US Investigates Crypto Exchanges Over Alleged Iran Sanctions Evasion
Crypto‑related activity connected to Iran has grown so quickly over the last year that it has triggered a fresh wave of scrutiny from US authorities. Regulators are now examining whether some digital asset platforms may have served as channels for Iranian officials and entities with state ties to sidestep international sanctions and move money across borders.
Rapid Growth In Iran‑Linked Crypto Flows
Blockchain data reviewed by specialized analytics firms indicates that transaction volumes associated with Iran have climbed into the multi‑billion‑dollar range. One blockchain researcher quoted by Reuters estimated that Iran‑linked crypto flows over the past year reached between 8 and 10 billion dollars as both government‑affiliated organizations and ordinary citizens increasingly turned to digital assets.
Figures compiled by analytics companies such as TRM Labs and Chainalysis highlight a steady rise in crypto use despite Iran’s limited access to conventional global finance. TRM Labs puts total crypto activity connected to Iran at roughly 10 billion dollars last year, compared with about 11.4 billion dollars in 2024, suggesting sustained high usage even as volumes fluctuate.
Chainalysis reported a similar trajectory: wallets it associates with Iran received a record 7.8 billion dollars in 2025, up from 7.4 billion dollars in 2024 and 3.17 billion dollars in 2023. Taken together, these numbers underscore how digital assets have become deeply embedded in Iran’s economic landscape, both for domestic users and actors facing sanctions.
Focus Of The US Investigation
US officials are now probing whether certain, as yet unnamed, crypto exchanges and service providers helped sanctioned Iranian organizations move funds abroad, obtain hard currency, or pay for goods and services in ways that bypass restrictions. The core concern is that crypto infrastructure may have been used as an alternative rail to the tightly controlled banking system.
According to Ari Redbord, global head of policy at TRM Labs, the US Treasury Department is actively assessing how digital asset services might have been leveraged for sanctions evasion. Redbord, who says he has direct insight into Treasury’s thinking, noted that the agency is zeroing in on patterns that suggest systematic use of crypto by blacklisted entities.
A spokesperson for the Treasury declined to comment specifically on the ongoing probes, but pointed to earlier announcements from September outlining new actions against so‑called “shadow banking” structures that support Iran. Those measures explicitly referenced networks that, in the view of US officials, rely on cryptocurrencies and related tools to mask flows and avoid sanctions enforcement.
Widespread Public Adoption Inside Iran
While regulators focus on state‑linked activity, crypto has also become part of everyday financial life for millions of Iranians. Nobitex, the country’s largest digital asset exchange, says industry estimates indicate that around 15 million people in Iran have at least some exposure to cryptocurrencies, whether through direct ownership or indirect participation.
Nobitex itself reports a customer base of roughly 11 million accounts, most of them retail traders and small‑scale investors. The platform says the dominant use case for its users is not sophisticated sanctions evasion, but basic wealth protection: many customers turn to digital assets as a store of value amid the persistent devaluation of the Iranian rial and ongoing economic instability.
For many households, crypto offers a way to preserve purchasing power, hedge against inflation, and gain some form of access to global markets without relying on fragile local banking channels. Stablecoins, in particular, are often used as a digital substitute for foreign currency that is otherwise hard to obtain.
Capital Gradually Moving Offshore
Even so, data from analytics firm Nansen suggest that a significant share of Iranian‑held crypto has been slowly migrating off domestic platforms. The firm’s analysis shows that balances of major digital assets on Nobitex dropped sharply from a mid‑2025 peak, indicating a sustained outflow rather than a single panic event.
Nansen analyst Nicolai Sondergaard interprets this as evidence that crypto in Iran is acting as a long‑term exit valve for capital. Instead of cashing out into fiat and leaving the digital asset space, many users appear to be moving funds from local exchanges to platforms and wallets outside Iran over an extended period.
According to this view, crypto in Iran is not only a hedge against local currency weakness, but also a practical mechanism for gradually relocating wealth beyond the reach of domestic financial controls. Such patterns inevitably attract regulatory attention when they intersect with sanctioned entities or individuals.
Nobitex’s Position And Risk Controls
Nobitex acknowledges that some of its users may employ cryptocurrencies to move money abroad. However, the exchange maintains that it does not monitor the ultimate destination or use of assets after they leave its platform. In its public stance, Nobitex emphasizes that its role is limited to providing an exchange service, not policing how customers eventually deploy their funds.
The company says it has implemented monitoring systems aimed at flagging suspicious activity and protecting user accounts. It also notes that a hacking incident in June may have contributed to shifts in user behavior, with some clients choosing to take direct control of their holdings in response to security concerns.
Nobitex further explains that, in many instances, outflows were directed not to foreign exchanges but to self‑custody wallets controlled by users. From the platform’s perspective, this reflects a desire by customers to secure assets independently while they evaluate risks and decide whether to redeposit funds on centralized venues later.
Why Iran Turns To Crypto
Several structural factors help explain why digital assets have gained such traction in Iran:
– Currency volatility: The rial has experienced repeated bouts of sharp depreciation, eroding savings and prompting citizens to seek alternatives, including gold, dollars, and now crypto.
– Sanctions pressure: Broad US and international sanctions restrict Iran’s access to cross‑border banking, making it harder to send and receive payments. Crypto offers a parallel network that is harder to block completely.
– Limited financial options: Capital controls, banking restrictions, and political uncertainty narrow the range of tools available to both businesses and households. Digital assets become one of the few remaining ways to diversify holdings geographically and by asset type.
These dynamics blur the line between legitimate financial self‑protection and activities that may, intentionally or not, facilitate sanctions evasion.
The Compliance Challenge For Global Exchanges
For international exchanges and crypto service providers, US scrutiny of Iran‑linked flows is a warning signal. Platforms that accept users from high‑risk jurisdictions may face questions over whether their compliance programs are robust enough to detect and block sanctioned entities, even when these entities attempt to operate through intermediaries or obfuscated wallets.
Key issues for compliance teams include:
– Identifying indirect exposure to sanctioned individuals or organizations hidden behind layers of addresses and intermediaries.
– Monitoring “nested” or “piggyback” accounts that use one platform to access others and mask origin.
– Distinguishing between ordinary Iranian retail users and actors that are formally designated under sanctions regimes.
Regulators are increasingly expecting exchanges to deploy advanced blockchain analytics, apply enhanced due diligence to high‑risk regions, and react swiftly to evolving sanctions lists, rather than relying on basic know‑your‑customer checks alone.
Implications For The Global Crypto Market
The outcome of the US investigations could shape how the industry handles users from sanctioned or partially isolated countries. If authorities conclude that major platforms were negligent or complicit, they may pursue significant penalties, tighten regulatory expectations, and push for broader de‑risking of entire jurisdictions.
This could lead exchanges to:
– Restrict or completely ban access for users in certain countries.
– Implement more aggressive geofencing and IP blocking.
– Demand more detailed documentation from users with any Iran nexus.
– Delist tokens or services that are seen as particularly vulnerable to misuse.
On the other hand, overly broad restrictions risk pushing activity further into opaque, unregulated channels where oversight is even weaker, and where state‑linked actors may find it easier to operate out of sight.
Sanctions, Crypto, And The Future Of Enforcement
The Iran case highlights a broader shift in how sanctions enforcement works in a world where value can move through public blockchains instead of correspondent banks. Authorities are adapting by:
– Working closely with analytics firms to trace crypto flows linked to sanctioned entities.
– Targeting intermediaries and “shadow banking” structures that help disguise origins.
– Issuing guidance and, increasingly, enforcement actions to set clear expectations for crypto businesses.
For policymakers, the challenge is to close off avenues for state‑level sanctions evasion without completely cutting ordinary citizens in sanctioned countries off from technologies that can protect them from domestic economic turmoil.
What It Means For Iranian Users
For everyday Iranians, increased US scrutiny is likely to mean tighter restrictions and more friction when interacting with global crypto platforms. Accounts may be frozen or closed, withdrawals scrutinized, and access to certain services curtailed, even when users are not directly involved in any illicit activity.
At the same time, the underlying drivers of crypto adoption in Iran—currency instability, sanctions pressure, and limited financial options—remain in place. That tension suggests that demand for digital assets is unlikely to disappear; instead, it may shift to less visible corners of the ecosystem as formal platforms come under greater pressure.
In that sense, the current US investigations are not just about past potential violations. They are a test case for how the international financial system will handle the intersection of sanctions, digital assets, and citizens living under economic isolation in the years ahead.