Blab Crypto
Chinas Procuratorate Proposes Presumption of Money-Laundering When Mixers or Privacy Coins Are Used
China’s Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP) has issued a set of recommendations that could reshape the country’s approach to cryptocurrency‑related money laundering. Published in the Procuratorate Daily, the proposal treats the use of crypto mixers and privacy coins as prima facie evidence of criminal intent, and it introduces new evidentiary rules, a state platform for confiscated digital assets, and a framework for international cooperation.
The recommendations arrive as China remains the world’s largest hub for crypto‑laundering activity. Chainalysis data cited in the SPP article shows that Chinese‑language money‑laundering networks processed $16.15 billion in illicit crypto flows in 2025—about 20 % of the global total. In 2024, Chinese prosecutors charged more than 3,000 individuals in crypto‑related money‑laundering cases, underscoring the scale of the problem.
The proposal addresses a mismatch between blockchain technology and existing legislation. Currently, most crypto‑related cases in China are prosecuted under a “concealment of criminal proceeds” statute, which is less stringent than the country’s money‑laundering law. The new framework would apply the stricter statute to any case where a suspect uses a mixer or a privacy coin.
Key elements of the proposal include: 1. Presumption of Guilt – Using a mixer or a privacy coin, or selling crypto assets at non‑market prices, would automatically establish money‑laundering intent unless the defense can provide reasonable counter‑evidence. 2. Blockchain Self‑Identification – Public blockchain explorer data that matches transaction hashes would be considered reliable evidence by default. 3. Shifting the Burden of Proof – Prosecutors would present a transaction‑chain analysis report, and the defense would need to disprove the findings. 4. One Case – Two Checks – Investigators would be required to search for money‑laundering indicators in every major crime investigation.
While the recommendations are not yet law, they signal a potential shift in China’s regulatory approach. The SPP’s authors argue that the new rules would help prosecutors overcome technical hurdles posed by privacy coins, decentralized exchanges, and cross‑chain transfers.
The proposal also tackles the practical problem of confiscating crypto assets. Because trading of virtual assets is banned in China, authorities lack a legal mechanism to liquidate seized coins. The SPP suggests creating a state platform that would store and value confiscated assets. A special expert committee would use blockchain data and international exchange prices to determine asset values.
In addition, the SPP outlines plans for international cooperation. China would seek judicial agreements with other countries to track and freeze crypto assets that move across borders. The proposal mentions a blockchain‑based judicial cooperation chain that could trace and recover assets transferred abroad.
The impact of these proposals could be significant for global anti‑money‑laundering (AML) efforts. By treating mixers and privacy coins as presumptive evidence, China would align its legal standards more closely with those adopted by other jurisdictions that have tightened crypto‑AML rules. The state platform for confiscated assets could become a model for other countries facing similar challenges.
However, several questions remain. The SPP has not yet enacted the recommendations, and it is unclear how quickly they would be incorporated into China’s legal framework. The effectiveness of the proposed international cooperation also depends on the willingness of other nations to enter into cross‑border agreements.
As of now, China’s crypto‑crime enforcement continues to rely on existing statutes, but the SPP’s recommendations indicate a clear intent to strengthen legal tools against laundering. The next steps will involve legislative debate, potential court rulings, and the establishment of the proposed state platform and international cooperation mechanisms.
The developments underscore the evolving regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies and the increasing focus on privacy‑enhancing technologies as potential tools for illicit activity. Stakeholders in the global crypto ecosystem will be watching closely to see how China’s proposals influence both domestic enforcement and international AML cooperation.
The recommendations arrive as China remains the world’s largest hub for crypto‑laundering activity. Chainalysis data cited in the SPP article shows that Chinese‑language money‑laundering networks processed $16.15 billion in illicit crypto flows in 2025—about 20 % of the global total. In 2024, Chinese prosecutors charged more than 3,000 individuals in crypto‑related money‑laundering cases, underscoring the scale of the problem.
The proposal addresses a mismatch between blockchain technology and existing legislation. Currently, most crypto‑related cases in China are prosecuted under a “concealment of criminal proceeds” statute, which is less stringent than the country’s money‑laundering law. The new framework would apply the stricter statute to any case where a suspect uses a mixer or a privacy coin.
Key elements of the proposal include: 1. Presumption of Guilt – Using a mixer or a privacy coin, or selling crypto assets at non‑market prices, would automatically establish money‑laundering intent unless the defense can provide reasonable counter‑evidence. 2. Blockchain Self‑Identification – Public blockchain explorer data that matches transaction hashes would be considered reliable evidence by default. 3. Shifting the Burden of Proof – Prosecutors would present a transaction‑chain analysis report, and the defense would need to disprove the findings. 4. One Case – Two Checks – Investigators would be required to search for money‑laundering indicators in every major crime investigation.
While the recommendations are not yet law, they signal a potential shift in China’s regulatory approach. The SPP’s authors argue that the new rules would help prosecutors overcome technical hurdles posed by privacy coins, decentralized exchanges, and cross‑chain transfers.
The proposal also tackles the practical problem of confiscating crypto assets. Because trading of virtual assets is banned in China, authorities lack a legal mechanism to liquidate seized coins. The SPP suggests creating a state platform that would store and value confiscated assets. A special expert committee would use blockchain data and international exchange prices to determine asset values.
In addition, the SPP outlines plans for international cooperation. China would seek judicial agreements with other countries to track and freeze crypto assets that move across borders. The proposal mentions a blockchain‑based judicial cooperation chain that could trace and recover assets transferred abroad.
The impact of these proposals could be significant for global anti‑money‑laundering (AML) efforts. By treating mixers and privacy coins as presumptive evidence, China would align its legal standards more closely with those adopted by other jurisdictions that have tightened crypto‑AML rules. The state platform for confiscated assets could become a model for other countries facing similar challenges.
However, several questions remain. The SPP has not yet enacted the recommendations, and it is unclear how quickly they would be incorporated into China’s legal framework. The effectiveness of the proposed international cooperation also depends on the willingness of other nations to enter into cross‑border agreements.
As of now, China’s crypto‑crime enforcement continues to rely on existing statutes, but the SPP’s recommendations indicate a clear intent to strengthen legal tools against laundering. The next steps will involve legislative debate, potential court rulings, and the establishment of the proposed state platform and international cooperation mechanisms.
The developments underscore the evolving regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies and the increasing focus on privacy‑enhancing technologies as potential tools for illicit activity. Stakeholders in the global crypto ecosystem will be watching closely to see how China’s proposals influence both domestic enforcement and international AML cooperation.
