister Marios Demetriades faces charges linked to the controversial Golden Passport Program, including money laundering, corruption, and bribery. Authorities allege Demetriades manipulated the naturalization process, granting citizenship through the Citizenship by Investment Scheme. The Cyprus law enforcement is investigating over 20 cases of naturalizations acquired under this scheme. Short Narrative The indictment against Marios Demetriades includes more than 50 charges and targets eight individuals and two legal entities. Among the accused are Demetriades’ family members, including his father and siblings, who were involved in the family law firm that facilitated these naturalizations. A lawyer from the firm, a foreign investor, and an embassy staff member in China, along with her spouse, are also implicated. Demetriades has denied all charges, calling himself a scapegoat and asserting that his professional and personal life has been under intense scrutiny for three years without any wrongdoing being found. His family’s law firm, Andreas Demetriades & Co. LLC, has also defended its actions, claiming the legal proceedings are an attempt to deflect blame for the inherent issues of the now-defunct Golden Passport Program. Key Points The Context: Cyprus’ Golden Passport Scheme Charges Filed: Marios Demetriades is charged with money laundering, corruption, and bribery linked to the Golden Passport Scheme. Ongoing Investigations: Over 20 naturalization cases are being investigated, with a total of 100 citizenships under scrutiny. Involved Parties: The indictment lists eight individuals, including Demetriades’ family members, and two legal entities. Demetriades’ Defense: Demetriades claims he is a scapegoat, and his family law firm argues the charges are an attempt to shift blame away from systemic issues with the Golden Passport Program. Actionable Insight The Golden Passport Program in Cyprus, which granted citizenship in exchange for financial investments, has come under intense scrutiny following allegations of widespread abuse, including money laundering and corruption. The termination of the scheme in 2020 followed revelations by Al Jazeera and other media outlets, exposing the depth of irregularities. This case highlights the risks associated with citizenship-by-investment programs and the importance of stringent oversight to prevent misuse. Share Information FinTelegram encourages insiders and whistleblowers with information on the Golden Passport Scheme or related financial misconduct to come forward via our secure platform, Whistle42. Your insights are crucial in exposing and combating financial crime. Report Financial Wrongdoing to FinTelegram CategoriesCorruption Law Enforcement Money LaunderingTagsAndreas DemetriadesMarios Demetriades

The Financial Times reports that a Munich court has found Markus Braun, the former CEO of Wirecard, along with Alexander von Knoop, former CFO, and Susanne Steidl, former chief product officer, personally liable for €140 million in damages. This decision comes after a long-running civil suit filed by Michael Jaffé, the administrator of Wirecard, over the executives’ roles in issuing unsecured loans to allegedly fraudulent business partners in Asia. Short Narrative Once valued at over €24 billion and considered a leading fintech company in Germany, Wirecard collapsed in June 2020 after admitting that half of its reported revenue and €1.9 billion in cash were non-existent. The lawsuit focuses on the decisions by the executives that resulted in substantial financial losses, including the issuance of €100 million in unsecured loans just months before the company’s collapse. The court ruled that these actions violated their professional duties, noting that the management decisions were “untenable and at odds with the duty of care of a prudent businessman.” The judgment also highlighted that the executives ignored internal advice and failed to conduct proper due diligence on the securitized bonds purchased from the same Asian business partners, which later proved worthless. Key Points The Case: Wirecard insolvency administrator against former Wirecard executives Court Decision: The Munich court ordered Braun, von Knoop, and Steidl to pay €140 million plus 5% annual interest for failing to perform due diligence and issuing unsecured loans to questionable partners in Asia. The judgment is not yet legally binding and can still be appealed. Fraudulent Loans: The lawsuit centers on potentially fraudulent loans that were a significant part of Wirecard’s alleged misconduct, with €100 million issued just before the company’s collapse, depleting much of its liquidity. Personal Liability: The court found that the executives are personally liable for the financial damage caused by these transactions, with compounded interest adding up to more than €30 million since Wirecard’s insolvency over four years ago. Asset Seizures: Braun, who once had shares worth over €1 billion and owned luxury properties, has had his assets seized by prosecutors. His financial situation is so dire that his former lawyer resigned due to unpaid legal fees after his insurance funds ran out. Read our Wirecard reports here. Actionable Insight The Wirecard case continues to unfold as one of the most significant financial frauds in Germany’s history. With a focus on the lack of oversight and fraudulent practices, the case underlines the importance of rigorous due diligence and internal controls in corporate governance. The revelations surrounding Jan Marsalek‘s alleged espionage activities for Russia add another layer of intrigue and complexity to the ongoing investigations. Companies must ensure strong internal compliance measures to prevent similar lapses in corporate governance. Share Information FinTelegram urges whistleblowers and insiders with information on Wirecard and related entities to report via our secure platform, Whistle42. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesBankruptcies Germany tickerTagsAlexander von KnoopMarkus BraunMichael JaffeSusanne SteidlWirecard

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Christopher Hu, owner of the New York-based seafood company Foodie Fisherman, and his wife, Linda Sun, have been charged with serious crimes, including money laundering and acting as agents for the Chinese government. Linda Sun, a former aide to New York Governor Kathy Hochul, allegedly used her political position to act as an undisclosed Agent of China and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Short Narrative On 3 September, Christopher Hu and Linda Sun were arrested following accusations that Sun acted as an undisclosed agent for China, leveraging her influence in New York to further the CCP’s agenda. The U.S. Department of Justice alleges that Sun and Hu laundered millions of dollars generated from lobster exports to China, hiding this income from U.S. tax authorities. According to the indictment, Linda Sun used her state position to influence official statements regarding China’s stance on Taiwan and the treatment of Uyghur minorities, and facilitated the entry of Chinese officials into the U.S. through forged letters. In return, Sun and Hu allegedly received monetary and non-monetary benefits, including luxury vehicles, high-end properties, and travel perks. Key Points Money Laundering and Fraud: Christopher “Chris” Hu is accused of laundering millions from lobster sales to China and evading taxes. Linda Sun allegedly acted as an undisclosed agent for the Chinese government, manipulating her political influence for Chinese interests. Chris Hu was also charged with conspiracy to commit bank fraud and misuse of means of identification. Chinese Government Involvement: Sun is accused of furthering the political agenda of China within New York, using her position to issue favorable statements and facilitate entry for Chinese officials through forgery. Luxury and Lavish Lifestyle: The couple reportedly used the proceeds from their schemes to acquire luxury cars, expensive real estate, and other high-end perks. Legal Proceedings: Both Sun and Hu pleaded not guilty to all charges. Bail for Linda Sun has been set at $1.5 million and $500,000 for Christopher Hu. Their next court appearance is scheduled for 25 September. Actionable Insight This case underscores the complex ways foreign influence can permeate local and state governments. It highlights the critical need for robust compliance and monitoring systems within both governmental and financial institutions to detect and prevent such activities. As the investigation unfolds, authorities will likely scrutinize similar cases where foreign entities might leverage local political influence for their gain. Call to Action: FinTelegram encourages whistleblowers and those with insider knowledge to report any suspicious activities related to foreign influence and financial crimes via our secure platform, Whistle42. Report Money Laundering Activities to FinTelegram CategoriesChina Court Cases Money Laundering United StatesTagsChristopher HuFoodie FishermanLinda Sun

Short Narrative The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has issued an order against Uniswap Labs, a Delaware-based company operating in New York, for offering illegal digital asset derivatives trading. The CFTC found that Uniswap Labs provided leveraged or margined retail commodity transactions in digital assets via a decentralized digital asset trading protocol and has been ordered to pay a moderate $175,000 civil monetary penalty. Key Points Respondent: Universal Navigation Inc. d/b/a Uniswap Labs, Illegal Derivatives Trading: Uniswap Labs was found to have illegally offered leveraged and margined commodity transactions in digital assets like Ether and Bitcoin without being a registered or designated contract market by the CFTC. These transactions did not meet the CFTC’s delivery requirements, making them unlawful for non-Eligible Contract Participants. Platform Operations: The company developed a blockchain-based digital asset protocol allowing users to trade digital assets through liquidity pools on the Ethereum blockchain. The platform included a web interface for trading in hundreds of liquidity pools, including a limited number of leveraged tokens, which gave users leveraged exposure to digital assets. CFTC’s Enforcement: The CFTC’s action underscores its ongoing enforcement focus on digital asset platforms and decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystems. The Commission emphasizes that DeFi operators must ensure compliance with laws to avoid similar penalties. Cooperation Acknowledged: The CFTC acknowledged Uniswap Labs’ substantial cooperation during the investigation, which resulted in a reduced penalty. Actionable Insight This enforcement action highlights the increasing regulatory scrutiny over DeFi platforms and digital asset derivatives. Uniswap Labs’ case serves as a warning to other DeFi operators about the importance of understanding and complying with the Commodity Exchange Act and other regulatory requirements. The CFTC’s stance makes it clear that no matter how innovative or decentralized a platform might be, it must operate within the bounds of the law. Call to Action: FinTelegram urges all crypto and DeFi operators to review their practices and ensure full compliance with applicable regulations to avoid facing similar penalties. For those with inside knowledge or further information on compliance lapses within the crypto space, please report securely via our Whistle42 platform. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesFinTelegram

The Wirecard scandal trial in Munich continues to unfold as former CEO Markus Braun remains in custody. The trial, which is one of the largest financial fraud cases in Germany’s history, also includes defendants Oliver Bellenhaus and Stephan von Erffa. The judges also justified the decision with the risk of flight and obstruction of justice. The value of the Wirecard trial remains questionable in view of the activities of the fugitive former board member Jan Marsalek, which have since been uncovered. Short Narrative Bellenhaus, the former head of Wirecard’s Dubai subsidiary, and von Erffa, the former chief accountant, are accused alongside Braun of market manipulation, fraud, and the falsification of financial statements. The trio allegedly inflated Wirecard‘s revenues through fictitious transactions to deceive investors and creditors, leading to the company’s collapse and bankruptcy in June 2020. While Oliver Bellenhaus has admitted to the fraud and is cooperating as a key witness for the prosecution, Markus Braun and Stephan von Erffa maintain their innocence. Bellenhaus has been released under strict conditions after more than three years in custody. Von Erffa, who is not in custody, recently admitted to making mistakes but rejected the accusations from the prosecution. Key Points The Case: Wirecard The Defendants: Markus Braun, Oliver Bellenhaus and Stephan von Erffa Jurisdiction: Germany Markus Braun Remains in Custody: The Munich I Regional Court ruled that Braun will not be released due to concerns of flight risk and obstruction of justice. Braun has been in custody since July 22, 2020. Oliver Bellenhaus Released Under Conditions: After over three years in detention, Bellenhaus has been released under strict conditions, acting as a key witness for the prosecution. Stephan von Erffa’s Stance: Von Erffa, not in custody, admitted to errors during his tenure but denies the criminal accusations against him. Charges and Allegations: All three defendants are accused of commercial gang fraud, embezzlement, market manipulation, and deception, linked to one of Germany’s most significant financial scandals. Actionable Insight The case also casts a shadow over former Wirecard COO Jan Marsalek, who remains a fugitive. Reports indicate that Marsalek may have operated as a spy for Russia during his time at Wirecard. He is alleged to have played a pivotal role in orchestrating the financial fraud that led to the company’s downfall. Braun has pointed fingers at Marsalek, blaming him for the collapse. The ongoing revelations emphasize the importance of robust internal controls and due diligence in corporate governance, especially within the rapidly evolving fintech sector. Call to Action: FinTelegram urges whistleblowers and insiders with information on the Wirecard case or Jan Marsalek’s whereabouts to come forward via our secure Whistle42 platform. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCourt Cases GermanyTagsMarkus BraunOliver BellenhausStephan von ErffaWirecard

Short Narrative The Nigerian Justice Emeka Nwite has ordered the officials of the Kuje correctional facility to provide Tigran Gambaryan, the detained executive of Binance Holdings Limited, with a wheelchair. This decision came after Gambaryan, who appeared in court walking with crutches, expressed that his health had severely deteriorated due to inadequate medical care at the facility. According to the Nigerian news outlet Punch, Tigran Gambaryan revealed he has been living with a herniated disc for 12 years but that his condition worsened since his detention at Kuje. The order followed an emotional plea from Gambaryan and his counsel, Mark Mordi, who reported that the lack of proper medical attention was causing his client immense pain and further health complications. Mordi also filed a fresh bail application, citing Gambaryan’s declining health as a critical factor. Key Points The Case: Binance Nigeria Defendants: Binance Holdings Ltd, Tigran Gambaryan, Nadeem Anjarwalla – A British-Kenyan Binance executive initially detained but escaped custody in March 2024. Jurisdiction: Nigeria Health Concerns: Gambaryan, detained on money laundering charges, has a worsening herniated disc condition. He requested a wheelchair, stating he could no longer walk without assistance due to inadequate medical care at Kuje prison. Court Order: Judge Nwite, upon hearing Gambaryan’s plea and questioning the prison officials, ordered that a wheelchair be provided immediately. Gambaryan was subsequently wheeled out of the courtroom. Legal Arguments: The prosecution argued that Gambaryan’s health condition was being exaggerated and that his medical records did not indicate a life-threatening situation. Meanwhile, the defense highlighted the lack of proper care and submitted a new bail application based on medical grounds. Ongoing Trial: The case, involving Binance and its executives facing $35 million in money laundering charges, was adjourned to September 4 for continuation. The court also noted issues with document submissions from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), as officials failed to provide a complete set of requested documents. Actionable Insight For companies operating internationally, the Binance Nigeria case serves as a reminder to ensure robust compliance and legal preparedness to handle diverse jurisdictional challenges. The ongoing trial of Binance’s executives in Nigeria underscores the increasing regulatory scrutiny facing global crypto firms and the necessity of transparent operations to avoid such legal entanglements. Call to Action We urge our whistleblowers and insiders to provide any additional information on this case or other compliance concerns to FinTelegram through our secure Whistle42 platform. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCourt CasesTagsBinanceBinance HoldingsNadeem AnjarwallaTigran Gambaryan

Short Narrative Bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX has proposed a plan to repay its creditors using U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoins, aiming to distribute between $14.5 billion to $16.3 billion—about $5.3 billion more than the initial owed amount. However, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) may oppose this plan and has indicated it reserves the right to challenge the proposed transactions, Benzinga reports. Key Points The Case: Bankruptcy of crypto exchange FTX SEC’s Position: The SEC has raised concerns about the legality of FTX‘s proposed repayment transactions involving cryptocurrency assets. The regulator noted that the FTX estate administrators have not yet identified a distribution agent to disperse the stablecoins to creditors, which may violate federal securities laws. Repayment Plan Details: FTX‘s plan aims to repay creditors more than initially owed, with most customers receiving 118% of their claims in cash for claims under $50,000. This approach is highly unusual in U.S. bankruptcy cases, where creditors typically receive only a fraction of their claims. Background: FTX filed for bankruptcy in November 2022 following a massive collapse and allegations of fraud. Founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) was sentenced to 25 years in prison for defrauding customers, investors, and lenders. As part of the bankruptcy proceedings, FTX has liquidated $222 million in real estate to help repay creditors. Actionable Insight FTX’s proposed plan to repay creditors using stablecoins represents a novel approach in the realm of cryptocurrency bankruptcy proceedings. The SEC’s potential challenge underscores the regulatory complexities involved when digital assets are part of bankruptcy settlements. Legal and financial professionals should closely monitor this situation, as it may set a precedent for how digital assets are treated in bankruptcy cases and influence future regulatory decisions regarding crypto asset management in insolvency situations. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesBankruptcies Crypto Schemes SEC United StatesTagsFTXSam Bankman-FriedSBF

1. Introduction The proliferation of digital platforms has revolutionized the way consumers and businesses interact. However, it has also given rise to new forms of misconduct, notably the manipulation of online reviews. Fake reviews constitute a significant concern in the digital economy, as they can mislead consumers, damage legitimate businesses, and undermine the integrity of online marketplaces. From a legal perspective, the creation and dissemination of fake reviews can be considered a form of fraud, with serious implications under various regulatory frameworks. 2. Legal Definition of Fraud Fraud, broadly defined, involves a deliberate deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain. The essential elements of fraud typically include: Misrepresentation of a material fact: The false statement or conduct must pertain to a significant detail that could influence the decision-making of the victim. Knowledge of falsity: The perpetrator must be aware that the representation is false or made with reckless disregard for the truth. Intent to deceive: The action must be performed with the intent to mislead the victim. Reliance by the victim: The victim must rely on the misrepresentation when making a decision. Resulting harm: The misrepresentation must cause some form of harm, whether financial, reputational, or otherwise. Fake reviews clearly align with these elements. They are deliberate misrepresentations intended to deceive consumers, who may rely on these reviews to make purchasing decisions, ultimately leading to financial loss or other forms of harm. 3. Legal Framework and Implications A. Consumer Protection Laws Many jurisdictions have consumer protection laws that prohibit deceptive and unfair practices. In the United States, for example, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces rules against false advertising and deceptive practices under the FTC Act. The act explicitly forbids “unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce,” which extends to the creation and promotion of fake reviews. The FTC has the authority to pursue legal action against companies and individuals who engage in such practices, leading to penalties, fines, and injunctive relief. Similarly, in the European Union, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive prohibits businesses from misleading consumers through false claims, which would include fake reviews. Violations can lead to fines, restrictions on operations, and other legal actions. B. Criminal Fraud and Civil Liability In addition to regulatory action, the creation of fake reviews can constitute criminal fraud. Depending on the jurisdiction, individuals or businesses involved in producing or commissioning fake reviews can be charged with criminal offenses. For instance, under U.S. federal law, wire fraud statutes could potentially apply if the fraudulent activity involves the use of interstate communications to deceive and defraud. Civil liability is also a significant risk. Victims of fake reviews, such as consumers misled into making a purchase or businesses unfairly maligned, may sue for damages. Potential legal claims could include fraud, defamation, and tortious interference with business relations. Successful claims could result in substantial financial judgments, particularly if there is evidence of a broader scheme to manipulate reviews. C. Platform Liability and Responsibilities Online platforms that host reviews also have a role in preventing and responding to fake reviews. While platforms like Trustpilot, Google, or Amazon are generally protected under intermediary liability laws (such as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in the U.S.), they are increasingly being held to higher standards regarding monitoring and removing fraudulent content. Platforms that fail to address fake reviews may face legal actions from regulatory bodies or private lawsuits alleging negligence or facilitating fraud. 4. Ethical and Policy Considerations Beyond the legal implications, fake reviews raise significant ethical concerns. They erode trust in online commerce and can have long-term detrimental effects on consumer behavior and market integrity. Consumers rely on reviews to make informed decisions, and the presence of fake reviews compromises this decision-making process, often leading to financial harm and decreased consumer confidence. From a policy standpoint, there is an ongoing debate about the best methods to combat fake reviews. Stricter regulations, improved technological solutions for detecting fraudulent reviews, and greater consumer education are all potential strategies to address this issue. Furthermore, encouraging platforms to adopt and enforce robust anti-fraud measures could significantly reduce the prevalence of fake reviews. 5. Conclusion Fake reviews constitute a form of fraud with serious legal, ethical, and economic implications. They not only violate consumer protection laws and can lead to criminal charges but also damage the integrity of online marketplaces and consumer trust. Legal systems worldwide are increasingly recognizing the harms posed by fake reviews and are taking steps to hold perpetrators accountable. As such, businesses and individuals should be aware of the significant risks associated with engaging in or facilitating the creation of fake reviews and take proactive measures to ensure compliance with legal standards and ethical practices. Report Fake Reviews Fraud to FinTelegram CategoriesCybercrime Fake Reviews

The world’s leading review platform, Trustpilot, has taken action against Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency platform, by blocking its profile. Trustpilot has detected and removed a number of fake reviews related to Binance, raising suspicions that the company may be engaging in deceptive practices to manipulate its public image. Users should be very careful when working with Binance. Fake Reviews Fraud Creating fake reviews to systematically and intentionally mislead customers or potential customers about the actual situation with customer satisfaction is fraud. It’s as simple as that, as a legal opinion commissioned by FinTelegram proves. We know that fake reviews can be easily bought through Fiverr, for example. Scammers are well-known for using fake reviewers and fabricated reviews to create a false sense of trust and credibility. Binance‘s apparent use of such methods is concerning and aligns with other questionable practices associated with the company. Recent History of Legal Troubles: In November 2023, Binance and its former CEO, Changpeng Zhao (CZ), pleaded guilty to money laundering charges and agreed to pay a substantial settlement of $4.2 billion. CZ was sentenced to four months in prison and fined further. He is currently serving his sentence in the United States and is expected to be released by the end of September 2024. Meanwhile, Binance continues to be under close scrutiny by U.S. authorities. In Nigeria, Binance and two of its executives face charges of money laundering and financial manipulation. Although Binance and its new CEO, Richard Teng, deny these allegations, they have countered with claims that Nigerian officials demanded bribes to prevent the charges. A Pattern of Evasive Behavior: To this day, Binance does not have an official headquarters, making it challenging for authorities to track and regulate its operations. This lack of transparency, combined with its ongoing legal issues, paints a troubling picture of a company that operates in a suspicious and opaque manner. Given this context, it is not surprising to see Binance involved in dubious activities concerning customer reviews. What You Can Do: If you have any information about Binance and its activities, please share it with us through our whistleblower system, Whistle42. Your insights could be crucial in uncovering more about the company’s operations and ensuring a safer, more transparent cryptocurrency ecosystem. Stay vigilant and informed. Protect yourself from potential scams and questionable practices in the crypto world. Report Binance Activities to FinTelegram CategoriesCrypto Schemes Fake Profiles Fake Reviews tickerTagsBinanceFiverrRichard Teng

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has announced that it has settled charges against Florida-based Galois Capital Management LLC, a former registered investment adviser for a private fund focused on crypto assets. Galois Capital was charged with failing to comply with regulations concerning safeguarding client assets, including crypto assets considered securities. Short Narrative Galois Capital, the crypto hedge fund that famously warned of the dangers around Terra’s LUNA and UST ahead of their 2022 collapse, has been charged by the SEC for misleading investors and for not properly safeguarding customer funds. The firm, which shut down in early 2023 after being impacted by the downfall of crypto exchange FTX, has settled the charges. The SEC found that beginning in July 2022, Galois Capital failed to ensure that certain crypto assets held by the private fund that it advised were maintained with a qualified custodian, a violation of the Investment Advisers Act’s Custody Rule. The SEC also found that Galois misled investors about the notice period required for redemptions. To settle these charges, Galois Capital agreed to pay a civil penalty of $225,000, which will be distributed to the fund’s harmed investors. Key Points The Case: U.S. SEC v. Galois Capital Management LLC The Respondent: Galois Capital Management LLC Custody Rule Violations: Since July 2022, Galois Capital failed to ensure that certain crypto assets held by its advised private fund were maintained with a qualified custodian. Instead, these assets were held in online trading accounts on platforms such as FTX Trading Ltd., which were not qualified custodians under SEC rules. Asset Losses: Approximately 50% of the fund’s assets under management were lost between early to mid-November 2022 due to the collapse of FTX, where the crypto assets were held. Misleading Redemption Practices: Galois Capital misled some investors by stating that redemptions required at least five business days’ notice before month-end, while permitting other investors to redeem with less notice, creating inconsistency and unfair practices. Regulatory Violations: Galois Capital was found to have violated the Investment Advisers Act by failing to adhere to its core investor protection obligations. Actionable Insight The SEC’s charges against Galois Capital underscore the importance of compliance with custody and investor protection rules, especially in the crypto asset space. Advisers and fund managers must ensure that all client assets, including digital assets, are held with qualified custodians to protect against loss, misuse, or misappropriation. This case highlights the ongoing scrutiny by regulators to enforce transparency and accountability in managing client funds. It serves as a critical reminder for all investment advisers, particularly those dealing with crypto assets, to adhere strictly to regulatory requirements to avoid legal and financial penalties. Report Suspicious Crypto Activities to FinTelegram CategoriesSECTagsGalois CapitalGalois Capital Management

The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has issued a renewed warning against Pay Back, a/k/a Money Back fund recovery scheme. This scheme, which operates out of Israel, has been blacklisted by FinTelegram due to its deceptive practices. Despite posing as a legitimate recovery service, Pay Back has been exploiting scam victims by promising to recover their lost funds for an upfront fee. Key Points Scheme: Pay Back a/k/a Money Back Deceptive Operations: The scheme operates under multiple brands and websites, including Money Back Ltd and Pay Back Ltd, making it difficult to trace. Both companies share the same address in Israel. Targeting Scam Victims: Pay Back, also known as Money Back, aggressively targets individuals who have already been scammed, promising to recover their lost funds for a fee. Unauthorized Activities: Pay Back also lists a Florida address on its PayBack Law website, indicating unauthorized activities in the U.S. market. Regulatory Warnings: The FCA has issued multiple warnings against Pay Back, classifying it as a clone of the FCA-authorized Moneyback Limited, thereby misleading victims about its legitimacy. Operator Details: The directors and beneficial owners of the companies involved are reported to be Amir Geva and Daniel Poleb. Short Narrative The Pay Back operations often involve purchasing lists of scam victims’ contact details and targeting them directly, capitalizing on their desperation and distress. The scheme’s operations blur the lines between multiple brands, domains, and websites, further complicating its traceability and accountability. Both companies—Money Back Ltd and Pay Back Ltd—operate from the same address in Israel and have been linked to Amir Geva and Daniel Poleb. Additionally, a related website, PayBack Law, lists a Florida address, suggesting unauthorized activities in the U.S. market. The FCA’s warnings, issued in May and updated in September 2024, describe Pay Back as a clone of the FCA-authorized entity Moneyback Limited, misleading victims about its legitimacy and involvement in severe regulatory breaches. Actionable Insight Victims of scams are strongly advised not to engage with Pay Back or any similar fund recovery schemes. These operations prey on the vulnerability and hope of victims, coercing them into making upfront payments and other fees under false pretenses. Falling for such scams can lead to further financial losses and emotional distress. Read our PayBack reports here. FinTelegram urges all whistleblowers and insiders with information about the operators of Pay Back or their partners to come forward and report through our whistleblower platform, Whistle42. Your contributions are crucial in helping us expose and shut down these fraudulent activities. Stay vigilant, and do not fall for these recovery schemes that exploit those who have already been victimized. Fund Recovery Scheme Key Data Trading namesPay Back AgencyPayBack AgencyPayBack LawPayBackPay BackMoney BackChargeBackDomainshttp://paybackagency.euhttps://www.payback-ltd.comhttps://payback-ltd.orghttps://paybackltd-de.comhttps://www.payback-law.comhttps://www.paybackpals.comhttps://www.claim-international.comhttps://chargebacksecured.comhttps://moneyback-team.eumoneyback-team.orgmoneyback-limited.orgLegal entitiesPay Back LtdPayback LtdMoney Back LTDContact datasupport@paybackagency.eusupport@moneyback-ltd.uk,support@moneyback-ltd.cc,support@moneyback-ltd.eu,support@moneyback-ltd.net,sam@moneyback-services.eu,lev@moneyback-team.euIL +972-77-7408749US +1-718-473-3943US +1-7868711161AU +61-283-185-343SE +46-812-410-614UK +44 7477 491147Related individualsAmir Geva, Daniel PolebJurisdictionsIsrael, United StatesUnited KingdomCompliance ratingBlackWarningFCA, FCA, FCA Whistleblower Appeal: Victims of scams often find themselves in dire psychological and financial straits, making them susceptible to such deceptive recovery promises. It is crucial to recognize that many fund recovery schemes, rather than providing a legitimate service, are either directly affiliated with scam operations or are run by individuals previously involved in scams. If you have any information regarding the operations, tactics, or any other relevant data concerning the Pay Back a/k/a Money Back Group, please contact us through our dedicated whistleblower platform, Whistle42. Your insights are invaluable in helping us uncover and report on fraudulent schemes, protecting future potential victims from similar exploitation. Share Information About Pay Back with FinTelegram CategoriesFCA Fund RecoveryTagsAmir GevaChargeBackDaniel PolebMoney BackPay BackPay Back AgencyPaybackPayBack Agency

Revolut, the leading digital banking platform, is gearing up to launch mortgage products in Ireland by the first half of 2025. Operating under its Lithuanian banking license, which has been passported to Ireland, Revolut plans to offer a fully digital mortgage application process. This move follows the company’s expansion into personal loans in Ireland and reflects its strategy to disrupt traditional banking sectors by leveraging technology to provide faster and more efficient services. Short Narrative Currently, Revolut operates in Ireland without a local banking license, using EU financial passporting rules that allow a bank licensed in one EU country to operate in others. With over 2.7 million customers in Ireland and a significant presence across Europe, Revolut is positioned to challenge traditional banks in the Irish mortgage market, potentially driving down rates and increasing competition. Key Points Launch Timeline: Mortgage Product Launch: Revolut aims to roll out its mortgage products in Ireland in the first half of 2025. Preparation Efforts: The company has been hiring staff with expertise in the Irish mortgage market since 2021 to support this launch. Market Opportunity: Customer Base: Ireland is a significant market for Revolut, with the company already serving 2.7 million users there. Market Dynamics: The Irish mortgage market is currently dominated by three main banks, with relatively high mortgage rates compared to the rest of the Eurozone. Operational Strategy: Digital-First Approach: Revolut will offer a “100% digital” mortgage application process through its app, aiming to simplify the customer experience. Regulatory Compliance: Although Revolut operates under a Lithuanian banking license, it must still comply with Irish mortgage regulations and consumer protection rules. Potential Impact: Increased Competition: Revolut’s entry is expected to intensify competition in the Irish mortgage market, potentially lowering mortgage rates for consumers. Regulatory Oversight: The Central Bank of Ireland may still play a role in overseeing Revolut’s mortgage operations despite its primary regulation from Lithuania. Actionable Insight Revolut’s aggressive expansion into new financial products and markets positions it as a formidable competitor to traditional banks, especially in the UK and Ireland. As the largest neobank in Europe with over 45 million customers globally, Revolut significantly outpaces its UK competitors like Starling Bank and Monzo, and Germany’s N26, which have much smaller customer bases and limited geographic reach. Revolut’s strategy of using its Lithuanian banking license to offer new products under EU financial passporting rules exemplifies its innovative approach to market entry. With the planned launch of mortgage products in Ireland, Revolut could capture significant market share from traditional banks, underscoring the importance of these institutions adapting to the evolving digital landscape to remain competitive. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesFintechTagsMonzoN26RevolutStarling Bank

Three UK nationals have pleaded guilty to operating otp[.]agency, a notorious online service that intercepted one-time passcodes (OTPs) to facilitate online account takeovers. Launched in November 2019, the service allowed scammers with stolen bank credentials to generate automated calls to victims, tricking them into sharing OTPs sent via SMS. These intercepted codes were then relayed to scammers, enabling unauthorized access to victims’ accounts. Short Narrative The UK National Crime Agency (NCA) identified and arrested the operators: Callum Picari, 22, from Essex; Vijayasidhurshan Vijayanathan, 21, from Buckinghamshire; and Aza Siddeeque, 19, also from Buckinghamshire. Despite initial shutdown efforts following exposure by a 2021 KrebsOnSecurity report, the service briefly continued operations before a final shutdown and the trio’s arrest in March 2021. During its operation, the service targeted over 12,500 victims. Key Points Accused: Callum Picari; Vijayasidhurshan Vijayanathan; Aza Siddeeque. Service Operations: otp[.]agency launched in 2019 to intercept OTPs for online account takeovers. Scammers input a victim’s phone number, triggering fake security calls to extract OTPs. Operators Arrested: The service was run by Callum Picari, Vijayasidhurshan Vijayanathan, and Aza Siddeeque, all of whom have pleaded guilty to their roles in the operation. Exposure and Shutdown: After being exposed in 2021, otp[.]agency briefly attempted to continue its operations but ultimately shut down following the arrests. Widespread Impact: The service targeted over 12,500 individuals during its 18-month activity span. Actionable Insight The case underscores the growing threat posed by cybercriminals exploiting OTP interception services to compromise online accounts. Authorities and cybersecurity experts emphasize the importance of vigilance against phishing schemes, particularly those involving fake alerts from financial institutions. Users should never provide personal information or OTPs to unsolicited callers and are advised to verify their account status directly through official channels if they receive suspicious communications. This incident also highlights the persistent risk of other similar services that remain operational, like SMSRanger, continuing to target unsuspecting victims. Report Cybercrime Activities to FinTelegram CategoriesCybercrimeTagsAza SiddeequeCallum PicariVijayasidhurshan Vijayanathan

Tigran Gambaryan, Head of Financial Crime Compliance at Binance, worked as a Special Agent for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the U.S. for approximately ten years before joining Binance. In February 2024, Gambaryan and Nadeem Anjarwalla, another Binance executive, were arrested in Nigeria on charges of money laundering and tax evasion. He has been detained in a Nigerian prison since then, facing health issues and legal challenges. Short Narrative Binance executive Tigran Gambaryan is pleading with a Nigerian court for bail and urgent medical treatment as his health continues to deteriorate amid a money laundering trial. Gambaryan, who suffers from a herniated disc and has developed pneumonia and malaria during his incarceration, requested surgery and the use of a wheelchair, which has repeatedly been denied. Despite his pleas, Nigerian prosecutors dispute the severity of his medical condition, claiming that prison officials are providing adequate care. Gambaryan, detained since April on charges of currency speculation and money laundering involving $35 million, denies all allegations. His employer, Binance, faces similar charges and also denies any wrongdoing. The trial has been adjourned to September 4 for a ruling on his bail application. Key Points The Case: Binance Nigeria Defendants: Binance Holdings Ltd, Tigran Gambaryan, Nadeem Anjarwalla – A British-Kenyan Binance executive initially detained but escaped custody in March 2024. Jurisdiction: Nigeria Health Concerns: Tigran Gambaryan, a Binance executive, is suffering from a herniated disc, pneumonia, and malaria while detained in Nigeria. His requests for surgery and a wheelchair have been denied, leading to claims of inadequate medical care. Legal Battle: Gambaryan and Binance are facing charges of currency speculation and money laundering totaling $35 million. Both parties deny the allegations. Court Actions: The judge has ordered prison officials to provide a wheelchair, but Gambaryan’s lawyer claims his client’s condition has worsened due to neglect and lack of access since the last court session. Next Steps: The trial is set to continue on September 4, when a ruling on Gambaryan’s bail application is expected. Actionable Insight The ongoing trial against Binance and its executive highlights the escalating scrutiny and regulatory challenges faced by cryptocurrency exchanges in various jurisdictions. This case underscores the importance for crypto companies to ensure robust compliance with local laws and regulations, as well as to be prepared for rigorous legal defenses. Moreover, it reflects the necessity for companies operating globally to anticipate and address potential legal and health-related risks for their employees. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCourt Cases Money Laundering NigeriaTagsBinanceBinance HoldingsNadeem AnjarwallaTigran Gambaryan

FinTelegram has uncovered yet another fake regulator—FINAEU. This fraudulent entity falsely claims to be an independent public supervisory authority overseeing the investment services market and other financial sectors in Europe, including crypto-asset services. On their website, fin-eu.com, they even boast about licensing over 85 brokers. However, this is completely false! The German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) recently issued a warning and confirmed that FINAEU is not a legitimate European securities regulator and does not oversee any financial companies. This fake regulator is part of a broader scheme where fraudsters pose as regulated financial service providers. ACTION NEEDED: Reject any offers or requests mentioning FINAEU as a supervisory authority. Report any encounters with this fake regulator to the police or public prosecutor. Whistleblowers Wanted! If you have any information about the operators behind FINAEU or other fake regulators, please come forward. Your insights are crucial in our fight against financial fraud! Stay vigilant and protect yourself from fraud! Report Scam Activities to FinTelegram CategoriesBaFin Fake RegulatorTagsFINAEU

The FinTelegram research team has identified a suspicious domain https://app-paymentgw.pgws2b.com currently deployed by several anonymously operated online casinos of Liernin Enterprises, including Malina Casino, Talismania, SlotUna, and others. This domain has been flagged due to its association with activities that potentially violate financial regulations and legal standards for online gambling. Details of the Warning Anonymous Operations and Lack of Transparency: The domain app-paymentgw.pgws2b.com is anonymously registered, which conceals the identity of its operators and raises significant red flags regarding its legitimacy. This lack of transparency is a common tactic employed by entities involved in illegal or unauthorized activities to evade detection by law enforcement and regulatory bodies. Association with Illicit Online Gambling: Investigations have linked this domain to Liernin Enterprises (previously known as Rabidi), a group operating a network of online casinos without proper regulatory oversight. These casinos are suspected of engaging in illegal gambling operations, which often include fraudulent activities, money laundering, and other financial crimes. Similarweb statistics show that in the last 28 days before August 30, 2024, alone, the domain was visited more than 557,000 times. Most of the visitors to the website are likely to be players at illegal online casinos. Almost 40% of them come from Germany, but also from Greece, the UK, Ireland, and Portugal (see screenshot on the right below). Risk of Financial Crime and Legal Liability: Engaging in transactions with domains linked to unauthorized or illegal operations can expose payment processors to significant financial and legal risks. There is a heightened risk of involvement in money laundering activities, which can lead to severe regulatory penalties and reputational damage. Potential Customer Harm and Data Breach Risks: Customers transacting through these platforms may be at risk of financial loss and data breaches. Anonymous domains are often used to obfuscate the true nature of their operations, leading to potential consumer fraud and theft of sensitive personal and financial information. Download the Rabidi Report here. Recommended Actions Immediate Suspension of Transactions: We strongly advise all payment processors to suspend any ongoing transactions associated with app-paymentgw.pgws2b.com and prevent future transactions to this domain until further notice. Enhanced Due Diligence: Conduct enhanced due diligence on any associated accounts or entities that have interacted with this domain to ensure compliance with anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF) regulations. Collaboration with Law Enforcement: Coordinate with relevant law enforcement agencies to report any suspicious activity linked to this domain and assist in ongoing investigations to dismantle illegal operations. Consumer Protection Measures: Inform your customers and clients about the risks associated with this domain and similar operations, and advise them to be cautious about their transactions online. Conclusion This warning serves as a critical reminder of the importance of vigilance and due diligence in preventing financial crimes and protecting consumers. By taking swift action against suspicious domains like app-paymentgw.pgws2b.com, payment processors can help safeguard the integrity of financial systems and contribute to the fight against cybercrime. Share Information If you have any information about the domain operators, associated casinos, or facilitating payment processors, please share it with FinTelegram via our whistleblower platform, Whistle42. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesIllegal Payment Services Illegal Payment ServicesTagsLiernin EnterprisesMalina CasinoSlotUnaTalismania

We are pleased to announce the release of our comprehensive Rabidi Report, now available for download in PDF format. This detailed report provides an in-depth analysis of the collapse of Rabidi N.V., a once-thriving online casino operator, and the emergence of its successor, Liernin Enterprises Ltd. The findings reveal a troubling pattern of regulatory evasion, financial misconduct, and the opaque disappearance of digital assets—a scenario that is becoming increasingly common in cyberspace. Executive Briefing: Key Findings of the Rabidi Report The Rabidi Report exposes the alarming reality of how a globally operating company, with a turnover of several hundred million euros and a profit of several million euros, can simply dissolve its assets and vanish from the regulatory radar. The report highlights several critical areas of concern: Asset Disappearance and Regulatory Evasion: Rabidi N.V., once a prominent name in the online gambling industry, managed to dissolve its assets through complex corporate maneuvers involving multiple Cyprus-based entities, such as Tilaros Limited and Tranello Limited. Despite generating substantial revenues and profits, Rabidi N.V. declared bankruptcy in May 2024 and transferred its operations to Liernin Enterprises Ltd., effectively disappearing without fulfilling its obligations to creditors and regulators. The Role of Cyprus-Based Entities: The investigation reveals that Cyprus-based entities, which manage trademarks and financial transactions, have the true operational control of Rabidi N.V. and Liernin Enterprises Ltd. This structure allows the companies to operate without direct regulatory oversight, using a network of shell companies to obscure the flow of funds and ownership. Connection to the ButOn Group: Evidence suggests that both Rabidi N.V. and its successor, Liernin Enterprises Ltd., are part of a larger scheme orchestrated by the ButOn Group, led by Denys Butko. Through shared trademark ownership and payment processing channels, the ButOn Group appears to have consolidated control over various online gambling operations, utilizing offshore jurisdictions to evade compliance with international regulations. Integration of Regulated and Unregulated Payment Processors: The report also uncovers the integration of both regulated and unregulated payment processors to facilitate transactions for Rabidi N.V. and Liernin Enterprises Ltd. This blend of financial channels, including FCA-regulated entities like MiFinity and various crypto payment providers, raises significant concerns about potential money laundering and financial misconduct. Anonymity and Cryptocurrency Transactions: Liernin Enterprises Ltd. continues to operate anonymously, accepting direct cryptocurrency payments without appropriate licensing. This strategy not only complicates regulatory oversight but also poses a risk for illicit activities due to the anonymity associated with cryptocurrency transactions. The New Norm in Cyberspace: Disappearing Companies and Digital Assets The Rabidi N.V. case is not an isolated incident; it is indicative of a broader trend in cyberspace where companies and their digital assets—such as websites, domains, and digital products—can vanish overnight. These entities exploit the digital nature of their operations, rapidly dissolving or transferring assets to new jurisdictions with minimal accountability. This emerging pattern poses significant challenges for regulators, financial institutions, and consumers alike, highlighting the need for more robust regulatory frameworks and international cooperation. Download the Rabidi Report For those interested in a deeper understanding of how Rabidi N.V. managed to evade regulatory oversight and dissolve its assets, we encourage you to download the full Rabidi Report. The report is available in PDF format and provides a detailed analysis of the company’s operations, financial dealings, and the network of entities involved. Click here to download the Rabidi Report (PDF) Call to Action for Whistleblowers FinTelegram remains committed to uncovering the truth and promoting transparency in the financial and cyberfinance sectors. We urge anyone with insider information about Rabidi N.V., Liernin Enterprises Ltd., or related entities to come forward. Your insights are invaluable in helping us further develop this report and shed light on these opaque operations. Whistleblowers can submit information confidentially through our secure platform, Whistle42. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesReports tickerTagsLiernin EnterprisesMiFinityRabidiRabidi GroupTilarosTranello

The Alice Guo money laundering case in the Philippines exemplifies the complex intersection of local politics, international crime, and financial misconduct in the Philippines. As a former mayor of Bamban, Guo allegedly leveraged her position to facilitate a sophisticated network of illegal activities, including human trafficking and cyberscams, while maintaining a facade of legitimate business operations. The case has drawn national attention. Short Narrative Dismissed Bamban Mayor Alice Guo, also known as Guo Hua Ping, is facing serious money laundering charges filed by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), and the Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Commission (PAOCC) in the Philippines. The charges accuse Guo and her associates, including her sister Shiela Guo (Zhang Mier), father Angelito Guo (Jian Zhong Guo), accountant Nancy Gamo, and Philippine offshore gaming operator (POGO) incorporator Cassandra Li Ong, of violating the Anti-Money Laundering Act. The case involves laundering over 100 million pesos (approximately US$1.8 million) linked to various crimes, including estafa, human trafficking, and securities fraud. The authorities have also moved to seize assets worth 6 billion pesos, including real estate, luxury cars, and a helicopter, believed to have been acquired through illicit activities. Guo, who fled the country after being dismissed from her position, is currently wanted by the Senate for evading hearings related to her alleged connections to Chinese criminal syndicates. She denies all allegations, claiming she is a natural-born Philippine citizen facing “malicious accusations.” Key Points The Defendants: Alice Guo, Shiela Guo (Zhang Mier), Angelito Guo (Jian Zhong Guo), accountant Nancy Gamo, and POGO incorporator Cassandra Li Ong Money Laundering Charges: Alice Guo and her associates face multiple counts of money laundering filed by the NBI, AMLC, and PAOCC. Alleged Crimes: The case involves laundering over 100 million pesos linked to crimes such as estafa, human trafficking, and securities violations. Asset Forfeiture: Authorities seek to seize assets worth 6 billion pesos, including properties, luxury vehicles, and a helicopter. Fugitive Status: Guo is currently a fugitive, evading Senate hearings and denying all charges as politically motivated. Actionable Insight This case highlights the rigorous actions taken by Philippine authorities to combat money laundering and financial crime, especially involving high-profile individuals and alleged connections to international criminal networks. For compliance officers and financial institutions, this serves as a reminder to strengthen due diligence and monitoring processes to detect and prevent similar illicit activities. Read more: The article in PhilStar Global is here. Read the article in the Jakarta Post here. Share Information If you have information about money laundering activities, please report it to us through Whistle42, our whistleblower system. Report Money Laundering Activities CategoriesCourt Cases Money Laundering PhilippinesTagsAlice GuoAngelito GuoCassandra Li OngGuo Hua PingJian Zhong GuoNancy GamoShiela GuoZhang Mier

The Israeli government reported seizing 190 Binance accounts linked to terrorism since 2021. In 2023, the U.S. FinCEN accused Binance of failing to take action to curtail Gaza-based militant group Hamas and other terrorist groups. The new controversy surrounding Binance and the alleged freezing of Palestinian funds has sparked intense debate in the cryptocurrency community. Here’s an overview of the current situation: The Allegations Ray Youssef, CEO of rival crypto platform Noones, claimed on X that Binance had seized all funds belonging to Palestinian users at the request of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). He alleged that Binance refused to return the funds even after appeals were made. Youssef shared a letter in Hebrew from Israel’s National Bureau for Counter-Terror Financing to support his claims. Binance’s Response Binance has strongly denied these allegations: CEO Richard Teng dismissed the claims as “FUD” (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt). The company stated that only a limited number of user accounts linked to illicit funds were blocked from transacting. Binance emphasized that it complies with internationally accepted anti-money laundering legislation, like any other financial institution. Context and Implications This controversy highlights several important issues: Geopolitical tensions: The situation reflects the complex relationship between global financial regulations and geopolitical conflicts. Cryptocurrency principles: Many users view this as a potential betrayal of cryptocurrency’s decentralized, anti-establishment roots. Regulatory compliance: Binance’s defense hinges on the necessity of legal compliance in an increasingly scrutinized industry. Community Reaction The crypto community’s response has been mixed: Some users have called for a boycott of Binance. Others have expressed skepticism about centralized exchanges and advocated for decentralized alternatives. The incident has reignited debates about the centralization of cryptocurrency exchanges and the importance of self-custody. This controversy is another reminder of the ongoing tensions between regulatory compliance and the preservation of cryptocurrency’s founding principles of decentralization and financial autonomy. Report Suspicious Crypto Activities to FinTelegram CategoriesCrypto Schemes tickerTagsBinanceNoonesRay YoussefRichard Teng