Register
Sign in
Menu
The UK government’s latest sanctions action against HTX marks an escalation in the way regulatory bodies see the dangers posed by crypto exchanges, sanctions evasion, and indirect blockchain exposure. For compliance teams, the message is clear: screening counter-parties is no longer enough.
On May 26, 2026, the UK imposed sanctions on the cryptocurrency exchange HTX (previously known as Huobi), part of a series of broader European enforcement actions designed to target networks and companies operating in cryptocurrencies that are believed to be providing financial infrastructure for Russian entities attempting to evade sanctions or engage in cross-border financial services and which are believed to support the Kremlin-backed A7 network.
UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulations have now been amended to apply correspondent banking-style restrictions to cryptocurrency businesses, fundamentally changing expectations about compliance with sanction-related obligations regarding cryptocurrency transactions, including monitoring Bitcoin wallets, tracing cryptocurrency transactions, and monitoring the activities of cryptocurrency-related businesses.
For compliance officers, investigators, and virtual asset service providers (VASPs), the HTX enforcement action raises numerous fundamental issues that many companies have yet to address based on prior EH sanction enforcement and unrelated to the current fraud-based nature of the HTX designated sanctions.
By designating HTX and multiple other cryptocurrency companies as being involved in financial transactions in violation of EU sanctions and T/ UAE orgs using those entities, the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has put in place significant sanctions against HTX and various other cryptocurrency companies.
According to UK authorities:
In addition, blockchain analytics companies have alleged that digital cash transactions from Russia to HTX through the HTX-sanctioned network over the past five years have reached billions of dollars in volume and that numerous transactions may have passed through HTX without public knowledge.
Even if HTX’s allegations of wrongdoing are ultimately determined to be false, the strict enforcement of the HTX designation will readjust the regulatory landscape for all virtual asset providers and service providers going forward.
Most crypto compliance programs are still designed around direct sanctions screening. That approach is now outdated. The UK’s enforcement action makes clear that regulators increasingly expect firms to identify:
This is where many compliance teams fail. Traditional sanctions screening systems focus on names, counter-parties, or direct wallet matches. But blockchain-enabled sanctions evasion rarely operates through a single direct interaction.
Instead, illicit flows often move through:
By the time funds reach a regulated platform, the original sanctioned source may be several hops away.
Following the sanctions, UK authorities now expect VASPs to screen for designated entities throughout the entire payment chain, rather than only during onboarding.
Instead of relying on static wallet blacklists they have continued to use, firms may better position themselves to deal with sanctioned entities that frequently change wallets, use intermediaries, or spread their transactions across multiple chains. Without on-chain transaction tracing capabilities, firms cannot effectively identify sanctioned entities through indirect channels of exposure. The use of modern blockchain intelligence requires:
As such, compliance teams that only focus on direct wallet hits do not have complete visibility into cryptocurrencies.
The recent sanctions package released by the UK specifically referenced cryptocurrency networks that are using stable coins as a means of facilitating cross-border trade and financial settlements and are therefore using a safe method of circumventing sanctions. This is due to the fact that stablecoins:
Many compliance programs continue to view stablecoin transactions as lower-risk than U.S. currency transactions; the risk of sanctions violations continues to grow.
The majority of the sanctions controls used within the cryptocurrency industry have been developed from traditional banking models. However, due to the new risks present in blockchain technology, there are new risk categories as well, including:
The HTX sanctions demonstrate that US regulators expect to be able to hold cryptocurrency users accountable for violating traditional money laundering and sanctions compliance systems. Compliance teams that continue to separate blockchain monitoring and traditional transaction monitoring may have trouble keeping pace with the changing landscape of regulatory compliance laws.
The enforcement action also included enforcement actions against several different jurisdictions connected to Kyrgyzstan, Panama, the UAE, and Georgia. This trend of increasing enforcement action for cryptocurrency in an internationally fragmented infrastructure for moving high-risk crypto activity continues. Many compliance teams spend time investigating OFAC lists but do not necessarily consider the following:
Global compliance with cryptocurrencies is now inherently multi-jurisdictional in terms of sanctions intelligence.
How Deconflict assists compliance teams?
Deconflict provides compliance teams and investigative teams with the ability to detect hidden blockchain exposure using advanced intelligence for wallets, transaction tracing, and real-time monitoring of activity.
As the enforcement of sanctions expands into new areas in addition to simple screening, compliance teams require the ability to see how funds move, not just where they end up.
To learn how Deconflict helps compliance teams uncover hidden blockchain exposure and strengthen sanctions investigations, request a demo.
The UK alleged that HTX provided financial services connected to Russia-linked entities and sanctions evasion networks, including the A7 network and Garantex.
Regulation 17A expands sanctions obligations by prohibiting payment processing and correspondent relationships involving designated entities, including cryptoasset exchanges.
The action signals that regulators increasingly expect firms to identify indirect sanctions exposure through blockchain tracing and transaction monitoring.
These are cryptocurrency transactions allegedly connected to Russian sanctions evasion networks, financial institutions, exchanges, or entities supporting restricted economic activity.
Modern crypto compliance increasingly requires: