Someone Mysteriously Sent Almost $1 Billion In Bitcoin (vice.com) 147
Someone transferred bitcoins worth close to $1 billion on Tuesday morning, a move that was public for everyone to see while the identities of the sender and receiver remain unknown. Motherboard reports: Big money moves hiding in plain sight tend to be events of some interest among Bitcoiners. Decrypt noted that the sending wallet was recognized as the largest Bitcoin wallet not known to be associated with a business such as an exchange. This means that it could belong to a wealthy private individual, or it could really belong to an exchange, investor, or other business that is simply currently unknown. There's no obligation to publicize which Bitcoin addresses one controls, and if nobody else puts two and two together, one's activities may remain shrouded in pseudonymity.
If the Bitcoin wallet belongs to someone legit, then it's likely the transfer was internal to the business, or it represents a large purchase of goods or services, or the sale of bitcoins. Regardless of what it was, the business would be expected to pay taxes in any relevant circumstances. If the transfer wasn't legit, well, pseudonymity and the ability to freely move money without the pre-approval of an authority is the point of Bitcoin. That being said, law enforcement is certainly aware of Bitcoin at this stage in the game and if I'm talking about this transfer then I'm sure more important people could be, too.
If the Bitcoin wallet belongs to someone legit, then it's likely the transfer was internal to the business, or it represents a large purchase of goods or services, or the sale of bitcoins. Regardless of what it was, the business would be expected to pay taxes in any relevant circumstances. If the transfer wasn't legit, well, pseudonymity and the ability to freely move money without the pre-approval of an authority is the point of Bitcoin. That being said, law enforcement is certainly aware of Bitcoin at this stage in the game and if I'm talking about this transfer then I'm sure more important people could be, too.
duck and cover (Score:1)
I doubt that money was spent on Nintendos.
Re: duck and cover (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
. . . Why did someone give someone else a billion buckeroo Disney dollars?
What did they get in exchange for it?
Unless this was just freely given with not expectation of compensation or exchange for anything, suuuuuuuure, it's not money. But if I was giving someone else 101857.24568009 BTC then I would most certainly expect something in return. You know, LIKE MONEY.
Re: (Score:2)
Or a second wallet owned by exactly the same person as the first one.
Re: (Score:2)
The "appearance of value" can cause as much damage as the real thing, if not more.
This is all fun and games until a malicious actor spooks the market into a disastrous reaction, affecting real money.
It wouldn't even have to be malicious, it could be some nitwit doing something stupid and triggering a massive overreaction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It was Putin paying the Taliban to kill more US troops.
It was Trump, paying Putin for the 2020 election. (He had to borrow half, and he's now broke, BTW.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:duck and cover (Score:4, Informative)
It was Colonel Mustard in the Study with the Candlestick.
Re: (Score:2)
Not so fast--I happen to have the Colonel Mustard card. Now I accuse Miss Plum with the candlestick in the study.
With this amount of money (Score:3)
With this amount of money it may soon be that governments will take real interest into how to track down the parts in such transactions.
Re:With this amount of money (Score:5, Insightful)
What amount of money?
A billion in bitcoins is like a billion in stock. Do you think you can monetize that? Imagine you held a billion in Facebook stock and threw that onto the market NOW. Do you think you'd get a billion dollars in return?
Re: (Score:2)
The average *daily* trading volume for FB is ~$6B ($227 * 27M shares traded), so yes, you'd probably get damn near $1B, especially if you spread the sale over hours/days in order to minimize the impact on volume, which is what anyone trading large volume does.
This is known as liquidity, by the way, and BTC has very high liquidity.
Re: (Score:2)
How much BTC is traded every day?
Re:With this amount of money (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
We aren't talking trading volume, we're talking about conversion to some real currency. $6B in bitcoin is not converted to other currencies daily. In order for that to happen someone must be BUYING $6B in bitcoin daily. The point is simple - in order for $1B to be converted to cash, $1B worth of bitcoin must be purchased using real currency. No exchange can remotely buy up that amount of bitcoin at once, and the public in general is not buying bitcoin at that rate daily.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not talking about shuffling crap about, I'm talking about taking that billion and pulling it out of the market. Even if you tried to spread that out over days or even weeks, it would get noticed by the other big traders and they'd immediately get REALLY nervous.
Re: (Score:2)
With this amount of money it may soon be that governments will take real interest into how to track down the parts in such transactions.
I sometimes think that when it comes tax time I should mention that I have a Shulker box full of Emerald Blocks (albeit limited to that one server), but the ATO has no detectable sense of humor and wouldn't get the reference.
(If they did have a sense of humor, they might ask for a bunch of Wither Skulls.)
Re: (Score:3)
They already know how to track Bitcoin transactions.
Re: (Score:2)
There are already several companies who do this commercially, using hundreds of ordinary-looking nodes scattered throughout the network to figure out where transactions are initially broadcast from using statistical analysis and timing attacks. Also, a lot of insiders know each other and aren't always careful who they brag/complain to or sleep with.
Is it really anonymous ? (Score:5, Informative)
These wallets can try to hide their trail, there could be anonymizers willing to transfer funds, but still all it would take is one careless transaction and it can never be undone.
Re: Is it really anonymous ? (Score:1)
Uh ya. Bitcoin isn't anonymous.
Anyone using it for criminal acts, to avoid taxes or just generally for privacy reasons is simply ignorant and kinda dumb for not learning such a basic fact before seeking privacy in a public ledger system.
Re: (Score:2)
It can be anonymous...it really depends. Say a guy acquires bitcoins through mining them...there's no real way to tell who mined them besides maybe an IP address, but IP addresses don't lead you to specific people all that well. Then that guy pays a hooker in bitcoin, and the hooker doesn't keep any books. That hooker likes crack, and buys some on silkroad 11.0. The crack dealer doesn't keep any kind of records connecting bitcoins to customer addresses, and he's eventually caught, bitcoins in tow.
All we kno
Re:Is it really anonymous ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Nothing to stop governments to note down sending/receiving wallets
There are numerous mixing services that combine bitcoins from many wallets and then transfer them to new or different wallets.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends where the operator of the service is located. Bitcoin is a truly international system, and if someone is operating such a service in a location where it's not illegal to do so then there's really not much that can be done about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While that's true, money laundering is one of those things that is widely frowned upon.. legally.
And yet so many people go to such great lengths to accomplish it. Criminal gangs launder a LOT of money on a regular basis. This was probably too big of a sum (especially all at once) for it to be a criminal organization though, since they understandably don't like to attract attention.
Re: Is it really anonymous ? (Score:2)
There are countries that do not consider bitcoin âoemoneyâ and therefore it cannot be money laundering as such.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course. But most money laundering operations are secret. Laundering bitcoin is like putting a sign on the door "Money laundering here."
So, (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I let you in on a secret: Nope, it's not. It's like conservatives complaining about fags during the day, and during the night you find them cruising the public toilets in the park. Yeah, officially it's a badbadbadbadbad thing, but face it, we need to stash that money somewhere eventually...
Re: Is it really anonymous ? (Score:2)
It's only illegal if it's done to launder money. Other legitimate uses, like privacy, are fine. Where people run into problems running mixing services is usually related to KYC rules. If you're letting people dump $10k into your service without getting their id, you're going to run afoul of the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you run such a mixing service in a country the name of which ends in -stan and not in Ohio.
You do that where the police has real crimes to fight and governments have zero interest to hunt down criminals that only hurt foreigners. For reference, see Nigeria scam.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the court ordered untangling would happen.
Good luck enforcing your subpoena in Uzbekistan.
Re: (Score:2)
These wallets can try to hide their trail, there could be anonymizers willing to transfer funds, but still all it would take is one careless transaction and it can never be undone.
In the banking industry they used to call this "Smurfing" no lie.
Re: (Score:2)
For small-ish amounts you could use a decentralized bitcoin mixer, (Chaumian CoinJoin), but I doubt that would work with any efficiency for very large amounts.
Re: (Score:2)
What if the wallet holder is really a government?
Taxes, BTC "value", and account transfers. (Score:2)
Why quote irs.gov? Who says any of these people are in the United States and subject to US tax regulations?
This is absurd.
Someone transferred their magic numbers from one place to another. If you want to pretend it's worth a billion dollars* then it went from Account A to account Z -- like when you transfer your $50 from Savings to Checking accounts -- and there's still nothing to see here. Nobody "bought" $1B worth of goods and services, lol.
E
* If anyone wanted to dump BTC that some idiot thinks is "wor
Re: Taxes, BTC "value", and account transfers. (Score:1)
Why would a huge sale deflate value?
By definition for every seller there is a buyer. If the sale price was at market then nothing happens to general BTC value. If below market, BTC might drop a little and go up if above.
I've always thought BTC was silly but it still must follow the laws of supply and a demand. A large sale in and of itself will not cause the price to drop if there is a matching buyer.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
> Why would a huge sale deflate value?
Well it's like this. If you have 1 BTC for sale, your selling it won't change the asking/bidding price much. It will remove your (top) bid and the next one is not likely that far lower. If you have 100 BTC for sale, almost similar, but enough people bidding to buy 0.0001BTC etc. will be removed from the list and the next lower down then gets it, etc. until now the price is lower.
For one billion dollars you're going to run through enough buyers that the price would
Re: (Score:3)
Who's to say it was a sale at all?
Someone may have simply transferred the coins between wallets that they control.
Re: (Score:1)
That's a big if. A large sale implies an increase in supply. Why would there be a matching increase in demand?
This case does look special. It doesn't look like a market sale, but rather some kind of transfer. The recipient of the bitcoin may start selling, which would depress prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Taxes, BTC "value", and account transfers. (Score:5, Interesting)
I did a bunch of transfers at a casino in Vegas once (not going to say which one, or when). I discovered that the machine that takes bills and spits out coins was right next to the machine that takes coins and spits out bills. It was kind of like playing a slot machine where you win every pull, and are even at the end. Fun, until they kicked me out.
Re:Taxes, BTC "value", and account transfers. (Score:4, Funny)
I can't be the only one who had a sudden urge to kludgineer a rig for them feeding into each other.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not.
Re: (Score:2)
I did something like that on a cruise ship casino for a while, except I bet mine was even more fun and exciting:
The machine was broken and about 10% of the time, spat out an extra bill. If you put in 100, it would give 3x20, 2x10, 3x5, 5x1... and it was random which bill it would spit out. Contrary to my experience with bill counters though, it seemed to have problems when the bills were really worn out, as opposed to crisp, which weighted it towards 1s.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah. I put in dirty money for sure, but what came out was just as dirty.
Re: (Score:2)
totally anonymous.... right (Score:4, Interesting)
And for anyone who thinks that bitcoin actually gives anonymity..... the truth is that it'll keep your identity a secret right up to the point that a modern tax agency or intelligence agency decides that they want to know who you are. After that, your cherished anonymity will last approximately 10-15 seconds.
Also....in terms of the agency that I least want to piss off. It's not the CIA, the FBI, the NSA or the FSB. It's the IRS. Learn where the real power lies.....
Re: totally anonymous.... right (Score:3)
Could have been north Korea transferring money to avoid sanctions
Re: (Score:2)
Governments don't tax themselves. Quite likely a transaction of this magnitude is a nation state that is unable to use real currency. North Korea has been mentioned already, or Iran.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes it illegal?
The owners of the source and destination wallet are not known, both wallets could be owned by the same person. There are no taxes due if you move your own assets from one holding location to another.
The location of the wallet owner(s) is not known, they could be anywhere in the world. Tax laws vary in every country, and you are only required to obey the tax laws of the countries in which you are either resident or doing business in. The wallet owner may be in a country where no taxes a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you're American, Hungarian, Eritrean or Myanmarian.
Re: (Score:3)
US criminals don't care about the three letter agencies. They're criminals.
The IRS gets a lot of information from three-letter law enforcement/intelligence agencies but that's a two-way street. If any of them catch wind of your criminal enterprises, the others are soon to find out, so the key is to stay off of everyone's radar, not just either the IRS or the FBI et al. Every criminal think's they're slick, but the questions are how slick, and for how long. Crime is always about not getting caught.
That said, this was an awful big, conspicuous transaction for it to be something i
Based on the clues given... (Score:2)
...if I had to put my chips somewhere, I'd say North Korea is behind the transaction [technologyreview.com].
North Korea (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's an awfully expensive funeral. But I loved him in "The Interview" so I guess he's worth it.
Money Laundering Laws (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious, at what point would miners become liable for helping process transactions which violate various local laws.
the same time that Visa and MasterCard are held libel for doing so with prepaid credit cards.
Re: (Score:2)
Visa and Mastercard know who their customers are.
Bitcoin miners literally do not (and most people don't mine, and they are all only dealing with already-anonymised transaction data, not actually processing or facilitating anything).
It'd be like suing Sage because someone happened to use it when they were fiddling the accounts, or suing GMail because someone used it to send a kidnap ransom demand (even if they co-operated 100% in supplying all the information they had).
I'm no Bitcoin fan, but it would be lau
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're missing the obvious. (Score:1)
I have it on good authority (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They're going to go on a Crusade in order to Invoke Prejudice. They hope to Cleanse the world of Stone-Throwing Devils and Imprison some Pradesh Gypsies. It is a questionable form of Jihad to be certain.
Why the fiat currency translation? (Score:3, Informative)
Is the point of calling it "$1 Billion" just a sensational headline for clicks? (BTW I assume that $ = USD...)
More accurately it could have been described as "Someone transferred 101,857 BTC". What's wrong about that?
Re:Why the fiat currency translation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of us don't know what 1 BTC is currently worth, and don't care. The element of general interest here is not how many BTC were transferred, but their value in real money that you can use to pay rent or buy munitions.
Re: (Score:2)
There's nowhere you can pay in BTC for either rent or munitions and BTC has no value in real money except what a broker will give you RIGHT FN NOW.
So what you're saying is a broker will give me money right now which I can use to pay rent or buy munitions. Got it.
What's your point again?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"bitcoins have no real value"
If someone values something, it has value. You can't pay your rent with gold or uranium either, but but have value.
Re:Why the fiat currency translation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that bitcoin is so volatile means that stating value in another currency is fairly meaningless and likely misleading. So the opposite of informative.
Re: (Score:2)
Is the point of calling it "$1 Billion" just a sensational headline for clicks? (BTW I assume that $ = USD...)
More accurately it could have been described as "Someone transferred 101,857 BTC". What's wrong about that?
Why wouldn't you consider the greater ramifications or equivalent value? It is worth almost a billion dollars, so saying so isn't sensationalism at all, it's simply translating an arcane unit into a more widely understood one. You might also consider that the value of BTC has fluctuated dramatically. I can remember a time when this transaction would have been worth more like a hundred grand. A billion dollars is a lot more interesting to a lot of people than would be $100k, or 100k BTC.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn... (Score:2)
...money wasn't supposed to go out until after the hit...
Re: (Score:2)
It was. Someone really wanted Carl Reiner dead.
It was supposed to be that "other guy," but Mandarin translates very poorly into English if you go through Armenian, then Korean, then Faroese on the way.
Caaaarl!
1,000,000,000.00 (Score:2)
Putin is delivered the ultimate destruction of America. (without ever having fired a single shell)
Trump finally gets to be a "real boy"
Russia? (Score:2)
Russia to the Taliban? Even better, Russia to Donald Trump? I'm kidding, of course.
So we're wondering who... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't anonymous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to the IRS.
Monero = privacy (Score:2)
taxes? (Score:2)
I do not see proof of sale of any kind.
Re: (Score:2)
Alternate Headlines (Score:2)
Found what was purchased (Score:3)
That's a lot (Score:2)
...of wine and women. KISS must have been getting desperate in their old age.
Everyone is missing the bigger picture! (Score:4, Informative)
For the sake of simplicity and readability, I'm calling these wallets A, B, C, etc.
On 2020-02-25 15:41, wallet A transferred 111857.24579800 BTC, with 5000 BTC going to wallet X and the rest going to wallet B. [blockchain.com]
On 2020-04-01 13:55, wallet B transferred 106857.24571944 BTC , with 5000 BTC going to wallet Y and the rest going to wallet C. [blockchain.com]
On 2020-06-26 17:56, wallet C transferred 101857.24568009 BTC, with 5000 BTC going to wallet Z and the rest going to wallet D. [blockchain.com]
Are you beginning to see that there's a pattern to these transactions? This latest "mysterious" transaction is but a single tree in a forest. Would anyone like to bet me that we won't see wallet D making a similar outgoing transfer sometime around August?
Allow me to suggest that wallets A, B, C, and D are likely all owned by the same person or entity... if that is the case, then what we actually see is that they've spent 5000 BTC on each of those dates. In fact it's entirely possible that they also own wallets X, Y, and Z, and merely wanted an additional layer of transactions to help insulate themselves from when those bitcoins were actually spent.
Worrisome (Score:2)
If a $1B anonymous transfer doesn't worry you at some fundamental level, it should.
Where my tulips at?? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. I don't understand why they think a wallet to wallet transfer would be taxable. If you keep it BTC, there is no tax. Right?