Crossroads signifying crypto’s sanctions

Crypto’s Sanctions Crossroads: Why Compliance is Now Geopolitics

Posted by:

|

On:

Crypto sanctions risk is no longer a theoretical concern but a real and growing challenge for Web3 businesses. The UK Office for Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) published its Cryptoassets Threat Assessment report in July 2025, spotlighting key risks to crypto firms linked to Russian, Iranian, and North Korean designated persons (DPs). The report urges UK cryptoasset firms to boost compliance efforts using smarter, risk-based approaches and blockchain analysis tools.

👀 Quick answers — Jump to section

  1. The Sanctions Compliance Gap: Under-Reporting and Delays
  2. Due Diligence Red Flags That Cry for Attention
  3. The Big Three Threats to UK Crypto Sanctions Compliance
  4. What UK Crypto Firms Should Do Next
  5. Final Thoughts: Crypto Can’t Escape Geopolitics
  6. FAQs

The Sanctions Compliance Gap: Under-Reporting and Delays

OFSI’s report paints a clear picture: UK crypto firms have consistently under-reported suspected breaches since August 2022. Despite a jump in reports post-April 2024, about 7% of all suspected sanction breaches involved cryptoasset firms suggesting many incidents fly under the radar. Delayed attribution and indirect exposure to sanctioned entities also contribute to compliance slip-ups.

In simpler terms, some crypto firms are like those people who only find out they’re late after the party is over except here, “late” means failing to freeze illicit funds or block suspicious transactions promptly.

To prevent such oversights, OFSI recommends firms adopt a risk-based compliance framework weighing counterparty risk, transaction patterns, and “hop count” depth (how many steps transactions take on the blockchain). Moreover, sanctioned parties often try to hide by moving assets to fresh addresses a crypto version of changing disguises so firms need to monitor linked wallets carefully.

Due Diligence Red Flags That Cry for Attention

OFSI points to several red flags that should trigger enhanced diligence, especially when two or more appear together. These are signals that things might be fishier than your average sushi bar:

  • Large or unusual transactions right after sanctions announcements
  • Links to counterparties connected to DPs
  • Interactions with services that skip Know Your Customer (KYC) checks
  • Use of anonymity-focused cryptocurrencies (privacy coins)
  • Cross-chain transfers or “chain hopping” to privacy-centric blockchains
  • Operations in jurisdictions ignoring UK-aligned sanctions

Ignoring these signs is a recipe for disaster.

The Big Three Threats to UK Crypto Sanctions Compliance

The report identifies three main geopolitical troublemakers:

1. Exposure to Russian DPs
Garantex, a designated crypto exchange hit by UK sanctions in May 2022, remains a prime example. After an OFSI disruption in March 2025, it resurfaced under the name Grinex, operating out of Kyrgyzstan with a rouble-backed stablecoin called A7A5. OFSI sees this rebranding as a classic “cloak and dagger” move to dodge sanctions. Things escalated quickly: Grinex processed roughly $9.3 billion in just four months after launching. Think of it as a bad sequel that nobody asked for but everyone watches.

2. North Korean Cyberactivity
DPRK-linked hackers are aggressively targeting UK crypto firms. In February 2025, North Korean hackers pulled off a $1.5 billion crypto heist on the Bybit exchange the largest ever recorded. These hackers don’t just steal crypto; they’re also after sensitive company data, leading to risks of misuse or leaks. OFSI warns that hiring IT workers remotely without solid vetting could unwittingly invite these cyber saboteurs.

3. Iranian Cryptoasset Firms Tied to DPs
Iran has steadily built a crypto ecosystem since 2019, including a digital Rial launched in 2024. Crypto helps Iran sidestep heavy international sanctions. OFSI suspects some Iranian firms with ties to DPs facilitate payments through the UK, often using Nobitex (a sanctioned entity). This looks like Iranian crypto’s attempt to break out of financial isolation using crypto’s “digital sleight of hand.”

What UK Crypto Firms Should Do Next

The report’s key warning: sanctions risk is systemic and complex. Routine transactions can hide anything from state-funded evasion to billion-dollar hacks. OFSI urges firms to ditch compliance as mere box-ticking and treat it as a core intelligence function.

To stay afloat, firms should:

  • Invest in specialist blockchain analytics to detect “chain hopping” and shady wallets
  • Monitor newly linked addresses to known DPs vigilantly
  • Take a risk-based approach considering transaction behavior and counterparty risk
  • Report suspected breaches immediately and consistently
  • Avoid doing business with anonymity-enhanced cryptocurrencies or unclear counterparties

In plain terms, crypto firms need to swap their compliance blindfolds for detective hats.

Final Thoughts: Crypto Can’t Escape Geopolitics

Blockchain’s transparency was once hailed as a blessing. Now, it’s a double-edged sword. Sanctioned actors use privacy coins, cross-chain moves, and rebranded exchanges to blur their tracks. Meanwhile, firms oblivious to these tactics risk hefty fines and reputation hits.

Simply put: crypto is no longer just a tech game it’s high stakes geopolitics. For UK crypto firms, survival demands vigilance, smart analytics, and a readiness to adapt in real-time.


FAQs

Q: What is a risk-based approach to sanctions compliance?
A: It means assessing the risk tied to counterparties and transactions and focusing more resources where suspicious activity is likelier.

Q: Why is chain hopping a problem?
A: Moving crypto assets between blockchains can hide the origin and destination, making it harder to trace illicit funds.

Q: Are privacy coins banned?
A: Not banned outright, but their anonymity features raise red flags for sanctions evasion and require extra scrutiny.

Q: How can firms detect new addresses linked to DPs?
A: Use specialized blockchain analytics software that tracks transaction patterns and wallet linkages.

Q: Is reporting delays a big deal?
A: Yes, because delayed reports can let illicit funds move or be spent before firms can act, violating sanctions.

_____________________________________________________________

Get your business referenced on ChatGPT with our free 3-Step Marketing Playbook.

Want to know how we can guarantee a mighty boost to your traffic, rank, reputation and authority in you niche?

Tap here to chat to me and I’ll show you how we make it happen.

If you’ve enjoyed reading today’s blog, please share our blog link below.

Do you have a blog on business and marketing that you’d like to share on influxjuice.com/blog? Contact me at rob@influxjuice.com.

Latest Blogs