Treasury Orders U.S. Institutions to Cut Off MEXC, Citing $16 Billion in Illicit Flows

The U.S. Treasury Department announced on Friday, November 6, that its Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has issued an order cutting MEXC Global, one of the world’s larger crypto exchanges, off from the American financial system. Treasury says MEXC handled at least $16 billion in illicit flows between May 2021 and May 2026 and finds it to be a foreign financial institution of “primary money laundering concern.” The headline reads as if MEXC has already been cut off. It has not, yet: the order takes effect 30 days after it is published in the Federal Register, and we could not find that publication as of Monday, November 9.

Because the order text is public, this piece sticks to what it says and does not say, which matters for banks, payment firms and crypto businesses that will have to apply it. It also lays out the allegations, what MEXC has said, and how this compares with earlier Treasury actions against crypto firms.

The legal basis

FinCEN issued a final order, not a proposed rule, so there is no comment period. It rests on Section 9714(a) of the Combating Russian Money Laundering Act, as amended in the fiscal 2022 defense authorization law, which works with the special-measures framework at 31 U.S.C. 5318A. The order is signed by FinCEN Deputy Director Jimmy L. Kirby. Section 9714 concerns Russian illicit finance, so the Iran and North Korea allegations are supporting findings and not the formal basis, even though Treasury announced the action under “Operation Economic Outcast,” a campaign CoinDesk describes as Iran-focused and launched in August. FinCEN’s own release page does not name the authority; the order’s file name and text do.

What the order requires

The order bars covered U.S. financial institutions from any transmittal of funds from or to MEXC Global, including its non-U.S. subsidiaries, branches, offices and successors. “Transmittal of funds” covers sending and receiving, and it includes convertible virtual currency. “Covered financial institution” takes its meaning from FinCEN’s general definition of a financial institution at 31 CFR 1010.100(t). Our reading, which is not stated in the order, is that this definition reaches beyond banks to money services businesses and broker-dealers, so check the regulation if your firm may be covered.

FinCEN chose this single measure and found the other special measures, such as extra recordkeeping or reporting, inadequate. No exemptions are listed, though FinCEN reserves the right to add conditions or exemptions later. Existing Bank Secrecy Act duties, including suspicious activity reporting, and OFAC sanctions are unchanged, and violations can bring civil or criminal penalties.

What the order does not do matters as much. It places no requirements on stablecoin issuers; the ruble-backed A7A5 stablecoin appears only as something MEXC handled. It does not address customer balances, freezes, returns or a wind-down period. It notes that institutions may decline to return funds to MEXC where their risk procedures would bar it. And it gives covered institutions some discretion where virtual currency that left MEXC has sat in an unhosted wallet for a long time, while acknowledging that incoming crypto is hard to reject before it arrives. Anyone who says what banks, stablecoin issuers or customers must now do beyond that is inferring, not citing a requirement. We could not find whether MEXC serves U.S. customers or how many.

The allegations

The figures differ slightly by document. Treasury’s and FinCEN’s releases say “at least $16 billion” in illicit flows from May 2021 to May 2026. The order text, as we read it, gives $16.7 billion for the same period, so we use Treasury’s wording and flag the difference. The sub-figures overlap with the total and with each other and should not be added together. Treasury lists:

• nearly $1.5 billion tied to Russian sanctions evasion, including $232 million in direct dealings with entities sanctioned by the United States, European Union or United Kingdom;
• at least $26 million benefiting the sanctioned A7 network and almost $200 million tied to the A7A5 stablecoin;
• about $1 billion in direct transactions with more than 40 Iranian exchangers, and about $22 million tied to Iran’s central bank and the IRGC-Qods Force; and
• dealings with the sanctioned exchanges Garantex and Grinex that continued as recently as June 2026.

The order also names North Korea, but we saw no standalone North Korea figure. Treasury says MEXC claims anti-money-laundering controls and bars users from Iran and North Korea, but that deficient controls let it serve those jurisdictions. For the Russian side of the story, see our coverage of the UK sanctions on exchanges tied to Russia’s A7 network.

What MEXC says, and who owns it

CoinDesk reports that MEXC said it is reviewing the order, is operating normally and has opened an independent review of its anti-money-laundering and sanctions controls. We found that statement only in CoinDesk; Cointelegraph, Decrypt and Reuters carried none. Treasury describes MEXC as an exchange founded in 2018 and among the top 20 worldwide, with more than $1 billion in daily transactions, about $5 billion in reserves and more than 3,000 listed assets. The order names affiliates in Seychelles, Estonia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, and cites regulatory actions in Seychelles, Hong Kong and Japan. No source we read names a beneficial owner. The Seychelles Financial Services Authority said in a May 2025 public statement that MEXC Global Ltd never held authorization under that country’s virtual asset law, was incorporated in February 2020, was struck off in August 2023 and dissolved in August 2024. On October 20, MEXC announced it would stop serving users in Russia and Belarus, citing compliance without naming a rule, per DiarioBitcoin.

How this compares with earlier actions

The tool matters because the steps differ. Treasury’s first Section 9714 order, against the exchange Bitzlato in early 2023, also prohibited transmittals of funds, and CoinDesk reports another against PM2BTC in 2024; we did not read the texts of either. FinCEN’s Huione Group action used a different authority, Section 311: it was proposed in May 2025 and finalized October 14, 2025, whereas the MEXC action came as a final order with no comment period. Garantex and Grinex were hit with OFAC sanctions, a separate tool, in 2022 and August 2025. The 2023 Binance resolution, which included a $3.4 billion FinCEN penalty, was a settlement and not a cut-off, so it is not a close comparison.

What we could not confirm

We could not find the Federal Register notice, document number or effective date; the order PDF on FinCEN’s site still carries a bracketed placeholder for the date and has no signature date. We did not read the order PDF line by line, so the $16.7 billion figure and the details of its unhosted-wallet language should be checked against the document. We found no FinCEN guidance or FAQs on how the unhosted-wallet discretion will work, and no primary MEXC statement.

Why it matters

A prohibition on transmittals is one of the sharpest tools Treasury has short of sanctions, and it falls on the banks and crypto firms that touch MEXC flows rather than on MEXC itself. Compliance teams will be watching for the Federal Register date and for FinCEN guidance on unhosted wallets and customer funds. For ordinary users, the order does not tell anyone what to do with a MEXC balance, so those with questions should look to their own institution’s guidance. This is reporting, not legal or compliance advice.

Further reading

• CoinDesk: Treasury moves to cut off MEXC over $16 billion in alleged illicit flows
• FinCEN: Operation Economic Outcast severs MEXC Global’s access to the U.S. financial system
• FinCEN: Section 9714 order regarding MEXC Global (PDF)
• U.S. Treasury press release on the MEXC order
• Cointelegraph: U.S. Treasury bans MEXC over alleged $16 billion in illicit transactions
• Decrypt: Treasury cuts off MEXC from the U.S. financial system
• Seychelles FSA: public statement on MEXC Global Limited
• FinCEN: final rule severing Huione Group from the U.S. financial system
• U.S. Treasury: Garantex and Grinex designations (August 2025)

Frequently asked

What did FinCEN do to MEXC?

On November 6 FinCEN issued a final order under Section 9714(a) of the Combating Russian Money Laundering Act finding MEXC Global to be a foreign financial institution of primary money laundering concern. It bars covered U.S. financial institutions from transmitting funds to or from MEXC, including crypto transfers.

When does the MEXC order take effect?

Thirty days after publication in the Federal Register. As of November 9 we found no publication, and the order PDF still shows a placeholder, so the effective date cannot yet be calculated.

How much illicit activity does Treasury allege?

Treasury says at least $16 billion in illicit flows between May 2021 and May 2026; the order text appears to give $16.7 billion. The sub-figures for Russia, Iran and cybercrime overlap with the total and should not be added together.

Does the order affect stablecoin issuers or MEXC customers?

The order places no requirements on stablecoin issuers and does not address customer balances or a wind-down. Its duties fall on covered U.S. financial institutions, which are barred from transmittals of funds to or from MEXC.

What did MEXC say in response?

CoinDesk reports that MEXC said it is reviewing the order, is operating normally and has opened an independent review of its controls. We found that statement only in CoinDesk.