China has accused the United States of unlawfully seizing more than one hundred thousand bitcoin that authorities say were connected to domestic cryptocurrency operations. The claim surfaced after the US Department of Justice announced in October that it had taken control of a large bitcoin reserve linked to a multi-year investigation into criminal activity in Asia. Chinese officials said the seizure amounted to the wrongful appropriation of national digital assets and questioned the legal basis for the US government’s actions.
According to China’s National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center, the seized cryptocurrency was originally held by the mining pool LuBian before being transferred to US-controlled wallets in 2020. The center said the United States kept the assets for several years without providing public details about their origins or about the individuals suspected of involvement in the alleged scheme. The US has not commented on the accusations or provided additional information about the bitcoin’s previous ownership.
The dispute emerged as the United Kingdom concluded a separate investigation involving one of the largest cryptocurrency fraud cases ever prosecuted in the country. A Chinese national, Zhimin Qian, also known as Yadi Zhang, was sentenced after admitting to laundering large amounts of bitcoin that originated from a fraudulent investment scheme in China. British authorities said the scheme operated between 2014 and 2017 and defrauded more than one hundred thousand investors.
Investigators found that Qian converted billions of renminbi into bitcoin before leaving China using false documents. She later relocated to Europe and attempted to conceal the funds through a network of shell companies, foreign bank accounts, and cryptocurrency wallets. UK authorities discovered devices containing more than sixty thousand bitcoin, which prosecutors said represented one of the largest cryptocurrency seizures in the country’s history.
Cross-border investigations and digital asset recovery
The two cases highlight growing tensions surrounding the ownership and recovery of large cryptocurrency holdings seized during international investigations. China’s complaint reflects broader concerns about the handling of digital assets across jurisdictions, while the Qian case demonstrates how cryptocurrency continues to be used to move large sums across borders with limited oversight.
British prosecutors said Qian lived under a false identity and moved funds across multiple European countries in an attempt to block investigators from tracing the assets. The Crown Prosecution Service described her conduct as deliberate and sustained and noted that many victims lost their life savings after investing in the fraudulent platform she controlled. Legal teams in the UK have begun civil recovery proceedings aimed at distributing seized funds, although they noted that the size of the case and the number of affected investors will make restitution a lengthy process.
Financial analysts said the global scale of both investigations illustrates the challenges authorities face when digital assets move across multiple jurisdictions. While blockchain transactions create a record that can help investigators trace funds, the anonymity of wallet ownership and the speed of transfers complicate efforts to determine legal control. They also said that the volatility of cryptocurrency values creates uncertainty for victims seeking compensation from assets seized years earlier.
International cooperation remains central to both cases. UK authorities worked with foreign law enforcement to verify the origins of the bitcoin linked to Qian, while China’s public accusations against the US highlight the diplomatic tensions that can arise when cryptocurrency assets are held by governments in different regions. Neither country has released detailed information about how remaining funds will be distributed or about the status of related investigations.
As global authorities continue to adapt to the growth of cryptocurrency-related crime, the scale of recent seizures underscores the need for consistent legal frameworks governing the handling of digital assets. Both the China-US dispute and the UK sentencing show that questions about ownership, restitution, and jurisdiction will remain central to future cases as more investigations involve large reserves of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.